It's a real beauty. Record storage is solved by just having a separate big cupboard! Which of course in my case is already full. HMV did make record cabinets designed to match some of the larger re-entrant gramophones. Don't know if there are any to match the 163.
Very nice. A great machine and I would love to own one. I have the 162, but there was quite a technology improvement between the 162 and the 163 and the 163 is much more desirable. Thanks 👍 😀
I'm very glad to have got one, although I'm not sure if the rest of my family shares that gladness! I've seen a few 163s here, but no 162s. The 162 is also a beautiful machine and yours sound nice. You're welcome!
To my mind the ultimate gramophone for electrical recordings, even later Hi Fi ones, which it appears to handle with ease. I would say however, that a good mica diaphragm machine is better for acoustic recordings. I read that in designing the 163, they adapted the math of 'matched impedance' (essential for realistic electrical reproduction), to the horn design of the 163, in order to deliver the excellent results that it gives. Back then, it would have been far more expensive to produce an electrically amplified machine that gave a comparable sound. You'll not regret owning this 163!
Thanks for the information about the 163, I'm sure I'll enjoy playing most of my electrically recorded records on it. I'll keep using the Rexonola for the acoustic ones as they sound nice on it, although the tracking is not as good as with HMVs and other good makes of the era. I have a few gramophones I plan to fix at some point including a table HMV with a No. 2 soundbox, and a Cheney, whose soundboxes have gutta percha diaphragms. One of those may become my go-to for acoustically recorded records, and I've always got my 101. Yes, with all that my Sonora unit once had inside it just to play records, I can see why an electrically amplified record player would be much more expensive at the time.
@@toomanyinterestsYou're welcome. As for tracking, I think some gramophone makers just didn't bother as far as tracking was concerned. Think its responsible for excessive groove wear that's found toward the centre on some of the smaller records like Mimosa, Little Marvel etc. Not come across gutta percha diaphragms. Would love to hear the results they deliver.
@@tiga4180 With most of my cheaper gramophones the poor tracking is more on the outer edge, where the needle is at quite an angle to the groove, since most of the Swiss generic tonearms are perfectly straight. The Cheney is an all round unusual gramophone, between the stepped tonearm, constricted opening from arm to horn, right angle bend into the "acoustical throat", and the free standing carved spruce "resonator" (horn) in the shape of a violin (sort of). It's rather bizarre and quite possibly all patent avoidance. There was a good article on AntiquePhono but it's no longer up, it can however be found through the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Unfortunately my Cheney is in very poor shape, although I did get both soundboxes in their original box, with the two jewel tipped styli for Edison and Pathe records. I broke one of the governor springs while working on the motor a while ago. I went to buy some new metal to make replacement springs, but was told that the springs are some strange alloy. The guy at the shop thought they were electrical contacts! They are also much narrower than the springs used on other brands' motors. I'm just going to try with normal spring steel of the same thickness, when I get round to it.
@@toomanyinterests Interesting. As for those governor springs, gut feeling is that if they're all the same, things should work ok, though speed calibration may be different from original.
@@clubisas Oh of course! Nice to have one in a mahogany cabinet, I've only seen oak ones here. If I had seen both I wouldn't be able to decide, I think both timbers are beautiful!
Very nice machine love every bit of it.I do wish there was record storage.who cares it plays beautifully
It's a real beauty. Record storage is solved by just having a separate big cupboard! Which of course in my case is already full. HMV did make record cabinets designed to match some of the larger re-entrant gramophones. Don't know if there are any to match the 163.
Very nice. A great machine and I would love to own one. I have the 162, but there was quite a technology improvement between the 162 and the 163 and the 163 is much more desirable. Thanks 👍 😀
I'm very glad to have got one, although I'm not sure if the rest of my family shares that gladness! I've seen a few 163s here, but no 162s. The 162 is also a beautiful machine and yours sound nice. You're welcome!
162 is great for acoustic recordings
To my mind the ultimate gramophone for electrical recordings, even later Hi Fi ones, which it appears to handle with ease. I would say however, that a good mica diaphragm machine is better for acoustic recordings. I read that in designing the 163, they adapted the math of 'matched impedance' (essential for realistic electrical reproduction), to the horn design of the 163, in order to deliver the excellent results that it gives. Back then, it would have been far more expensive to produce an electrically amplified machine that gave a comparable sound. You'll not regret owning this 163!
Thanks for the information about the 163, I'm sure I'll enjoy playing most of my electrically recorded records on it. I'll keep using the Rexonola for the acoustic ones as they sound nice on it, although the tracking is not as good as with HMVs and other good makes of the era. I have a few gramophones I plan to fix at some point including a table HMV with a No. 2 soundbox, and a Cheney, whose soundboxes have gutta percha diaphragms. One of those may become my go-to for acoustically recorded records, and I've always got my 101.
Yes, with all that my Sonora unit once had inside it just to play records, I can see why an electrically amplified record player would be much more expensive at the time.
@@toomanyinterestsYou're welcome. As for tracking, I think some gramophone makers just didn't bother as far as tracking was concerned. Think its responsible for excessive groove wear that's found toward the centre on some of the smaller records like Mimosa, Little Marvel etc. Not come across gutta percha diaphragms. Would love to hear the results they deliver.
@@tiga4180 With most of my cheaper gramophones the poor tracking is more on the outer edge, where the needle is at quite an angle to the groove, since most of the Swiss generic tonearms are perfectly straight.
The Cheney is an all round unusual gramophone, between the stepped tonearm, constricted opening from arm to horn, right angle bend into the "acoustical throat", and the free standing carved spruce "resonator" (horn) in the shape of a violin (sort of). It's rather bizarre and quite possibly all patent avoidance. There was a good article on AntiquePhono but it's no longer up, it can however be found through the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.
Unfortunately my Cheney is in very poor shape, although I did get both soundboxes in their original box, with the two jewel tipped styli for Edison and Pathe records. I broke one of the governor springs while working on the motor a while ago. I went to buy some new metal to make replacement springs, but was told that the springs are some strange alloy. The guy at the shop thought they were electrical contacts! They are also much narrower than the springs used on other brands' motors. I'm just going to try with normal spring steel of the same thickness, when I get round to it.
@@toomanyinterests Interesting. As for those governor springs, gut feeling is that if they're all the same, things should work ok, though speed calibration may be different from original.
Nice. 😃👍.
Thanks!
It is a really wonderful machine I made videos of mine
Yes, it's really magnificent. Interesting that yours has a different grille design.
@@toomanyinterests the mahogany cabinet has a different grille
@@clubisas Oh of course! Nice to have one in a mahogany cabinet, I've only seen oak ones here. If I had seen both I wouldn't be able to decide, I think both timbers are beautiful!