Talk:Phonograph

message: I'm offended! I have a Jelly Roll Morton 78 that I like to play on my Victor Victrola 4-3, and I use the steel needles only once. The records actually don't wear out quickly-quite the contrary. Don't be afraid of using a steel needle with a wind-up record player-it won't hurt it.
:The advice is to change the needle every record. This actually means change the needle every side played. I have several records where side 2 is worn out because someone didn't play it with a new needle. This is particularly important these days because most needles come from China and are rarely the correct radius. If you change the needle every side, the wear to the record is minimal. The needles are far cheaper than the records and a lot less rare! I have quite a few records that still play like the record was new (that is without the krkrkrkr noise of a worn record). The record did contain a lubricant in the shellac mix but this is rapidly worn away with worn out needles. 86.132.158.45 (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steel Needles 

message: What's with this "1 gram of stylus force" statement?  A gram is a unit of mass, not force!
Well, that's how people refer to the force with which a needle bears into a groove. Perhaps it's scientifically questionable, but it's the correct phrase for the article. --128.119.22.152 (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  unknown comment 

message: This article refers to gramophone records and phonograph cylinders as one concept. Gramophone records are flat discs whereas phonograph cylinders are disparate. 
The entry for Phonograph makes phonograph and gramophone synonymous where "gramophone record" remains a separate entry from "phonograph cylinder"s.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.117.162 (talk) 09:46, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Disc players were known as phonographs in America long after the cylinder disappeared.  The word 'gramophone' was a registered trademark of His Master's Voice and the word passed into common usage in the United Kingdom for disc players.  It was far less common in America even though the Victrola company was able to use both the registered trade mark as well as the Nipper dog logo. 86.163.86.229 (talk) 18:48, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gramophone Record vs Phonograph Cylinder 

message: The article contains 3 recordings of Au Claire de la Luna with 2 of them pitch adjusted to reflect the pitch of Édouard-Léon's voice.  Unless there is a another recording of his voice that is of a precisely known recording speed (highly unlikely), this would be impossible to achieve. 86.184.233.167 (talk) 15:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Based no the known male vocal range you could at least get it in the right octave. Possibly even in the right key. --Kvng (talk) 17:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

text: I removed the recording because it was too much for a WP:SUMMARY. I wasn't sure whether to replace the recording already present on Phonautograph so I instead landed it on the talk page for discussion. --Kvng (talk) 17:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Édouard-Léon's voice 

message: I have deleted the unsourced illustration of the VolksVagen van sitting on a record.  Without any further description of what it is and what it does, the illustration adds nothing to the article.  It could just be a photo of any toy van placed on a record.  If you wish to reinstate it, please at least add some description as to where it fits into the phonograph story (with appropriate citations of course).  86.177.27.130 (talk) 08:06, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a Volkswagen van that held a phonograph cartridge, a phonograph preamp, and a speaker. In other words, it was a complete phonograph. A novelty item that never became popular, its applicability to this article is very small. Binksternet (talk) 12:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I had guessed that it was something of that nature.  But that was my principal objection - I had to guess. 86.182.65.190 (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  VolksWagen Van 

message: In the intro, it says that Edison showed the phonograph in October. Later, it says November. 
As there were disputes (and lawsuits) related to the invention of the telephone and/or microphones around about that time, it seems important that the exact timing of related inventions be stated and cited. (There are SEVERAL articles here about the telephone and its timeline. And they don't all entirely agree.) 
The article on Microphones didn't seem to help, as it has didn't have a history section or timeline (that I saw); and many of the developments mentioned don't have dates.
Different articles across Wikipedia state that different people invented the microphone. 
They say, in short that: 
In 1876, several people were working on a microphone concept -- some say Emile Berliner invented it, some may say Elisha Gray, or Alexander Graham Bell, though some mysterious voice-related devices were apparently shown in the 1840s and 1850s. (Documentation?) One also says that In 1876, the first carbon microphone was tested by Thomas Edison. 
Not being a historical expert on these matters, and not having citations handy, and not having hours to research this, I therefore added  in the intro here. 
For this device, which was it, November or October? :)
Misty MH (talk) 11:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact there were lawsuits over the phonograph as well.  It is alleged (so it won't go in the article) that Edison spent more on litigation over the phonograph than he ever made out of it - and most of the lawsuits were against Edison alleging that most of his phonograph features were unpatentable as they were developed by others. 109.156.49.202 (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Device shown in October or November? Citations needed. 

message: On this page, the photograph of Edison with his second phonograph is attributed to Matthew Brady; clicking the link shows the same photograph attributed to Levin C. Handy, an attribution supported by its link to The Library of Congress.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.50.18 (talk) 15:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph source disagreement? 

message: They do exist: I've got a vinyl 78. It's "Putting  On the Style" c/w "Gamblin' Man" by Lonnie Donegan and his Skiffle Group, recorded 9 May 1957, on Pye Nixa N.15093. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have several vinyl 78s in my collection.  They can't, of course, be played on any of my vintage wind up gramophones because the steel needle and the heavy sound box would ruin them.  DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I, too, have some vinyl 78s. I have a lightweight cartridge with a sapphire needle made for playing them, on a modern phonograph produced in 2000. I also have a heavy steel needle cartridge for older records. Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vinyl 78s 

message: I don' know about you, but I called it a "record player" or a "turntable". It a record that you put on you record player or a turntable, so that it plays sound.  No one called it phonogragh any more. I'm just saying make a differet article, OK. hul3124 comment added by 130.156.142.240
:No need for a new article, record player works. The problem with turntable is that it has other meanings. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Who deleted record player

message: "While other inventors had produced devices that could record sounds, Edison's phonograph was the first to be able to reproduce the recorded sound."
- so how did people know if the sound was recorded unless it played back. Obviously preceding inventions could also reproduce sound, right?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.248.183.27 (talk) 05:52, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Previous machines, although they recorded sound, were never intended to play that sound back.  The machines were invariably constructed in order to investigate the properties and nature of sound. 86.171.45.27 (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Choice of words 

message: Vinyls have been played liquid-greased, too. Trademark Lenco sold slim cylindric plastics bottles, containing about 150 ml clear liquid (I think iso-propanol, water, antistatics) brushed on in a thin layer by a second lever, before & during play on the groove and drying soon. Starting about 1975 or 1980 --Helium4 (talk) 12:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lenco - wet play 

message: a couple of us were looking for information on how the sound was reproduced.  This article is the perfect place for such info but way too much time is spent on the recording mechanism and not enough on the replay mechanism.  We're still in the dark.  Pun intended.
68.55.64.124 (talk) 18:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the current rev of the opening paragraph now makes that a bit clearer right off the bat, at the cost of being considerably longer. But the reader still has to be willing to click on a link or two or three if the nature of sound is not already well-understood, or an audio waveform is not easily visualized, etc. AVarchaeologist (talk) 08:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  incomplete 

message: Is it worthwhile added a reference / image of the Sharp (I do not know if other manufacturers made similar devices) Vertical, linear record players to the Linear tracking section - such as the one built into the VZ-2500 Ghetto-blaster from the early 1980s?  This particular model is a little iconic as a portable player (though it does automatically stop playing and reset the tone-arms if lifted from the surface if it is playing a record!) capable of playing both sides of a 7/10/12 inch 33⅓/45 r.p.m. vinyl record. SlySven (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Vertical players? 

message: The original link is dead. The article can be retrieved at the writer's personal site in the form of a Word doc.
I read this article, and found this is the extent of Frank Palka's supposed phonograph murder (note there are no phonographs here):
THE EXAMPLE OF FRANK PALKO
Frank Palko was a resident of the state of Connecticut. Late one evening in 1935, he broke into a music store, stole a radio and fled on foot (in those Great Depression days, a getaway car was a luxury few criminals could afford--O Tempora, O Mores). The police were summoned and they contacted Palko a few blocks away. When they approached him, Palko shot and killed one of the officers and escaped. He was captured and arrested a month or so later.''
The idea that Palka clobbered someone to death with a phonograph clearly is untrue and not related to this Wikipedia page. Therefore: I'm deleting it. If someone wants to add it back, maybe they could find evidence for such absurd claims.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.197.221.217 (talk) 04:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Murder Weapon" section is unsourced, false 

message: This image was previously being used as an illustration in § Phonographs in the 21st century, until I removed it just now. The data it represents (information which we have no way to verify), the number of images associated with each manufacturer that have been contributed to a particular website by its user community, is not informative in any way within the context of the article. In fact, it's entirely possible that it was added for no other purpose than to tacitly promote the website named in the caption. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 16:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed uninformative image 

message: The elliptical stylus allows for more groove contact area, which increases fidelity,
The increased contact area does defnitely NOT increase fidelity, it may reduce pressure and record wear, or may NOT ...
The contact area is increased vertically, but reduced horizontally (smaller contact radius).
The main increase in fidelity is, that the Elliptical stylus is able to follow the curvature of the groove at higher frequencies (steep slopes, slewrates). This will be important above 2 kHz. Also the contact area at the spherical stylus moves around the needle, this increases also some sort of distortions.  
--AK45500 (talk) 12:14, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pic    Elliptical stylus , TEXT wrong 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Phonograph record which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 14:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: what is an eco system  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:D002:E925:853D:1207:3DCF:B981 (talk) 09:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  eco sytem 

message: Should this image be used in this page? Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using image 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: It seems to me that the article misses the introduction of the vacuum tube, a major advance over the purely mechanical players.  Vacuum tubes aren't mentioned until we get to transistors. Mwanner | Talk 22:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electronics, the vacuum tube 

message: T4P and other systems not described !?!  --  2A02:8071:819F:4700:7835:1C1E:E3F2:6492 (talk) 11:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:   T4P and other systems not described !?! 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations

message: I'd appreciate if the history section of this article said something about technology between 1907 (acoustic amplification) and 1955 (first solid state phonograph).  I expect that somewhere in between, there were vacuum tube amplifiers.  More info would be helpful.  Thanks. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6032 (talk) 04:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  1930s 

message: : "The phonograph was invented in 1877 by Thomas Edison.[1][2][3][4] Phonograph use would grow the following year."
Of course usage grew after it was invented. The question is to how much? Are we trying to say usage grew quickly? How about just saying that? B9 (talk) 00:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "use would grow" the year after it was invented 

message: : Records have undergone a revival since the late 2000s.
The phrase "the late 2000s" seems more applicable to 2999 than 2009. Why was it phrased this way? Is there controversy? Looking at https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/, for example, it appears we can just say "since 2009" based on the increase of LP sales year over year.e. B9 (talk) 00:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's safer to stick to "late" instead of fixing on a single year. Sales have increased every year since 2007 but because the bar was really low back then it can be misleading into readers believing that records were "wildly popular" from that time on when it wasn't. Also there's evidence at least from the UK that the revival was already beginning in 2006. Sateystnes (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The original point is that "late 2000s" is ambiguous; it most naturally refers to years such as 2089, 2094, or 2098. But the intention is to refer to years late in the period from 2000 to 2009, i.e. years 200x, for which the digit x is towards 9. Unfortunately there is no obvious unambiguous way (in English) to refer to this. Imaginatorium (talk) 10:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "since the late 2000s" is confusing 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 02:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Phonograph →  – Phonograph is a very old term that isn't common and widely recognised today - it may have been suitable if this was an article strictly about something historic but this is something current too. Today the common name is a "Record Player", or a "Turntable" (often interchangable but the latter is strictly about a specific type of record player). See WP:COMMON it applies here. Sateystnes (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

text: I agree that a move seems reasonable. I'm English, but live somewhere else, so I have no idea what terminology is common now, (or in the US, where I wouldn't be surprised to learn they call it a "disk rotator" or something). But notice that "record player" has only the one applicable meaning, whereas "turntable" also has other meanings, so is less clear. Imaginatorium (talk) 04:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 6 May 2024