Of course I did... LOL   Phil actually saved this one for me when a furniture and appliance dealer in a former mining boom town here in La Belle Province closed late last year.    It looked as if it had been a showroom display model, but when I tried it out, the turntable wouldn't budge and all the amp did was buzz.  I'm going to guess it'll need some fairly major work like recapping...  

Unfortunately I'm not exactly the handy type when it comes to replacing electronic components.  And I have a list of other washer projects for the summer....  I'll keep it stored safely until the winter and with any luck I may just be able to figure out what to do to get it working again!

In the meantime, I'll just imagine one of my RCA 'new orthoponic' hi-fi records playing on it... 

Nice console!

As for the idler wheel, I think there are services that can rebuild an existing wheel, which gives an additional option (attractive if a replacement wheel can't be found). Some wheel designs apparently age better than others, too, and thus (with those designs) there is a better chance the wheel will still work (or need only minor attention).

As for lubing, that's a good idea. I saw one turntable that had frozen platter that I later learned was likely frozen lubricant in the platter bearings. I also know of at least one turntable motor that wouldn't run--even when fully disconnected from the platter--that worked again once it was cleaned/lubed.

Hum can also be caused by issues other than capacitors, such as wiring. But at this age, recapping is a good idea no matter what. At least if one wants to use the console at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong, experts, but isn't this turntable the same one Collaro made for (pre-1958) Magnavox?  The tone arm & lock, record stabilizing system, and speed/reject controls look very familiar. Did Collaro also make changers for RCA at some point?

Good eye, Eugene!  The Canadian RCA turntables (as well as another Canadian brand - Fleetwood) were made by Collaro.  I'm pretty sure that the Fleetwoods were not rebadged as the RCA models were.  

So I did a little late night 'net surfing yesterday and found that the Collaro RC456 record changers like this one have a bad rep for seizing up.  However, I was also pure dumb lucky to stumble on service manual for it and the technical specs for the RCA amplifier.  I also found that these models seemed to have been built between 1956 and 1959.  And the finish on this one was 'mahogany'.   Now, if only a manual for a Youngstown dishwasher or Dominion washer could be found so readily... LOL 

I'm going to have to be disciplined and stick to my restoration plans for this summer:  '57 GE washer, '57 GE dryer, and hopefully the '53 GE washer (all plans subject to change and veto by Hubby...LOL)

So comforting to know there are others with vintage "projects" waiting in line. With the Magnavox Windsor and "Spirit of 1776 Secretary" covered up in my garage as well as the Canadian Westinghouse tall clock stereo, my truck and 65 Wildcat are a tight squeeze. Bad enough the Magnavox Concert Grand is on a piano dolly in the house that gets moved around to accommodate guests. The Barzilay audio and speaker cabinets are in my kitchen. "House Beautiful" this is not. Nothing's gonna get done until I have my back surgery.

Here in the Southern California Desert you work on your projects in the winter unless you have room indoors. Obviously I've pretty much missed the main window of opportunity for this year. Today's temp is supposed to be around 105...for the beginning of May!

I didn't think it it was worth mentioning the Haunted House pinball that's sitting in the middle of my dining room. One day I'll be able to move it to my pinball room where it belongs, back permitting. 

I tried to get a photo of the tube diagram, Roger but I didn't capture the tube layout very well at all... However, according to the tech specs I found, the output tubes are 50C5's.  I'll have to confirm that when I get back down to Ogden on the weekend.  But it's truly not Macintosh... LOL 

I'd definitely appreciate your help and guidance with recapping.  More reasons for you to visit the Ogden Appliance Museuem again soon (official season opening May 13th.... LOL)!!

I do rather wish people would stop saying that a push-pull 50c5 amp using the very high efficiency speakers of that era can't put out more than 'background' sound levels.

We're not talking about a jam-packed disco here, we're talking about a home environment. The sound level without audible distortion is more than adequate.

Those are beam-power tubes - more efficient that pentodes, lower third-order harmonic distortion and (relatively speaking, I acknowledge this isn't a high-power amp) considerably more power output than an equivalent pentode.

Collaro produced various turntables apart from the Micromatics we all hold in such fond memory. I'd practice minimal maintenance on this - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Any 60 year old motor using that era's horrid 'lubrication' may well seize up. No big hu-hu, it's not as if their bearings are made of dilithium crystals. Just thoroughly clean out the old gunk, lubricate with Blue-Can 3in1 (I said Blue, ladies, not 'red' and if you don't know the difference, then don't snap right back) and be careful - there may be a tiny ball-bearing at the bottom of the shaft, waiting to get lost. Collaro, like all UK manufacturers, had to use what they could get in that era so don't be surprised if the motor isn't what the catalogs say it must be. When you put the motor back together, pay close attention to tightening everything evenly and gently - better to use threadlock and not as tight as too tight.

Before you send off the rim-drive wheel to be rebuilt, pay super close attention to how the idle-position is set up. I haven't worked on one of these in decades, but recollect that it was far easier to get wrong (whilst still looking right) than the V-M Tri-o-matic design.

Might as well replace the cartridge at the same time.

Personally, unless I had a Unimatic waiting for me (right now there's another Flair a Filter-Flow and a mid-seventies Westinghouse FL), I'd bring this one to the front of the queue. There is going to be lag time waiting for the parts anyway.

Oh, recapping - if you're not as experienced at is as you'd like to be, remember that even the 'deadest' cap can still carry enough current when unplugged to fry something expensive - or kill you. If there isn't one, I'd add a fuse in line. Replacing the output transformers on this would be painfully expensive.

Color me jealous.

I don't know what was worse, the RCA or the GE turntables of that era (and yes, dears, GE really did offer their own horrid stuff, it was NOT V-M).

I'm not as allergic to V-M as some people, perhaps because I worked on turntables in my undergraduate days. They weren't anywhere near the better DUALs of that period, but the 'eww-ick' reputation is undeserved. Far more reliable than the last of the Micromatics, too.

But, yes - this era Collaro is a very complicated piece of machinery. I'd only fix what absolutely needs fixing.

In that era would have sneered at anything which didn't have the name Macintosh or Fisher*.

Truly, though - I remember these. They didn't sound bad, at all. Plenty loud enough.

It's interesting how much our personal perceptions influence our determination of 'good' or 'bad' - the first Class D (and that does not stand for 'digital' amp) I was ever conscious of hearing sounded great. Unsurprisingly, I've not been knee-jerk anti-Class D ever since, though nobody can pretend there aren't some awful Class D amps out there.

I had to figure out voltage drop across a selenium rectifier a while back. Gave up and looked up the data sheet. That made no sense at all compared to what I was expecting. Recently, found this article - makes much more sense. Basically, the manufacturers were measuring at 1% duty cycle, room temp. So much for the '1volt/plate' rule. I'd guess a voltage doubler based on one of these would be dropping one heck of a lot compared to silicon diodes. Since it was an ECC83 (12AX7), I could afford a wider range of voltage, anyway. Wised up and forgot about the stinking pile of rotten cabbage and just aimed for what the Telefunken catalog said the tube wanted. Worked fine last I talked to my cousin in Icking, gosh we did that in 1983!

*Hard to believe, but once upon a time, Fisher really did build good equipment. If all you know is their trash after the early '70s, you'd never believe it. Then again, who ever thought Zenith would become LGs low-end brand and Magnavox Philips' el Cheapo division?

I've got a rather decent Stromberg-Carlson power amp waiting for a recap - ultra-linear, but I'm not that much of a purist. Be curious to hear what comes out of her when I'm done.

I believe it was Scott who published that average listening volume for classical music (so, widest dynamic range you'd encounter) was 1.7rms.

Makes sense, I really think people have problems grasping the relationship between decibels and 1+1=2. Heck, most of us don't follow exponential relationships, much less log.

Hard to believe, but once upon a time, Fisher really did build good equipment. If all you know is their trash after the early '70s, you'd never believe it. Then again, who ever thought Zenith would become LGs low-end brand and Magnavox Philips' el Cheapo division?

I know Fisher was a good company once. Some products from that era interest modern audiophile types. The fall is really sad. My first experience with Fisher was with the Fisher of 1980s. Their stuff might have even been bad by the standards of the mass market electronics industry of the era, let alone quality electronics. But maybe I'm cynical because of personal experience...

Q. What is the difference between 1980s Fisher and Fisher-Price?

A. You get better audio equipment from Fisher-Price.

I gather the name is no longer in use, and I've even seen ads for Fisher stuff on Craigslist that make note of that: You can't buy this new! But you can buy this used from me for only $____.

But I guess they weren't alone. There is Zenith, as mentioned above, except I think they had probably declined considerably even before the LG takeover. Maybe I'm cynical, but I doubt that they were putting the quality in before they put their name on the last electronics they made vs. earlier decades.

One sad fall and then rise again was Marantz, which was yet another rack system maker in the US during the 1980s. Marantz elsewhere had different ownership. (Phillips owned the name outside the US for years IIRC.) I don't know what the quality was like, but they did make some good audio equipment that got good reviews. Eventually, we got that Marantz. Not sure what happened to the US Marantz--haven't heard of that level of product in years.

I do rather wish people would stop saying that a push-pull 50c5 amp using the very high efficiency speakers of that era can't put out more than 'background' sound levels.

I think one problem is that we are so conditioned to tons of power, and massive watt ratings on modern equipment. Problem is, of course, that power ratings (at best) really don't tell the whole story. A low power amp with efficient speakers might easily play louder than a higher power amp with hugely inefficient speakers. And it's also possible for a low power amp that is well designed to have more usable power than a higher power amp that isn't so well designed. I've heard it claimed that some designs are specifically engineered to do well on power tests, but fall down considerably when dealing with an actual music signal.

I recall NAD having a struggle in the 1980s because their power ratings were modest compared to similarly priced products. For a while, NAD tried to fight back by stating the official power, and saying short term burst power was much greater. I'm not sure how successful they were--in the US, I have to think they probably still had problems competing with dreadful sounding 200 watt monsters with more flashing lights than a Christmas tree.

Past this, there may be times when something that can't play loud may actually be a better product in some ways. I had a chance to hear a pair of Quad ESL-57 speakers a year or so back. These speakers can't play loud, and I'm sure that would immediately rule them out as a possible choice for many people. But within their limits, they are really, really good speakers...and as I listened to them, I frankly didn't care that they couldn't be cranked up. My take is not unique: those speakers are ancient technology (released in the 50s!)...and yet they remain desirable. Many people have them and would not trade them in. Also they have had huge influence on quality audio--they are probably one of the most influential designs ever.