Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

snap, crackle and pop
ntsc525
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 45
Joined: 31 Dec 2017 23:59
Location: Southern California

Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by ntsc525 » 10 Feb 2020 03:16

Hi, everyone!

I'm the crazy guy who tried to improve a Crosley Cruiser a while back and did a whole write up about it with pictures here on Vinyl Engine.

Not having learned my lesson, and still looking for a cheap, lightweight "screener" player for my bargain bin 45s, 78s, and badly scratched copy of Dark Side of the Moon, I found this Crosley Traveler Model CR-49 at my local ham-fest swap meet, and relieved a fellow Antique Radio Club member of it for a paltry $15.00, which still left him room to make a profit! (And the unit was basically mint with the original manual and warranty!)

My initial impression of the CR-49 is "Better than expected", mainly because my bar had been reset by my other Crosley, a Cruiser Deluxe. It comes in a larger case, so there is room for larger speakers. It can still sound a little tinny, but this one has a tone control, so that can be tamed. With the tone control and larger speakers, you can actually hear music from the lower mid-range. I would describe the sound as "Fair", "OK", or "Meh...", which is a lot higher than "Offensive" which is what you get from the Cruiser. It will NEVER compete with my GE Trimline portable in sound quality, but that ol' GE weighs probably about 50 Crosley's worth, and is about 4 times as big to lug around.

No one will mistake the Traveler for Hi Fi (not even by 1950s standards), but if you've got some old 45's lying around, you can listen to them and decide if you like the music enough to find a good copy to play on your good system!

This unit with original speakers, sounds better than my kiddie players, and better than my Califone 1010AV (school player), but my Audiotronics 304E (school player) still sounds better. However, the Crosley has a good auto stop, (see below), and it's stereo. Also, the needles are cheaper to get than the Astatic combo needle and cart used in the Audiotronics, so I'm less afraid of a bad record destroying my needle. (I'll play cracked records on the Crosley and not even think twice about it!)

As mentioned above, I was pleasantly surprised about the CR-49's auto stop mechanism. Unlike the cheaper Cruiser, which has a simple microswitch under the mechanism that pushes against the tone-arm, making the table stop at a predetermined position, and puts back pressure against the stylus, this unit actually uses a "velocity based" trip mechanism similar to the older changers from the 1950s to the 1970s. There is a very low friction slide that trips when the tone arm moves fast enough to be in the leadout section, which moves a pawl into the turntable, and the turntable motor (rather than the tone arm) shuts the switch off. This is a LOT gentler on your records, and is better at sensing the actual leadout section, rather than shutting off too early or not at all.

I tested it with several standard records with various leadout sections, and it reliably tripped only in the leadout, never early. I also tested it with a fully loaded 7 inch stereo test record where the music went right up to the label with no leadout, and it played the whole track without stopping. (No leadout, so no way to detect the end of the record.)

Remind me to tell you later, how to determine if a table uses this mechanism without taking it apart, if you find yourself looking at these in a thrift store.

To turn the turntable back on, you have to move the tone arm all the way to the right until you hear the switch click back on. There are probably a lot of players with this mechanism being sold as "not working" because people don't know to just move the tone arm all the way (gently) to the right! ("It turns on, but the turntable doesn't spin!" "Try moving the tone arm all the way to the right!" "Click!" "Oh! It's spinning now!")

I like my CR-49 enough to use it now and again, but I would never recommend buying one new (if they're still available new), and probably wouldn't spend more than $20 or $30 (US) tops on it in good condition. If you can get one cheap, and don't mind messing with it a little, I'd say "Go for it", but expect to buy a new belt and invest in a flip needle cartridge if you're going to do 78s, or a new needle with a metal cantilever if you plan to keep the original red-tipped cart, and maybe do some filing of plastic (watch for my upcoming replies).

Those of you with high end tables may be asking: WTF? (As in What The-heck For? That's what WTF stands for, right?)

Who is this player for?

Someone just getting into vinyl, who plans on buying new albums and wants to get that "vinyl experience" would be better served by one of the lower priced entry level true turntables offered by the likes of Audio Technica and others, which would connect to an existing stereo system. A light tracking magnetic cartridge is required to get the best sound out of your good vinyl. Those users would be disappointed in the CR-49 because, while useable and not nearly as offensive as the Cruiser, it is still not up to the task of delivering anything remarkable.

Of course, anyone playing the kinds of records I play on the Crosley on a high end system would also be disappointed, because, of course, with a worn or imperfect record, there's really not much good in that extra detail!

If space is limited, and you're looking for something compact, I'm sure there are also better self contained stereo record players out there (and if I find one cheap, I'll probably buy it and review it here also). Even some of the better Crosleys have magnetic carts, but unless the mechanism is also greatly improved, I would wonder if a magnetic cart would only expose more rumble and flutter.

You still haven't answered my question: Who is this player for?

First, if you have parents or grandparents who feel like dragging their old records out, and they don't also have their old stereo system around, maybe a CR-49 would be a good fit. This is especially true if they were not particularly "anal" about record care. If you can pull the record right out of the jacket without taking the sleeve out first, and you can easily tell the record has been played before, it's probably OK to play that on the Crosley.

You may have a high end system, but just hauled home a box of old records. Maybe a milk crate full of Jazz 78s, and your high end table won't do 78s, or these are not exactly the cleanest shellacs, but were found naked in a pile in someone's garage, and you just want to hear them, because you have no idea what "jive" music was in the 1930s. (I assume the same kids that call LP's "vinyls" would call 78s "shellacs".) You should give a listen to some 78s, especially if your grandparents had good taste! But turn the tone control down a bit!

Will this player ruin your records?
In my opinion, No. Still, it's not for your brand new 180 gram copy of Dark Side of the Moon. It's for that beat up copy you pulled out of a mildewed, tattered jacket with no inner sleeve, which after cleaning (you did clean it at least, didn't you?), it still has enough scuffs, gouges, and nicks to make you afraid to put it on your good table. Still, you want to know what the fuss is about and whether you should buy a good copy, so give it a spin on the Crosley!

Those vintage records from the 50s to 70s? Why not? They were probably played on heavy tracking players back in the day! Can you hear the wear from one play on a Crosley if you play that same record on a good system? My answer: If you have a good system already, then don't even put your new vinyl on the Crosley to find out!

I have stacks of 45s that I'm going through. I'll wash a pile of them. A small few look absolutely minty fresh, and I think they'll sound good on a good table. The rest get the ol' Crosley test before I decide if they're keepers, sellers, or wall art. (Even the wall art gets played at least once on the Crosley!) Any record I'd play on a vintage V-M changer, RCA luggable, or GE Trimline luggable stereo, I'd put on the Crosley without fear of doing anything those players won't. Also, any record I'm afraid to put on my V-M, RCA, or GE, I'd still put on the Crosley!

Here is a player you needn't be afraid to toss in the car and drag to your grandparents house to listen to their old party records from whatever decade they grew up in. Heck, even listen to the records your dead ancestors partied to!

As for improvements, I have no immediate plans to try to upgrade the speakers. I did test connect better speakers to it, and found there was no extra bass available from the amp, and the tweeters just emphasized the shrill treble. The cheap speakers in the case sounded better than good external ones!

I've read elsewhere that the ceramic cartridge may not be loaded properly by the amp. Some day, I may try to mess with that and see if I can improve the sound that way. Tinny treble is a sign of improper impedance from the cartridge, and these Crosleys have tinny treble. I'll let you know if I do that and what the result is.

In an upcoming reply, I will add some detail and post pictures so you see what this thing looks like on the inside.

This message brought to you by the Crosley CR-49: It's not afraid of your dirty, cracked records!

KentT
long player
long player
Posts: 4622
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 19:44
Location: Athens, TN

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by KentT » 10 Feb 2020 13:15

Same crummy tonearm, same crude, low compliance ceramic cartridge, still as bad on record life. The high end belt drive Pro-Ject built Crosley models are the only good ones worth buying.

AceDeuce73
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 128
Joined: 31 Dec 2014 00:59
Location: McAllen, Texas

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by AceDeuce73 » 10 Feb 2020 13:37

I avoid poor condition records in the first place.

circularvibes
long player
long player
Posts: 1594
Joined: 24 Sep 2010 02:09
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by circularvibes » 10 Feb 2020 15:39

There are times I want to play something out of curiousity before I toss it or hang it on the wall too. I am glad the OP found a machine he feels unafraid to do so with. Sometimes we need to be able to satisfy curiousity without spending money on better copies of stuff that may well have been free. Older stuff is getting harder to find at a reasonable price and there is a wealth of good music from all generations out there that those of us who are too young to know or we paid attention to other genres when we were less old. I used to cruise the 25 cent singles boxes for this reason.

KentT
long player
long player
Posts: 4622
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 19:44
Location: Athens, TN

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by KentT » 10 Feb 2020 17:39

I use Pickering V 15/Stanton 500 heavy duty cartridges and styli for this. TEI replacements are excellent.

ntsc525
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 45
Joined: 31 Dec 2017 23:59
Location: Southern California

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by ntsc525 » 11 Feb 2020 01:06

KentT wrote:
10 Feb 2020 17:39
I use Pickering V 15/Stanton 500 heavy duty cartridges and styli for this. TEI replacements are excellent.
Something to consider for using a good turntable on rougher records.

But, I'm sure I paid less for the Crosley than just one stylus for the above carts (in fact, I think I have a Pickering V 15 on a spare headshell for my ELAC 50H, and I will see how it does with rough records), and the Banpa cart with flip needle was probably less than the Stanton stylus let alone the cart.

Still, I bet you wouldn't toss your good table in the back seat of the car and take it to a party without worrying about it.

If you have a good eye, you can grab a CR-49 for less than the cost of a Big Mac large meal combo, and the Crosley will have MUCH less salt and fat! (Listen to a Crosley: They don't sound fat at all. Quite thin, in fact!) ;-)

Anyhoo...

ntsc525
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 45
Joined: 31 Dec 2017 23:59
Location: Southern California

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by ntsc525 » 11 Feb 2020 02:35

Crosley Traveler CR-49 Teardown, Part 1: The Beginning

First, let's take a look at the top of the unit. Here you can see the record end trip mechanism, which shuts off the turntable.
Mech Top.jpg
(103.63 KiB) Downloaded 99 times
Here, Crosley must have spent an extra dollar's worth of parts to provide a much gentler auto stop than some of the newer players. The tone arm gently pushes the wire guide towards the plastic pawl, but the pawl gets gently pushed back with every revolution unless the arm moves quickly enough to indicate it's in the lead out.

If you're checking out cheap plastic record players that look like this, try moving the tone arm towards the center spindle. If you feel a definite backpressure before you get to the center, and hear a click, which releases when you move the arm back, that is the bad one, which puts pressure against the arm and causes wear on the record.

If you can turn the unit on, then if the table is not spinning, move the arm to the right until you hear a click. The table should start to run. Then move the arm towards the center spindle. Without feeling any resistance on the arm, you'll hear the platter catch on the mechanism and it will shut the table off.

If the unit is now powered, you can still check it out manually. You should be able to move the arm almost all the way to the spindle without feeling much resistance. Then, when you spin the turntable, you'll feel the table catch on the pawl, and you'll hear the click of the switch. (If not, try moving the arm to the right and see if it clicks, then try again.)

It's a minor difference, but a big difference in the way it works and side pressure against your stylus and record groove. (That is the worst "record killer" part of the tables that have a cheap stop switch.)

Here's the bottom of the mechanism.
Mech Bottom.jpg
(108.3 KiB) Downloaded 94 times
If you're looking for a new mech (and they can be found cheap from China, or pulled from another cheap player if you are so inclined), look for the metal rod and this type of auto stop.

While we're talking about the table mechanism, if you found one of these used, you'll probably need to replace the belt. (They're on eBay and Amazon.)
Belt Hook for Platter.jpg
(115.56 KiB) Downloaded 94 times
The platter has a little nub (nib?) that you hook the belt over to get it back on the motor. Give it a spin to seat the belt. If your record plays way too fast, check it again, because the belt has probably ridden up in the wrong place.

Mine has a plastic pulley on the motor, which is horribly uneven, so there is lots of flutter (which is probably why the player didn't get much use).
File Pully for Flutter.jpg
(90 KiB) Downloaded 95 times
I turned the motor on, and placed my file gently on the spindle to gently file it a little smoother. This is not Hi Fi, but I did improve the bad flutter to a tolerable level. It's now not much worse than a cheap idler player from the likes of Fisher Price.

The motor is the standard DC motor used on all these cheapies, and can be replaced for under $5, with a metal pulley. (I guess they learned!)

That's it for Part 1. Coming up: Speakers and cartridge.

Brought to you by Crosley: You might have to take it apart to get it to work right!

KentT
long player
long player
Posts: 4622
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 19:44
Location: Athens, TN

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by KentT » 11 Feb 2020 02:52

ntsc525 wrote:
11 Feb 2020 01:06
KentT wrote:
10 Feb 2020 17:39
I use Pickering V 15/Stanton 500 heavy duty cartridges and styli for this. TEI replacements are excellent.
Something to consider for using a good turntable on rougher records.

But, I'm sure I paid less for the Crosley than just one stylus for the above carts (in fact, I think I have a Pickering V 15 on a spare headshell for my ELAC 50H, and I will see how it does with rough records), and the Banpa cart with flip needle was probably less than the Stanton stylus let alone the cart.

Still, I bet you wouldn't toss your good table in the back seat of the car and take it to a party without worrying about it.

If you have a good eye, you can grab a CR-49 for less than the cost of a Big Mac large meal combo, and the Crosley will have MUCH less salt and fat! (Listen to a Crosley: They don't sound fat at all. Quite thin, in fact!) ;-)

Anyhoo...
Any record which has any hope of playability, even a Banpa is not allowed in my house on it. There are 2-3 ceramics ever which are, none of which are currently made. Magnetic only. If I were bringing a turntable to a party, I have a rugged old SME mount option or two with a Stanton 500AL available for this. I like my records, and care for their preservation. I also like hearing them played back at the correct speed without waver. I've spent this kind of money on much better turntables than this Crosley. I handle records more carefully with Cerebral Palsy and a few drinks than most do. So I can party and my records (as long as party goers aren't allowed near the system).

vinyl master
vinyl engineer
vinyl engineer
United States of America
Posts: 21003
Joined: 01 Nov 2013 05:27

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by vinyl master » 11 Feb 2020 02:59

Interesting, ntsc525...Normally, I'm not a fan of Crosleys in general, but I do understand taking one like this to the record shows, say, as a 45' screener...Of course, I have much better options for regular listening, as many here may know...Still, I've been picking up portable turntables just for this purpose of screening and have two vintage ones now, the Gakken and the Columbia...

48023
48026
48252
48253

I don't know why, but I am suddenly attracted to these things...For previewing duty, they'll do just fine and I've been surprised at how nice the Gakken sounded at the Vintage Expo I went to...Believe me, though, there is NO mistaking it for a decent standalone turntable (and I wouldn't use one of these to replace a good standalone TT), but the nice thing is that it's battery-operated and good for those record shows and/or crate digging...In fact, there is another show coming up soon so I may have a chance to have more fun with it...Of course, the 45's I've been picking up have been $1.00 or less each, so not too expensive...Records that are much rarer or in better shape might deserve more careful handling...

ntsc525
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 45
Joined: 31 Dec 2017 23:59
Location: Southern California

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by ntsc525 » 11 Feb 2020 05:09

Crosley CF-49 Traveler Teardown, Part 2: Mediocrity Is An Improvement!

As a reminder, this player is really competing with other small, portable players for screening records, or dragging to a party when you don't want to risk your best table. It competes with players from the likes of Califone, Audiotronics, and Webcor.

Here's a look inside the case:
Inside Base.jpg
(123.14 KiB) Downloaded 83 times
More room for larger speakers than the Cruiser, this unit will reproduce lower midrange frequencies, and with a better amp and speakers could probably even approach actual bass! Note the large magnets, making these speakers of average efficiency, which is significantly better than the tiny tweeters in the Crosley Cruiser.

Being "side firing" speakers, you get better stereo separation than you would with the forward facing Cruiser and similar small briefcase players.

Note those little foam thingies stuck to the speakers. I don't know what they were going for: Bass response? Preventing feedback? Not sure if they accomplish anything, and in 10 years, they'll probably disintegrate and give the future owner something to vacuum up!
Speaker Diagonal 2.jpg
(114.9 KiB) Downloaded 83 times
With about 4 1/2 inches diagonal mounting holes, you could conceivably upgrade the speakers. However, my testing shows no improvement based on the limited output of the amplifier. We could chase that down, but what would be the point? It's a Crosley. Maintain your low expectations for this unit!

By the way, if you do end up with one of these, I recommend opening it up and checking all of the mounting nuts on the speakers. I found a few loose ones, which cause a rattle if the speakers get up to trying to impersonate some bass! Anything that could rattle should be secured. This is why the hot glue holding the wires to the bottom. (Done by the factory, not me, because it's cheaper than a clamp!)

Oh: I forgot in the previous post to show you an attempt at isolating the table from the base using rubber grommets:
Motor and Grommet Side View.jpg
(63.29 KiB) Downloaded 82 times
While I would be impressed if a middle school child thought of isolating the table from the base, in this case, they used fairly stiff rubber grommets which really don't cut it. First, they do not separate the motor from the rest of the table, so vibration from the motor will go through the platter as well as the tone arm. And second, those rubber grommets will send that speaker howl right up to the platter anyway! I'd give a child a "nice try", but an adult engineer a "fail" on that.

If you have the volume up a bit, when the table stops at the end of a record with the needle just sitting there, you can sometimes get a low level howl from feedback from the speakers through the platter. Another argument against improving bass from the internal speakers.

If you're going to play 78s, (possibly the reason someone with a high end table might be looking at something similar to this, because most 78's are hardly Hi Fi anyway, though a few vinyl ones are pretty good), then you do need a flip stylus, with .7 mils on the LP side for LPs and 45s, and 3 mils for 78s. A good cheap one that will snap right into your modern Chinese tonearm is the Banpa BP2ATC cart, (available cheap on Amazon and elsewhere) shown here swinging to some Benny Goodman, I think.
Banpa Cart BP2ATC.jpg
(99.45999999999999 KiB) Downloaded 80 times
Tracking force with this cartridge on my table is about 6.8 grams. A little heavy, but lighter than my old RCA luggable and about par for most ceramics of the olden days. (If I still had my old plastic Garrard from '75, I wonder what the VTF would be on that puppy!)

If you're playing a lot of 78s, you really have nothing to worry about as far as tracking force. Those early players tracked heavier (up to and maybe over 10 grams), and back in the 1920s, they tracked MUCH heavier. (How about 120 grams with a steel needle!?? What's a Crosley going to do to your 78s that's worse than the players from back in the day?)

So, what I have done with mine to get it usable is:
  • Replaced belt because the old one was loose and sloppy.
    Replaced the original cart with plastic cantilever sapphire needle with Banpa BP2ATC, which comes with a diamond stylus for LPs and sapphire one for 78s.
    Finally, and this is really the most ridiculous fix that was needed, I filed the bumps off the plastic pulley to reduce flutter.
Would I buy one new? Hell no! Would I recommend it as a good screener? Only if you're willing to file a pulley or replace the motor. Should this be your only record player? Probably not! (Unless you don't care about your records, or only have a pile of rough records in the garage and want to hear them before you get rid of them.)

The flutter is really the worst part of this, and hopefully all of them aren't like mine. Maybe the newer ones had a metal pulley, and hopefully still had the gentler auto stop mechanism.

I got mine good enough to go full Forrest Gump on a box of records. (You never know what you're gonna get!) However, in the future, I'm going to look into:
  • Replacing the motor with one that has a metal pulley, especially if I notice flutter again. (They're under $5 on eBay, so why not.)
    Looking into the amp impedance and if needed, adjust the impedance from the cartridge to 1 MegOhm. If that improves bass response, I may look into some cheap speaker upgrades, but that will probably lead to feedback.
    I'll probably add a headphone jack, because this doesn't have any external output or headphone jack.
I think I recommended this player as a screener, but because of the flutter mine had, I'd probably only recommend this player to someone not afraid to take the platter off and file the motor pully. (Don't expect Grandma to do that before playing her Artie Shaw 78s or Rolling Stones 45s!)

Of course, if you're handy with tools and don't mind spending about $30 on a new idler on top of what you already spent on the player, you could look into some vintage portable players. Solid state ones will be lighter and easier to use, but tube ones will have extra "cool" factor at the cost of weight and warm up time.

You'll definitely need to be, or find, an electronics technician with experience with tubes to make sure any tube player you get is in good working order before you use it. Those will probably need the amplifier re-capped, and the turntable / changer mechanism taken apart and cleaned and lubed. (Some of those V-M changers may have to be cleaned several times before all of the gunk finally clears that keeps the changer from cycling reliably.)

With older record players, you can usually find schematics and even changer information on line. With the newer Crosleys and other cheap Chinese imports, you won't find diddly squat for a schematic. (It's a shame, because even cheap plastic crap should be fixable, like the cheap plastic crap we had in the '70s!)

So, now you know the ins and outs of the Crosley Traveler CR-49. Don't worry about your 78s. The Crosley is more afraid of the 78s than they should be of the Crosley! (They're very abrasive, which is why steel needles wore out so quickly.)

This post was brought to you by Crosley: The Yorx of the 21st Century!

ntsc525
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 45
Joined: 31 Dec 2017 23:59
Location: Southern California

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by ntsc525 » 11 Feb 2020 05:31

vinyl master wrote:
11 Feb 2020 02:59
Interesting, ntsc525...Normally, I'm not a fan of Crosleys in general, but I do understand taking one like this to the record shows, say, as a 45' screener...Of course, I have much better options for regular listening, as many here may know...Still, I've been picking up portable turntables just for this purpose of screening and have two vintage ones now, the Gakken and the Columbia...

48023
48026
...
When I was a kid, I had a Gakken like that one but with a radio built in also. If I found one now, I'd snap it up! If I remember, it had a Pioneer speaker in it, and while not being confused for Hi Fi, I'm sure it sounded better than a Crosley Cruiser. (The Traveler I've reviewed here, probably sounds better than the Gakken, but it's not Hi Fi either.)

To think of how many times the Real Don Steele of 93 KHJ screamed through that speaker when I used to record songs off the radio with my cassette recorder. (Kids, that's how we "downloaded" music back in the day!)

I don't remember what happened to the record player, but I remember cutting out the radio part and building it into a cigar box so I could still use the radio. Now, of course, I wish I'd taken better care of that Gakken and stashed it away!

A Crosley Traveler competes well with those little players. I forgot to mention that it wouldn't be that difficult to put a small 12 volt battery inside to make the Traveler more portable. (Maybe a future project.)

KentT
long player
long player
Posts: 4622
Joined: 13 Mar 2008 19:44
Location: Athens, TN

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by KentT » 11 Feb 2020 17:09

ntsc525 wrote:
11 Feb 2020 05:31
vinyl master wrote:
11 Feb 2020 02:59
Interesting, ntsc525...Normally, I'm not a fan of Crosleys in general, but I do understand taking one like this to the record shows, say, as a 45' screener...Of course, I have much better options for regular listening, as many here may know...Still, I've been picking up portable turntables just for this purpose of screening and have two vintage ones now, the Gakken and the Columbia...

48023
48026
...
When I was a kid, I had a Gakken like that one but with a radio built in also. If I found one now, I'd snap it up! If I remember, it had a Pioneer speaker in it, and while not being confused for Hi Fi, I'm sure it sounded better than a Crosley Cruiser. (The Traveler I've reviewed here, probably sounds better than the Gakken, but it's not Hi Fi either.)

To think of how many times the Real Don Steele of 93 KHJ screamed through that speaker when I used to record songs off the radio with my cassette recorder. (Kids, that's how we "downloaded" music back in the day!)

I don't remember what happened to the record player, but I remember cutting out the radio part and building it into a cigar box so I could still use the radio. Now, of course, I wish I'd taken better care of that Gakken and stashed it away!

A Crosley Traveler competes well with those little players. I forgot to mention that it wouldn't be that difficult to put a small 12 volt battery inside to make the Traveler more portable. (Maybe a future project.)
I've owned the Philips made Mercury portable phono from the 1964 era, it sounded far better than the Crosley ever will, had a Philips ceramic cartridge which played Stereo discs at acceptable tracking forces, had good vertical compliance, and was nice to use. It wasn't cheap but worth paying for. .Find you a nice old Zenith luggable phono with a VM changer and the Micro-Touch 2G system and you'd forget about that Crosley, likewise a Magnavox one, or a Sylvania Exponent or a good Packard Bell similar model.

vinyl master
vinyl engineer
vinyl engineer
United States of America
Posts: 21003
Joined: 01 Nov 2013 05:27

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by vinyl master » 11 Feb 2020 18:25

ntsc525 wrote:
11 Feb 2020 05:31

When I was a kid, I had a Gakken like that one but with a radio built in also. If I found one now, I'd snap it up! If I remember, it had a Pioneer speaker in it, and while not being confused for Hi Fi, I'm sure it sounded better than a Crosley Cruiser. (The Traveler I've reviewed here, probably sounds better than the Gakken, but it's not Hi Fi either.)
You might want to look for one of these at some point, ntsc525...Sounds like you had good memories with yours...And for the record, my "new-to-me" Gakken DOES have a radio built in...There's a tuning dial on the side that gets AM stations fairly well...More than I can say for the Crosley, though, at least in that regard...

Funny you should mention The Real Don Steele, too...You know, they used an aircheck of him in the film "Once Upon A Time In Hollywood"...I probably have some old airchecks of him around here somewhere...That and Casey Kasem, Wolfman Jack, Dick Biondi, Charlie Tuna, Alan Freed, Murray The K, Herb Kent, Frankie Crocker, Sonny Hopson, etc.
Last edited by vinyl master on 11 Feb 2020 18:44, edited 1 time in total.

Tinkaroo
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Canada
Posts: 7694
Joined: 04 Feb 2011 20:00
Location: Pixie Hollow by The Bay

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by Tinkaroo » 11 Feb 2020 18:38

I'm surprised they use a plastic pulley on the motor. I've never seen that before.

If they used a metal one as well as a metal platter and aluminum tonearm it would be an improvement.

The motor could use some vibration dampers or bushings.

Separating the speakers from the base as in satellites would also help a lot.

toaster999
senior member
senior member
Great Britain
Posts: 407
Joined: 11 Jan 2016 18:27

Re: Crosley CR-49: Not the worst Crosley! Screener or Cheapie

Post by toaster999 » 11 Feb 2020 18:53

Can't we ban talk of Crosley on this site?

Post Reply