Portable record player decks - UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Discussion Forum

Fidelity Fan · 6th Jul 2020, 11:01 pm

In the early 1980s, I was given a BRC Model 2014 record player with a BSR UA14 deck. This started my interest in electronics. I most have collected loads of record players over the following years.

I found that the majority had BSR decks with Garrard a close second. I am surprised that I only have ever had two with Collaro decks. One was a Decca Deccalian with a Collaro Conquest and an Amplion player with a RC54 deck. My first player was a Peto Scott radiogram with a Collaro Conquest deck too. The autochanger function on this deck later failed due to damaged teeth on a cog wheel and a BSR C123 deck was fitted in it's place.

Why were Collaro decks a lot less common than BSR or Garrard on portable record players of the 1950s and 1960s?

Michael Maurice · 7th Jul 2020, 7:32 am

I was told by someone who worked for Dansette in Stanmore that Collaro decks were considered too complex for what they were.

Consider the complexity of an RC54 or RC456 to a BSR UA6 or a Garrard RC75 etc

Edward Huggins · 7th Jul 2020, 7:48 am

The Collaro decks were far more complex than the BSR and the (pre-"Autoslim") Garrard units. They were heavier, difficult to service and somewhat more expensive. However they still gave a superb performance, fitted an excellent and durable range of "Studio" cartridges and were all-round excellent Autochangers. Sadly these over-engineered Collaro products, and the later Magavox versions, did not survive and the business failed in the early 1960s. Overall they had the smallest share of the market as compared to BSR and Garrard. Additionally they suffered from Copyright infringement issues from BSR during 1957.

Ekcoman · 7th Jul 2020, 8:17 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Maurice

I was told by someone who worked for Dansette in Stanmore that Collaro decks were considered too complex for what they were.

Consider the complexity of an RC54 or RC456 to a BSR UA6 or a Garrard RC75 etc

I heard too regarding Collaro decks that somewhat over engineered and were not as competitive price wise with budget Garrard & BSR decks which contributed to their demise. Have to say their cartridges have fared well over the passage of time.

Fidelity Fan · 7th Jul 2020, 3:47 pm

Thanks for the replies. I seem to recall that the Collaro Conquest deck fitted into the Decca Deccalian had the same fate as the one in the Peto Scott radiogram. The mechanism would cease up in the autochanger sequence due to a green nylon cogwheel having damaged teeth.
(https://www.vintage-radio.net/forum/...llaro+conquest see post 2 6.PDF). It is item 5269 on this diagram of the mechanism. Was this a common problem with these decks?

The Collaro deck on the Decca was consequently swapped for a Garrard Autoslim.

6th Jul 2020, 11:01 pm	#1
Fidelity Fan Hexode Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Wigan, Lancashire, UK. Posts: 372	Portable record player decks In the early 1980s, I was given a BRC Model 2014 record player with a BSR UA14 deck. This started my interest in electronics. I most have collected loads of record players over the following years. I found that the majority had BSR decks with Garrard a close second. I am surprised that I only have ever had two with Collaro decks. One was a Decca Deccalian with a Collaro Conquest and an Amplion player with a RC54 deck. My first player was a Peto Scott radiogram with a Collaro Conquest deck too. The autochanger function on this deck later failed due to damaged teeth on a cog wheel and a BSR C123 deck was fitted in it's place. Why were Collaro decks a lot less common than BSR or Garrard on portable record players of the 1950s and 1960s? Last edited by AC/HL; 7th Jul 2020 at 1:05 am. Reason: Thread split

7th Jul 2020, 7:32 am	#2
Michael Maurice Moderator Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Wembley, Middlesex Posts: 7,225	Re: Portable record player decks I was told by someone who worked for Dansette in Stanmore that Collaro decks were considered too complex for what they were. Consider the complexity of an RC54 or RC456 to a BSR UA6 or a Garrard RC75 etc __________________ Forum Moderator http://www.michaelmauricerepairs.co.uk/

7th Jul 2020, 7:48 am	#3
Edward Huggins Dekatron Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Southwold, Suffolk, UK. Posts: 8,340	Re: Portable record player decks The Collaro decks were far more complex than the BSR and the (pre-"Autoslim") Garrard units. They were heavier, difficult to service and somewhat more expensive. However they still gave a superb performance, fitted an excellent and durable range of "Studio" cartridges and were all-round excellent Autochangers. Sadly these over-engineered Collaro products, and the later Magavox versions, did not survive and the business failed in the early 1960s. Overall they had the smallest share of the market as compared to BSR and Garrard. Additionally they suffered from Copyright infringement issues from BSR during 1957. __________________ Edward.

7th Jul 2020, 3:47 pm	#5
Fidelity Fan Hexode Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Wigan, Lancashire, UK. Posts: 372	Re: Portable record player decks Thanks for the replies. I seem to recall that the Collaro Conquest deck fitted into the Decca Deccalian had the same fate as the one in the Peto Scott radiogram. The mechanism would cease up in the autochanger sequence due to a green nylon cogwheel having damaged teeth. (https://www.vintage-radio.net/forum/...llaro+conquest see post 2 6.PDF). It is item 5269 on this diagram of the mechanism. Was this a common problem with these decks? The Collaro deck on the Decca was consequently swapped for a Garrard Autoslim. Last edited by Fidelity Fan; 7th Jul 2020 at 4:01 pm.