Radiola 61-2

[Tubejunke]

So, it's liked by one of us at least. LOL! Don't get me wrong. I didn't expect everyone to think it was a stellar find. I just wanted some opinions or facts as oddly enough out of all the radios that I do have; I don't have any RCA Victor or Radiola as standards of performance. Also, for some reason I thought that Radiola was some independent company and not an RCA. I'm still not sure, but I don't think all RCAs were Radiolas.

The name was a selling point though along with supposedly a slick white original paint job, super clean and restored (recapped) six tube chassis, and although on the plain looking side there still is some Art Deco flair about it. As far as packing goes the guy said he packs in that expandable foam, so it should be able to take a beating from the best of our cautious and careful postal employees. I shall soon see what kind of performance comes from RCA during that time period. My experience tells me that Philco is the stuff that just plays forever with little to no work involved and certain Zenith sets. So I needed an RCA for the dust collection. Thanks everyone!

[DavGoodlin]

Originally Posted by Tubejunke

So, it's liked by one of us at least. LOL! Don't get me wrong. I didn't expect everyone to think it was a stellar find. I just wanted some opinions or facts as oddly enough out of all the radios that I do have; I don't have any RCA Victor or Radiola as standards of performance. Also, for some reason I thought that Radiola was some independent company and not an RCA. I'm still not sure, but I don't think all RCAs were Radiolas.

The name was a selling point though along with supposedly a slick white original paint job, super clean and restored (recapped) six tube chassis, and although on the plain looking side there still is some Art Deco flair about it. As far as packing goes the guy said he packs in that expandable foam, so it should be able to take a beating from the best of our cautious and careful postal employees. I shall soon see what kind of performance comes from RCA during that time period. My experience tells me that Philco is the stuff that just plays forever with little to no work involved and certain Zenith sets. So I needed an RCA for the dust collection. Thanks everyone!

That is a rare circuit, using a 12J5 for an oscillator. Mine is also Radiola-branded, bit cracked but looks similar and is a model 76ZX12, without a tone control in the middle. Im keeping it just for the very unconventional tube complement

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by DavGoodlin

That is a rare circuit, using a 12J5 for an oscillator. Mine is also Radiola-branded, bit cracked but looks similar and is a model 76ZX12, without a tone control in the middle. Im keeping it just for the very unconventional tube complement

The Radiola line was made for the smaller non-franchised dealers. They were pure RCA in design. IIRC, the chassis numbers were the same.
They were only available in a few models, usually on the lower end.

[Tubejunke]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

The Radiola line was made for the smaller non-franchised dealers. They were pure RCA in design. IIRC, the chassis numbers were the same.
They were only available in a few models, usually on the lower end.

Interesting! So Radiola was an entity unto it's own meaning my Radiola IS a Radiola radio. Or if I were around then I may opt for I guess a better RCA radio. I never knew they were low end. But I don't know much at all it seems. I simply thought that collectors of really old went for the Radiola, so I thought it was something special. I didn't think that they were still being produced as late as this one is. I always think 20s and 30s....

[wa2ise]

Originally Posted by DavGoodlin

That is a rare circuit, using a 12J5 for an oscillator.

Why did they do that, vs just use a 12SA7 pentagrid converter? Can't imagine that that would offer any performance improvement of significance for an AM radio. Avoiding patent infringement? Or they just had a ton of 12SG7s and 12J5s to use up?

[jr_tech]

Originally Posted by wa2ise

Why did they do that, vs just use a 12SA7 pentagrid converter? Can't imagine that that would offer any performance improvement of significance for an AM radio. Avoiding patent infringement? Or they just had a ton of 12SG7s and 12J5s to use up?

Perhaps as a selling point, I suspect that the general public would buy a 6 tube radio over a 5 tube radio expecting better performance. Several manufactures at the time offered "6 tube" radios that departed from the optimum design, to save a few bucks in manufacturing. Remember those "10 transistor" radios that used many of them as diodes?

Jr

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by wa2ise

Why did they do that, vs just use a 12SA7 pentagrid converter? Can't imagine that that would offer any performance improvement of significance for an AM radio. Avoiding patent infringement? Or they just had a ton of 12SG7s and 12J5s to use up?

I'm trying to remember what the advantage was, but I understand there was one.
Most of the hotter radio's of the day, used a separate osc and mixer, especially the multi-band sets, even though, they didn't have an RF stage.
The earlier Hallicrafters receivers used a 6K8 or a 12K8, pre-war. The tube manual shows a separate triode and hexode, with a common cathode.
Anyone, feel free to correct me on this, so we all know!