What Happened To American Transistor Radios? RCA 1959 shirt-pocket radio, consumer electronics USA

4,290
0
Published 2022-10-30
1958... was the year that Sony...DEFINED the shirt-pocket transistor radio with its successful TR-610 model-- a radio that actually did fit in a shirt pocket. That year, how many American radio makers met that competition by introducing a full-featured shirt-pocket transistor radio of their own?

Well, let's see. Not Admiral. Not Arvin. Not GE. Not Hoffman. Not Magnavox. Not Motorola. Not Raytheon. Not RCA. Not Sylvania. Not Trav-Ler. Not Westinghouse. Not...Zenith.

Philco gave it a shot at least, in 1958, with their earphone-only "Veep" radio, but without a speaker, you can't call it a full-featured radio.

Only ONE American brand managed to introduce a new full-featured shirt-pocket radio in 1958. Emerson. We covered this terrific 999 Champion model of theirs in a recent video.

Besides the Emerson,... nothing. Just Emerson... But I'll bet that next year--in 1959--the American makers inundated the market with all kinds of pocket models, with all kinds of improvements. ((crickets)). Those are crickets. Seriously. THAT was the American makers' response to the Sony, and the swarm of other great little radios finding their way to American shores from dozens of other Japanese brands. Crickets from the American makers.

Finally, in late 1959, one American brand managed to jolt itself awake enough to try and meet the challenge, releasing its first shirt-pocket radio, RCA Victor.

The Radio Corporation of America and The Victor Talking Machine Company had merged in 1929 to become RCA Victor. Arguably the first media conglomerate of the electronic age, RCA Victor was into network broadcasting, the record business...and made the radios and record players on which to play it all.

And at the beginning of the transistor era, RCA was there with their pioneering 7-BT-9J from 1955. That's it on the top in this picture. Not a pocket-size model, but smaller than the first Philco transistor that it's sitting on here.

In December of 1959, this ad appeared, introducing RCA's first SHIRT-pocket radio, the 1TP-2 model. That's the radio we're looking at today. But notice in the ad that they had already been busy making larger transistor radios. And that's what all the American makers had been doing throughout the late-'50s: making larger radios, in sizes we call the coat-pocket size, the even larger "portable" size, ((groan)) and the table-top models. One could argue that such large radios sounded better, with their larger speakers, and performed better. But what many people really wanted at the time was a shirt-pocket size radio. This was no secret. The FIRST transistor radio, the Regency TR-1 from 1954 WAS shirt-pocket size, or nearly so. To Regency, and most of the rest of us, that was the point of having transistors instead of tubes--radios could fit in your shirt pocket.

When RCA's little radio arrived in late 1959, it had been a full five years since the Regency TR-1. As you can see, the RCA is quite an elegant little radio. And it has the nostalgic touch of their old logo featuring the dog, named "Nipper," who is looking into a phonograph because he believes he hears coming from it "his master's voice." That was their slogan, "his master's voice."

RCA dubbed this radio "The 'Pockette' Personal." There's a name chosen by a committee if I ever heard one. Pictured on the operating instructions are two models, the 1TP-1 with a plastic front, and the 1TP-2 which has a metal front. Both models were apparently issued simultaneously. We'll look at them side by side in a little bit. Notice in the instructions that the radio takes a 4-volt battery. Now, such a battery would be as hard to find then as it is today. Back then, where would you find it? Not at a drug store or even at a hardware store. Only at a radio shop--the same shop where you bought the radio. And that was the point to many of the American radio makers using these odd batteries: to keep you coming back to their dealer's stores.

It's a handsome looking box in gold and red. Nestled inside is the radio, the case and strap, the earphone in its own plastic box, and the battery. This is what's known as a "gift box," and that explains why it says inside "The Gift That Keeps On Giving." Many radios came in such boxes and also were sold in a more modest and smaller box with fewer or no accessories. The case here is worthless. Dolled up to look like leather, it is little more than a piece of cardboard. It only survives here in pristine condition because it's barely been used. Best not to touch it. It's brittle and as stiff as, well, cardboard.

Earphone Set RK-219A... for RCA Victor instruments. Now, I like that. That sounds impressive. And speaking of impressive,... what a beautiful little radio this is. As we look around the sides, we see scuffing and this is another reason I have such disdain for the cheap cardboard cases--they scratched the radios. I really don't see how a cardboard case should be any part of a deluxe gift set.

All Comments (19)
  • @Steven-re7xt
    My mother worked for RCA of findlay ohio. And brought home a diode from the reject bin. And started the radio adventure for me.
  • I like watching your videos my dad's sister had a transistor radio just like that back in the 70s
  • Makes me proud and sad at the same time. What could have been if more people would have supported the American made brands. Thank you for your posts. I hope these videos will be a inspiration to future generations.
  • The 4 volt battery had me stumped, the voltage is not characteristic of the carbon-zinc batteries commonly used in transistor radios. Thinking about for a few minutes, I figured it out, the 4 volt battery is a mercury type, with 3 cells in series. This arrangement should yield a 4.05 volt output. Mercury batteries were far superior to carbon-zinc. They had many times the capacity for the same physical size, had a constant output voltage as the battery aged, and had a 10 year shelf life. I noticed the speaker was a custom part, using a center tap, essentially the typical audio output transformer was built into the speaker voice coil.
  • @mr50sagain55
    Great video!!!...I recently purchased a mid-1960’s (when I became of transistor radio age) Viscount shirt pocket size radio in “mint” condition…arrived in an incredibly flimsy polymer-like material case currently in the process of decomposing…case seems to have leached onto the smooth plastic top and sides of the radio creating a cloudy looking surface…it looks like these little radios were somehow able to predict the future of today’s merchandise!
  • @carlrudd1858
    This is a very well done video and educational as well. If only the narrator didn't have the slightly condescendingly sarcastic tone.
  • @jeffking4176
    Another great video. Interesting history, too. 📻🙂
  • @marklang7004
    Thank you Eric! Always love your videos! I know what you mean about the cheap faux leather cases. I don't think it's fair to even call them faux leather. You're right they're more like cardboard!! Anyway been collecting for years, but you always teach me something new.
  • @MaxW-er1hm
    Great video. Can you do an episode featuring the different battery types and styles? Even if you can't show actual batteries, photos and descriptions would be fine. Thanks.
  • @johnstone7697
    Very good summary. The US makers were getting creamed by the Japanese by this time, and many didn't wait long to give up on US manufacture and just buy from Japanese OEMs. Those US made components were a lot more costly than the Japanese made parts. Just one example: the large air gap tuning cap was certainly a lot more costly than the comparable Mitsumi sealed unit. And as beefy as it looked, it performed no better. RCA made clever use of a high impendance speaker with dual windings, that eliminated the output transformer that was found on virtually all Japanese radios. That saved money on the transformer, but the speaker was clearly more expensive. Other than that, the circuitry was very close to what you found in any Japanese 6 transistor radio. Certainly not superior in performance.
  • What is something is that $19.95 in 1959 is $203.48 today Imagine giving $200 for such piece of junk