|
Post by old-phonographs on Mar 27, 2009 18:25:24 GMT -6
I just opened the machine up everywhere I could. There is no sign of identification that says Columbia on it except for the reproducer. The works are very obviously Columbia. I took a strong light and looked at the finish and the underside of the lid and there is no indication that there was ever a decal anywhere there. And I'm sure the finish is all original after this inspection.
There are 3 things I did find though.
1) On the bottom of one of the sides sections there is a paper sticker that is glued on and looks to have been there forever. It says NO. 1242 on one line and Lot No. 2673 on the second line.
2) I took the drawer out and it has the number 22 stamped into the wood on the bottom front panel.
3) Under the drawer there is a smeared ink stamp that is oval shaped. It is completely unreadable. It "could" say Columbia and show other info. There is no way to read it.
Does any of this help identify it to any of you Columbia experts out there?
Thanks
Dan
|
|
|
Post by yesteryear1 on Mar 28, 2009 6:44:42 GMT -6
I would say the fellow who could really help out here is Robert Baumbach, the author of the Columbia Phonograph Companion Volume 2, which contains many details and illustrations of all the Disc model Graphophones and Grafonolas known to have been produced by Columbia. Is there anyway to reach him or send him a digital of this beautiful art model type desk phoograph with the Columbia Works. Perhaps he can shed some light on this. Also note that if this in fact is a Columbia product, it's volume control method are the doors swinging in and out, which would represent a Victor Patent infringement, and only the really early grafonolas had this Victor Type feature and quickly changed to the Columbia Louvers for volume control. This would make this a very early example of a regent type desk/phonograph combination.
|
|
|
Post by phonofolks on Mar 29, 2009 10:05:48 GMT -6
I think you can easily find Robert Baumbach through the mulhollandpress.com website and email him the link to this site for him to see the pictures.
Rick
|
|
|
Post by Lyle Boehland on Mar 29, 2009 11:02:19 GMT -6
The walnut desk phonograph is terrific! I have a mahogany sofa table phonograph. Can anyone identify it? I cannot determine the manufacturer. If the photo does not upload, contact me at BoehlandL@aol.com
|
|
|
Post by old-phonographs on Mar 29, 2009 13:25:02 GMT -6
I would say the fellow who could really help out here is Robert Baumbach, the author of the Columbia Phonograph Companion Volume 2, which contains many details and illustrations of all the Disc model Graphophones and Grafonolas known to have been produced by Columbia. Is there anyway to reach him or send him a digital of this beautiful art model type desk phoograph with the Columbia Works. Perhaps he can shed some light on this. Also note that if this in fact is a Columbia product, it's volume control method are the doors swinging in and out, which would represent a Victor Patent infringement, and only the really early grafonolas had this Victor Type feature and quickly changed to the Columbia Louvers for volume control. This would make this a very early example of a regent type desk/phonograph combination. I took your suggestion and e-mailed Bob. Below is his very kind response and a few pictures of another early machine with decals. From the pictures he provided, it is very obvious mine is indeed a Columbia. His opinion is based on some speculation as he admits. But, who would know better than him? Take a look at the side drawer and records storage on his and mine. The are exactly the same. Dan
Hi Dan; I believe that this is the real deal, but I can offer no convincing explanation of why it does not have a decal. I can speculate, which I love to do, however. We know that this is the earliest form of the Regent desk, with the lid over the turntable. This style was only built for short period because it violated the Victrola patents. We know also that Columbia bought its cabinets from various furniture companies. Perhaps this cabinet was built by the furniture company to showcase its skills to Columbia. If it were one of the very first ones built, Columbia may have added the mechanical parts but never applied the decal, either because it did not intend to offer it for sale through the regular channels, or because the decal was not yet ready. I would think that if this instrument were intended for public display, such as at a trade show, that the decal would have been important. This leads me to speculate that it left the factory out of the back door, so to speak. It may have have been used by one of executives, or perhaps it just stayed around at the factory and finally left after it was obsolete. In either case, a decal may not have been important. Of course it is also possible that the inside of the lid or even the entire cabinet was skillfully refinished at some point long ago, and the decal was simply not replaced. Generally the phonograph companies were not bashful regarding their instruments, so one or more decals would be expected. Clearly this is an exceptional example of the Regent, so you would think that they would be more proud of it than the ordinary Regent. I agree that the lack of a decal is curious, but I have seen enough oddities form various manufactures to know never to express features as a certainty. The best we can do is say "usually", "nearly all" or something equally vague when describing the construction and outfitting of various models. Bob P.S. i have attached some photos of an early Regent.
|
|
rvuill
One Spring Motor
Posts: 3
|
Post by rvuill on Mar 29, 2009 14:52:07 GMT -6
I know Victor had a patent on doors over the horn to adjust volume which forced Columbia to use louvers, but never heard of a patent on a lid over the turntable. What's the rational for that? Certainly most all cabinet style phonographs had some type of lid over their mechanism. I've never heard of any challenge to that. Please advise.
|
|
|
Post by yesteryear1 on Mar 29, 2009 18:01:00 GMT -6
This is great news, we now have confirmation from the Columbia book II author that this in all probability, as he says the real deal. The set up of the drawer and record storage and position of the lid and mechanism etc., and his explanation of the reason for the absence of the Identifying Columbia Logo, is certainly plausible. So we are really looking at one of the earliest stunning examples of the Columbia Regent desk/phono. Very nice indeed, and this leaves all the speculation behind, and that is really wonderful. You can print out his reply and use it as part of the complete historical provenance of this magnificent addition to your collection. Congratulations again. Also maybe you could send him this link as well as I am sure he will be also happy to comment on the Columbia Lyric from one of the other threads we have running. victrolagramophones.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=talk&action=display&thread=282
|
|