1914 HMV Model No.7 Gramophone

[Zwebie]

Well I went and did it, bought my first HMV Gramophone. Thank You, Steve and Epigramophone, for your help in describing which model it was from my earlier post.

I purchased it, because it looked like a good solid original machine that still retained its original finish and decals, (although quite dirty), and had what appeared to be good original nickel plating.

When it arrived I got straight to work and disassembled all the nickel parts and cleaned them with MAAS metal polish. I think they came out amazing! I had to tap out a broken needle screw before rebuilding the reproducer, and replaced the back flange. The cabinet and horn were cleaned with Gojo, taking extreme care to stay away from the decals. They also came out amazing! The glow from the golden oak is really something to see! I cleaned and re-greased the motor, and lastly replaced the red felt with high quality 100% wool felt.

I think it came out really great, and hope you’ll agree!

Some Observations: a) Except for the Schoolhouse machine, Open Horn Victor machines in the states never came in golden oak. b) Many of the parts appear to be interchangeable with victor machines, although they have slight differences. c) The reproducer is labeled Gramophone & Typewriter Ltd., but was still made in U.S.A. d) The reproducer is a round hole as late as 1914, (In the states you don’t see round hole reproducers on machines much later than 1904-05). e) I’m guessing that the Angel was a dealer decal? f) The horn was probably stored separate from the machine, because it was not as dirty and the finish was not as crazed as the cabinet. g) I determined the machine was from 1914 because of the paper tag glued to the underside of the machine, which stated Machine # and Inspectors initials and rubber stamped date, (JUN 12 1914).

Bob S.

[Zwebie]

More Pictures:

[Edisone]

That is one lovely gramophone!

Some "Recording Angel" history is at : http://www.musicweb-international.com/F ... page11.htm

[epigramophone]

Congratulations on your purchase. That is as nice an example as I have seen, and you have made an excellent job of sensitively cleaning it.

To answer a couple of your questions :

Exhibition soundboxes for the UK market were made in the USA until about 1918, after which they were made at Hayes. Yours appears to be earlier than the machine, as examples from about 1908 to 1918 have "The Gramophone Co.Limited" on the front rather than "Gramophone & Typewriter Ltd".

The "Angel" transfer (decal) is a maker's mark not a dealer's. The Gramophone Company continued to use the "Recording Angel" trademark for some years after it acquired the rights to the "His Master's Voice" painting, and even revived it after World War 2 for some of their most expensive classical LP issues.

[Steve]

I would simply like to echo what has already been said. Fantastic machine in outstanding condition - in all respects, this is the equivalent (UK) to a Victor VI in its day. The machine and its vital components are certainly all the same, only the cabinet design and plating is different! And no doubt for a zillionth of the money?

BTW, I have never seen that angel decal before. Normally the angel exists on a small circular ivorine plaque, but only on earlier models. Your No. 7 (or technically HFO) must have been made for another foreign market.

Congratulations on a great purchase and even better cleaning operation. You have a machine that even most UK collectors wouldn't know enough about to risk buying it. If it doesn't say "Monarch" on it, most of them walk by and pass! Now that's a real collectors' item.

[Steve]

I now know why I haven't seen that recording angel decal before; I haven't visited Imperial Russia! That machine was made exclusively for the Russian market with that decal. It is therefore not only a great machine in its own right, top of the range horn model in its day but also incredibly rare with that decal.

So it's probably worth more than a Victor VI anyway? It's certainly a darn sight rarer.

That makes me soooooo !!!

[epigramophone]

Absolutely right. I knew I had seen that design before.

It appears on some Russian "Amour" and "Monarch" record labels, such as Lot 255 pictured in the recent SAS sale catalogue of the late Sir Paul Getty collection.

[Uncle Vanya]

I would simply like to echo what has already been said. Fantastic machine in outstanding condition - in all respects, this is the equivalent (UK) to a Victor VI in its day. The machine and its vital components are certainly all the same, only the cabinet design and plating is different! And no doubt for a zillionth of the money.

Well, strictly this would be the equivalent of the Victor V. Oak cabinet, 12" turntable, 3 spring spiral drive motor, and speed indicator dial. The Victor V with smooth horn was offered in 1911 for $70.00 as a complete outfit. According to the exchange rate at at New York in October of 1911, that would be very nearly 14 Guineas.

More than 50,000 Victor V machines were sold, and more than 16,000 Victor VI machines were sold. The VI was mechanically identical in all ways to the Victor V save for the balancing turntable, though some Victor V machines made between sometime in 1911 and 1917 were also fitted with the balancing turntable.

Yje interesting and vary attractive "New Style No. 7" was doubtless made in vastly smaller quantities than the American machines, and I cannot imagine more than a few hundered of this model having been sold in pre-revolutionalry Russia.

lovely machine indeed, far more interesting than the admittedly common American equivalents.

[VintageTechnologies]

Just wow! I like the style, I like the condition. Now I'll have to go home and throw rocks at my Victor III.

[Steve]

Uncle, you make a good point but please also remember that the HMV No. 7 was ALSO made in mahogany, unlike say Victor V/VI which were only made in one timber. That is why this HMV model really is the equivalent to them from HMV at this time.