Nice portable Gramophone

[Phono48]

I had noticed the stick-on job right away, but to me it still looks OK. Since we don't know what condition the old covering was in, it's very possible that re-covering was the only way to have a decent-looking machine, which IMO is preferable to having a ratty-looking old one that one must apologize for. Just my $.02 worth.

Despite my earlier caustic comments regarding this particular machine, I couldn't agree with you more! Why do many collectors get upset when they come across a re-covered machines? To say it destroys the originality is ridiculous, surely a torn and bubbling covering isn't original? If it's an extremely rare machine, then obviously it's best left as is, but as very, very few portables fall into this catagory, I can see no reason to have a machine that, as you say,one has to apologise for.

Barry

[Henry]

Thank you, Barry. Now if only I had such a machine (fully "restored," of course!) to support my pronouncement....