HMV Model 163...variations, or not?

[Marco Gilardetti]

...but here comes the antichrist of cabinetry.

Since the bottom part of the legs are already missing and are nowhere to be found again, if this were my machine, I'd cut to zero those useless stumps of the legs in order to have the bottom of the horn laying down to the floor. Then I'd put the machine right in the middle of a corner, and I'd enjoy the tremendously increased bass response.

I actually fancied doing the same with my machine in a reversible way, but as the legs' structure is nearly perfect I decided that it was definitely not the case to mess it up. But since the damage was already done to this machine, I would go all the way and experiment with it.

[Steve]

Given the rather streaky appearance of the wood, inside and out, I'd say that the whole thing has been stripped and repolished. Why? -- I long ago gave up trying to guess why previous owners of anything have done the things they did. The feet might have been damaged in a flood, or perhaps the user was what I remember Ted Cunningham, a former CLPGS Chairman, describe as 'a person of less than normal loftiness.'

The oval winder escutcheon was standard on all HMV cabinet models with the 32 motor, as far as I can recall, but the absence of black on the winder knob is all part of the 'refinishing' -- the original back lacquers often starts to chip and fall off, and someone has simply removed what was left.

'A person of less than normal loftiness.' I almost choked on my Cornflakes reading that! How very funny. I could use that to describe the average Joe selling a gramophone or related items on Ebay. I often raise a palm to my forehead when I look at Ebay listings.

[epigramophone]

When Caruso bought this outfit for his stepmother, he failed to factor in her lack of loftiness :

[nostalgia]

Here is the escutcheon, it does not look like anything I have seen on a HMV machine. Still, I think I will keep it, since this machine anyway is not original, but after being serviced will play its records just as well an original 163. It will first, last and always from now on be a re entrant that plays for decades ahead, it treated with respect.

[Sherazhyder]

Here is the escutcheon, it does not look like anything I have seen on a HMV machine. Still, I think I will keep it, since this machine anyway is not original, but after being serviced will play its records just as well an original 163.

This escutcheon looks like the classic brass rosette found in American homes of the 1910s and 20s.

[nostalgia]

Now I am stepping into a mine field...would it be complete sacrilege to strip and refinish this machine, even in a color never used for this model? As we read above here, Oedipus also agree that is has been stripped and refinished already.

I had a closer look at it, and it for sure must have been stripped and refinished already, or someone has applied some kind of stuff on top of the original finish, with or without removing the original finish. Legs are cut too, but the horn and sound are of course intact.
This will be my summer job, and the grill cloth will also be removed, but not necessarily substituted with a grill cloth in a color close to the original, or maybe I will not use a grill cloth at all. I would never had such ideas, if the machine was original, of course. I just finished restoring a 163 two days ago, that looks great, and original.
This one, however, look even worse in real, than on the photos.
Opinons?

[nostalgia]

And here is the newly restored 163, it looks good to my eyes, all original, and with its legs intact too. It will of course be kept this way.

[JerryVan]

You've done such a wonderful job on the one machine, I can't imagine doing anything that would be better on your new project. My thought would be, why extend and further the mistreatment of the cut-down machine? If it's restored as per original, maybe a donor cabinet will one day come available to correct the shortened legs. You'll then have a "proper" example. Just my take on it though. I'm sure whatever you decide will be tastefully done.

[Marco Gilardetti]

Now I am stepping into a mine field...would it be complete sacrilege to strip and refinish this machine, even in a color never used for this model? As we read above here, Oedipus also agree that is has been stripped and refinished already.

As written many times on this board, each of us is totally free to do whatever he wants with his own objects. We are not funded by a state agency, nor we have any responsibility towards other citizens (that are not helping us in any way, concerning our activity).

So, if you have some ideas to deploy, since this machine has already been heavily altered in any case, it makes a good chance to try them out. Frankly speaking, I also took some liberties with mine, beginning by replacing that awful brown felt, and ending by repainting the horn so that it is not completely smothered by that hideous black colour.

As already written earlier, if I were you I would immediately get rid of those shortened pegs and have the machine sit on the floor, possibly set in a corner of the room. The sound should be immense.

[nostalgia]

Marco...everyone else.
The time has come to finally restore, or at least get this 163 back to work.

I am looking at the shortened legs, Marco...you state that you would remove the legs in total, BUT...would it not alter the sound, since there would be no empty space under the horn? I just ask, I have no idea what to expect if I really cut off the remaining parts of the legs. Also, the horn would be lowered more that it already is, and I am hesitating...

Inputs are welcome from everyone with knowledge of the HMV re-entrant models, before the saw is potentially used.