Decca Dulcephone "Trench" Model 1 - Restoration Questions

[Sherazhyder]

Ah! Thank you, Sheraz for these great details.
Do you know if the needle cup sits above the board? Or does the cup rest in a larger diameter hole?

Also, thank you the pic of the brake with rubber stopper intact! Now I know what that needs to look like. Thanks!

Hello! Thank you for your appreciation. The needle cup stays in a round hole and the cup’s cover is made of a thin metal, which rises about 2 mm above the surface of the motor board.
Best regards
Sheraz

[Sherazhyder]

Ah! Thank you, Sheraz for these great details.
Do you know if the needle cup sits above the board? Or does the cup rest in a larger diameter hole?

Also, thank you the pic of the brake with rubber stopper intact! Now I know what that needs to look like. Thanks!

I have measured the three dimensions of Junior Decca’s case, as in pictures, so you could know the difference/similarities between the two cases.
Cheers
Sheraz

[Oedipus]

Let's clear up a couple of points, first of all:
1)The difference between UK and US date order is not relevant here -- the question I was posing was the presence of that '0'. the normal way of writing a date by hand in 1920 (and in the 1950s, when I was young) was d/m/yy. Sometimes you might use a full stop in place of the / (which we used to call 'stroke', not 'slash'!)The day and the month were either one or two digits as required, with no '0' in front of either. On a rubber date stamp, the norm was d mon yyyy, with the month given as three letters. The day date was one or two, though for a single number the blank space in front was often given as a hyphen, to make the stamp work with even pressure.

2) I never said the maroon finish was typical on early Deccas. That one in the Decca booklet (it is now on display at the Musical Museum in Brentford) is probably the only one I have ever seen. What is typical about it is the 'long grain', normally seen on early black models. I'll try and attach a photo of such a black covering shortly.

Now, back to that weird 'date'. Two more photos I am planning to attach show a very similar label which is difficult to read, (it looks like 503. 21.), which is on an early black model (with black enamel Dulciflex). The 21 is particularly difficult to read, but 1921 is even more unlikely than 1918 for a Decca with a rear handle and right-angled tone-arm. Then there is another label which has a very clear date 25/4/19. That was the normal way of writing a date at that time -- though Decca soon dropped it in favour of a simple row of numbers (eg 20725) at the bottom of the label. So it's beginning to look as if the pattern with 3 digits beginning with '50' and followed by a full stop and then two more digits, if it indicates a date at all, does so in some kind of code known only to the Barnett Samuel assembly works! Please will all owners of early Deccas study these sub-turntable labels, so that we can see if a pattern emerges?

As for the black cloth on the Decca in question, I see no reason to doubt that it is completely original. Its 'pebbled' graining is typical of the period (found on other portable gramophones, and cameras - this leather cloth is often called 'camera cloth'), and as a variation from the 'long grain' is no doubt explained, as I mentioned earlier, by the difficulty of getting consistent supplies in wartime.

I also attach a photo of the whole black motor board with the '503.21' label. Note that motor boards were covered in a thinner, inferior material to that of the outside.

[mbhdesign]

Oedipus, thank you for your clarification on these label types and numerical sequences. Especially for the images of similar labels.

I had asked if a serial number reference or database existed for Decca machines. Other groups I am associated with (in the vintage typewriter community, for example) have been able to work out rough manufacturing date ranges from serial number data. Perhaps we in this community could start such a database, if it does not already exist.

Thank you also for clarifying about the maroon cloth machine. That’s also very much appreciated.

I can understand a reluctance to consider assigning a date for this machine later than 1915. It has too many characteristics of pre-1916 machines to make sense ordinarily.

I differ in opinion only in that the use of a zero as a placeholder is quite common in my experience in deciphering many other industry dating systems used between 1900 and today.

Could I be in error here? Certainly! I eagerly encourage any insight and effort that can help determine confidence about what I have.

I also welcome the efforts of anyone willing to share pictures of their early Decca labels for comparison. Please do so. I believe it would be of great benefit to all of us in the long run.

I offer again to Oedipus, or anyone who asks, all my unbiased assistance in providing high resolution detailed images or details of any part of this machine on request. Happy to do so.

Many thanks, Oedipus, for your comments and contributions toward helping solve this mystery. It is deeply valued.


Michael

[Oedipus]

A possible solution to the dating anomalies has occurred to me; that the basic black models (Model 1) retained early features like the rear handle and the right-angled tone-arm, for several years after the more expensive ones (models II and III were changed.

I am not aware that anyone has attempted to collate Decca serial numbers. I have tried with some Gramophone Co. series, but they changed the system so often that it became fruitless. If these two peculiar dates with the 0 in the middle are indeed 1918 and 1921, then their serial numbers would seem to tally. But the number on the 1919 Model III doesn't seem to fit in with them (it seems to start with a 0, but perhaps that is acceptable in a serial number!). Then again, maybe each model had its own serial number series. I don't know the number of the maroon one, and won't be able to get to it until July; I know only that the date at the top looks like 1915, but I am uncertain, and in the light of these two black ones I look forward to seeing what format the date takes.

[mbhdesign]

I read a lot of 19th and early 20th century handwriting in my researches. I would hazard a possibility that the “0” cipher in front of the serial number of the 1919 dated label you posted might have originally been written as a “1” and then the oversight corrected into a “0” afterwards by the writer.

It would explain the anomaly. I can see the vestige of a “1” downstroke corrected with a curved stroke afterwards.

These assemblers were human, after all, and in the rush of assembly these kinds of alterations from “normal” practice, individual interpretations of system, and simple error are quite common.

[mbhdesign]

A possible solution to the dating anomalies has occurred to me; that the basic black models (Model 1) retained early features like the rear handle and the right-angled tone-arm, for several years after the more expensive ones (models II and III were changed.

I think that your hypothesis fits well considering the data we have. It’s quite likely and I can imagine the factory supplies being used up to fulfill floods of orders. Especially with the lowest priced model machines.