What Makes a Machine "Off-Brand"?

[HisMastersVoice]

A question inspired by this thread: What are some opinions on the criteria for categorizing a brand of machines as "off-brand"? Popularity? Market Share? Production numbers? Is it country-specific? A matter of opinion? Did a company with a machine line and a record label have a better chance at "making it"?

The generally accepted "Brand Name" machines (correct me if I'm wrong) are:

• Victor / HMV
  Columbia
  Brunswick
  Edison
  Pathé

Would Sonora, Silvertone, and Cheney machines be considered off-brand? Where do we draw the line?

Discuss...

[estott]

To me the off-brand machines are the ones where all of the parts are from one catalog or another and at best the maker built the cabinet. You're right in saying there's a grey area, for example where do you put a make like Stradavaria. They sold very well and I've seen some good cases on them, but I'd still consider them a minor company.

[Phototone]

Well, in MY opinion, an "Off-brand" machine would be one made from generic off-the-shelf components in a cheaply made cabinet. There were hundreds of these.

I do not consider machines that were designed, and had most parts custom-made for them alone to be off-brand.

[briankeith]

I like this thread big time since my favorite machines are off-brand. Here is my two cents. There are also "client" machines that were made by Columbia, such as the Harmony and Symphony and I think the Aretino was also Columbia but I am not sure. Look at all the different spindle hole sizes used so they could market their own records under United Records, Aretino, etc. I myself would add Silvertone as one of the big brands due to the vast amount of models made over many many years. And tons of cabinet styles just like Edison and Victor. (And Sonora since they also made a lot of cabinet styles, models, and even sold their own brand of records) If you look in one of the very old Sears & Roebuck catalogs you will find many Silvertone talking machines. If we are going to discuss off-brands I feel we should limit this discussion to ONLY machines built in the United States. Many off-brands came out of the Chicago area like my Ecco disc phonograph. This thread would also be a great place to post photographs of these off-brands so collectors would have an idea of what they look like, cabinet styles, wood variations, disc or cylinder, etc. When the patents ran out it opened a flood gate of off-brand machines being manufactured - tons of different brands much harder to collect than the name brands. Some even play much better and look much better. Just my thoughts here

[briankeith]

Chicago Co. (example - made in USA) A great resourse is http://www.gracyk.com/makers.shtml

[FloridaClay]

A question inspired by this thread: What are some opinions on the criteria for categorizing a brand of machines as "off-brand"? Popularity? Market Share? Production numbers? Is it country-specific? A matter of opinion? Did a company with a machine line and a record label have a better chance at "making it"?

The generally accepted "Brand Name" machines (correct me if I'm wrong) are:

• Victor / HMV
  Columbia
  Brunswick
  Edison
  Pathé

Would Sonora, Silvertone, and Cheney machines be considered off-brand? Where do we draw the line?

Discuss...

It is somewhat subjective. Your list pretty much is the same as mine, except I might include Sonora.

Clay

[Uncle Vanya]

I'd suggest that a machine was an off-brand if it used purchased mechanical components, so Sonora, with its imported motors, tone arms and reproducers would thus be an off-brand. Pathé's early US production used Columbia components, save for the Pathé reproducer. Their late production used Heinemann motors and special tone arms made for them by Heinemann. Early Brunswick machines also used Heinemann components. Cheney and Starr, marques which many would classify as "off brand" actually produced more of their components in-house than others, including Edison, which before their purchase of the Wisconsin Cabinet and Panel Company sourced all of their cabinets from outside makers.

[briankeith]

I think Pathé was much much bigger in Europe, but I have seen alot of Pathé machines for sale over the years. Consoles, uprights, table disc, cylinder, etc. I have even read catalog advertisements of Pathé phonographs and film projectors sold in Newark New Jersey. I'm not sure if they were actually manufactured here in the USA or shipped over from France. I have three Pathé's - one upright disc, one table top disc, and one cylinder machine that does say France on it. The big upright says USA on it's ID plate. But no Rooster,,, which was their trademark I think?

[FloridaClay]

Pathé was a major French firm and I think still survives there in some form. They were in the phonograph business in Europe as far back as the 1890s and in the record and phonograph business in America from 1914 into the 1920s. Early phonographs were assembled from parts from France--apparently in cabinets made by US suppliers. Later, however, they did have factories in the US and phonographs and records for the US market were apparently made in their US plants.

There is a lot of information about the firm and its products in America in Pathé: Records and Phonographs in America, 1914-1922 by George Copeland and Ronald Dethlefson, an interesting read.

Clay

[Uncle Vanya]

Well, the first two years' production of American Pathé machines were built under Columbia patent protection. The very cheapest models were fitted with european motors, which were also supplied to Columbia for use in their client machines, and in their bottom-end products such as the "Meteor", but the majority of the range (the machines in those odd flat-top cabinets were built using three-spring Columbia motors, on round wood motorboards fitted with the same brake and speed controls used on 1912 vintage Columbia machines, and Columbia tone arms of the sort used on the 1912-1915 models. These arms were designed to accept the large aluminum Pathé reproducer, which was imported from Europe and was stored in a round carton similar in appearance to the Pathé salon cylinder carton. The machines were also, however, fitted with a lateral reproducer, a Columbia No. 6 bayonet reproducer, which came with a special elbow that fitted in the lace of the Pathé unit. This reproducer bore an opaque aluminum diaphragm which of course obscured the Columbia trademark which was engraved thereon. I've owned examples of the entire 1914-15 line, and know whereof I write. At home I still have a Pathé 150 of this vintage which is so equipped.