Page 1 of 3

Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:39 pm
by Steve
Maker: Gramophone & Typewriter Company
Model: New Style No. 3
Serial No. N/a
Years: 1902-04
Original Cost: 3 Guineas
Case/Cabinet Size: 7" x 7" (not including base)
Turntable/Mandrel Size: 7"
Reproducer/Soundbox: Concert type (serial 111592)
Motor: Single spring
Horn Dimensions: 10" diameter bell x 14" long from end of elbow
Repro Parts: None
Current Mint Value: £2500
Interesting Facts: The last modification done to the original Trademark machine.
Favorite Characteristics: The winder rotates anti-clockwise as the machine plays!

I have owned this machine since February 1996 and purchased it from one of the UK's leading gramophone specialists - machines like this just rarely turn up in the wild. Even though it was very expensive, I've never regretted buying it as it is one of the best examples I've ever seen. The only work I did to it was to polish up the steel motor case (the nickel was almost all lost) to a mirror finish. Elsewhere the plating is in amazing order including the horn which is also nickel plated zinc but otherwise identical to the original Trademark type, which was lacquered brass in the UK (mainly).

The white rubber sleeve protecting the horn on the wire support is also a bit of my handiwork. All the machine is original with no repro parts which again seems to be quite a rarity these days?

The "New Style 3" came about when the G & T Company in Britain introduced the "number/price" labelling system ie a No. 2 cost 2 Guineas, a No. 3, 3 Guineas etc. The last version of the Trademark was re-numbered to a No. 5 and sold for....yes, 5 Guineas.

This machine has a combined speed and brake control and features a bigger spring than the earlier TM machine. Note also the "D" shape of the motor case as opposed to the half round type on the TM machine.

However originally the No. 3 was a spring motor Trademark style machine but with NO WOODEN CASE at all and the motor mounted simply on the base board. The No. 4 was the same machine but with the motor mounted in a nickel plated cast box (often called "The Biscuit Tin Model" over here) and the No. 5 was the late Trademark machine. When the final variation was produced (this model showing here) it was intended to be sold at the cheaper end of the market, as by this time the first of the Monarchs were available with 10" turntables and elaborate decorative cases. However because there was already a No. 3 they couldn't sell this machine at 3 Guineas as intended without fouling up their price policy so the company elected to call it a NEW Style 3. (BTW the earlier No. 2 was a hand-wound motor variant and lacked the luxury of a spring powered motor and also, again lacked the wooden case - the very epitomy of basic simplicity)

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:14 pm
by Valecnik
Steve, it looks to be in excellent original condition. I'm a little surprised by your valuation. I would have thought it worth a good bit more especially in that condition. A very nice machine!

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:24 pm
by Steve
Bruce

Are you offering?! ;) LOL!

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:29 pm
by richardh
That is a very pristine looking machine. Very nice condition all over. Even the horn is good with no obvious dents at all. Thanks for posting this - i'm green with envy :mrgreen:

RJ 8-)

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:31 pm
by MordEth
Steve,

I’m glad you got this in as a featured phonograph—it truly is a remarkable little machine, and in very impressive condition (as other members have commented as I have been editing and previewing this post).

While I’ve already featured the Recording Angel trademark logo in the logo transparency thread, I wanted to include it here, also:

Image

Out of curiosity—did the typewriters become more of an afterthought as they sold more phonographs, or were they similarly successful with the sale of typewriters?

— MordEth


Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:32 pm
by Steve
Richard

There is (sadly) a small dent on the horn, which when the horn is sitting on the machine correctly, is on the "bottom" of the horn about half way along, so it is never really visible. 8-)

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:38 pm
by Steve
David

The Lambert Typewriter was sold between 1901 and 1907 and according to the sales figures was an extremely popular and sought after commercial apparatus. Initially the G & T Co. were sceptical about their long-term future selling just gramophones so it made perfect sense for them to expand into other areas where they were more assured of success. However, with the advent of the early Caruso recordings for G & T, the popularity of the gramophone increased rapidly and it wasn't considered that the company needed to stay in the typewriter market any longer, especially considering that there would have been a requirement to replace the Lambert by this time, so they dropped the Lambert altogether (which had been the only instrument they'd sold anyway) and reverted back to being simply the "Gramophone Company" again from 1908.

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:42 pm
by MordEth
Steve wrote:There is (sadly) a small dent on the horn, which when the horn is sitting on the machine correctly, is on the "bottom" of the horn about half way along, so it is never really visible. 8-)
I completely missed seeing it until it was mentioned—then after careful scrutiny, found it in this photo:

Image

Even with this minor imperfection, it’s still an impressive machine.

— MordEth


Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:46 pm
by Steve
MordEth wrote:completely missed seeing it until it was mentioned—then after careful scrutiny, found it in this photo
You disappoint me. I'd have thought by now that you would have "Photoshopped" it out! ;)

Re: Featured Phonograph № 6

Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:56 pm
by MordEth
Steve wrote:You disappoint me. I'd have thought by now that you would have "Photoshopped" it out! ;)
Steve,

Sorry, I was busy making a thumbnail of it and adding it to the archives. :D

Too many distractions. ;)

— MordEth