Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
-
- Victor I
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:43 pm
- Location: Leicester, England
Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
A recent ebay purchase has led to me owning a few really nice and early 7 inch records. The lot includes a rare Nicole record from c.1903 (What is the use of loving a girl? 1775), a Gramophone and Typewriter record (The soldiers farewell. 4202) and an early Columbia disc (Medley of Scotch airs. 549). I am a fan of very early record labels, so this is a nice addition to my small yet growing collection. I don't suppose anybody has an idea on the date for the G&T and Columbia discs? My research has come up blank. The records have not arrived yet, but I was too excited to wait for their arrival so I have posted the seller pics, which, unfortunately are of poor quality. Many thanks and I hope you enjoy
-
- Victor II
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:52 am
- Location: Redruth, Cornwall, U.K.
Re: Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
On the G. & t. record, the (apparently) hand-written matrix number and the large embossed catalogue number suggest an early date, perhaps 1903 or 1904. I presume this is a Victor matrix, despite the word LONDON on the label. I am away from home at present; when I am back, next week, I shall look up this item in J. R. Bennett's book which generally gives release dates.
The Columbia should be even earlier, since it does not include the patent date, 10 December 1901, which was added to the black-and-silver label design during 1902.
Oliver Mundy.
The Columbia should be even earlier, since it does not include the patent date, 10 December 1901, which was added to the black-and-silver label design during 1902.
Oliver Mundy.
- Orchorsol
- Victor IV
- Posts: 1622
- Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:03 am
- Location: Dover, UK
- Contact:
Re: Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
The late Eddie Shaw's D.A.T.E.S. indicates G&T numbers 4197 to 4292 as being issued in 1902. I remember a collector/researcher with whom I was in touch some years ago saying that the Shaw listings contained some errors regarding early G&T, however (probably inevitable, and it was after all a perpetual work-in-progress; it's a pity nobody was able to carry on the good work).Menophanes wrote:On the G. & t. record, the (apparently) hand-written matrix number and the large embossed catalogue number suggest an early date, perhaps 1903 or 1904. I presume this is a Victor matrix, despite the word LONDON on the label. I am away from home at present; when I am back, next week, I shall look up this item in J. R. Bennett's book which generally gives release dates.
The Columbia should be even earlier, since it does not include the patent date, 10 December 1901, which was added to the black-and-silver label design during 1902.
Oliver Mundy.
BCN thorn needles made to the original 1920s specifications: http://www.burmesecolourneedles.com
Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe4DNb ... TPE-zTAJGg?
Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe4DNb ... TPE-zTAJGg?
-
- Victor I
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:43 pm
- Location: Leicester, England
Re: Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
Thanks guys. That's some fantastic info. I hadn't realised they were such early dates.
As to the possibility of it being a Victor matrix, I'm not sure. I'm based in the UK and these coins came from a fellow English collector, so perhaps there's a slight difference between U>K and U>S labels on these records.
As to the possibility of it being a Victor matrix, I'm not sure. I'm based in the UK and these coins came from a fellow English collector, so perhaps there's a slight difference between U>K and U>S labels on these records.
-
- Victor I
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 3:43 pm
- Location: Leicester, England
Re: Three nice early records. Nicole, G&T, Columbia
Both records arrived today and play great.
Upon closer inspection of the Columbia record, there is the faint trace of the 1886 and 1901 patent dates on them. So post-1902 I'd guess the Columbia is.
Upon closer inspection of the Columbia record, there is the faint trace of the 1886 and 1901 patent dates on them. So post-1902 I'd guess the Columbia is.