epigramophone wrote:I think you are right. I don't know what the legal position was in Australia, but no UK Regal or Columbia machine of this period would have had a gooseneck tonearm as it would have infringed the Victor/HMV patents.
The horn looks to be of German/Swiss origin and is known as the Peacock Feather pattern.
I have to come clean about the horn I know it is not original to this machine your points about patent infringement are pretty convincing - so Regal as possibly a Columbia derivative would have had a straight tone arm? It would be great to see some contemporary catalogue images for reference wouldn't it?
stevel wrote:I'd say that was an honest machine worthy of some work.
Almost certainly constructed from European components it may have been assembled in Australia to get round import taxes.
Steve
That sounds plausible I know for a fact that this happened with British motor cars.
Jerry B. wrote:Is it typical that the needle will not touch or get close to the spindle with machines like this? Is it possible that the back bracket or tone arm have been replaced? Jerry
I would have thought not. The needle on this arm falls about three quarters of an inch short of the spindle but then again the needle on my HMV 103 falls about three eighths short and I know that is an original untampered with original. Does anyone know how much is safe for our records? I have had a look at where the bracket is fixed to the cabinet and it all looks pretty original - witness marks and bolt holes
Phonofreak wrote:The arm looks like a modified Victrola off of a VV IV or a VV VI. The little screw in the crook is a dead give-away.
Harvey Kravitz
I didn't know what a VV IV or VI looked like so I googled some images. Would what you suggest require turning the tone arm from a Victor hornless phonograph upside down and wouldn't that mean that the soundbox faced the spindle rather than the outside of the turntable?