A Very Nice Grafonola (+others), CL, Worcester, MA

[Cody K]

[Not mine/no affiliation:]

I don't know what model this is, but what a handsome cabinet! Definitely one of the nicer ones, early to mid-'teens, I think? And there are two other lesser Columbias and a Sonora, too, at decent prices. I can't have any more phonographs, but the big Columbia's hard to resist. Thought I'd post it here, hoping it'll find a good home.

http://worcester.craigslist.org/atd/4987780625.html

[De Soto Frank]

Ah... the wonderful Columbia "whatzit?" game !

The biggest one (first one listed) looks to be a Nonpareil, probably 1912-16-ish, judging by the reproducer and amount of carvings in the center of the lid and lower rail. Later examples frequently did not have the center appliques, only on the corner pilasters / legs. The single tip-out bin threw me for a moment, but the height of this machine suggests it should be the Nonpareil. Should have a four-spring motor. A respectable machine from Columbia.

The next one is probably a Mignonette, with the "typewriter" record ejector.

The third one is probably a "100", perhaps a "150".

If they are flexible on the prices, the first probably are worth grabbing.


That United is also intriquing...

[Cody K]

Thanks, Frank, you're right in the identification of the Nonpareil. There seems to be very little information online about that model, even the goog fails to bring up much. One of the first results on any one of several search engines leads to a post on the Forum in which you discussed the Nonpareil with a new member who was thinking about buying one. That make you a Recognized Internet Authority on these! Also there's a link to a much later Nonpareil that a member sold through the Forum in 2011, and it's interesting to see how Columbia's gradual deletion of design elements ended up making the later Nonpareil a shadow of its former self. It's almost like what happened at Victor to the VV-XVI between the VTLA years and 1921. That thread, with its photos: http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=9&t=7231

From what little I've found online, it does seem that (as you point out) the central decorations were quick to be deleted -- to the detriment of the cabinet, because I think they did a lot to balance out the very fancy carvings on the posts, which maybe also got a little slimmer over time before getting streamlined entirely? On this example, they're really pretty massive, which combined with the center carvings, really give the cabinet an especially high-end look.

The finish looks dry but entirely restorable on the one on CL. I wish I could justify bringing another machine in here, I'd consider this one very strongly. The apparent early date would (I think) suggest the possibility that the tone arm might be brass and not pot-metal, though the elbow does look a little scuffy and suspicious in the picture:

ColArm.jpg (29.85 KiB) Viewed 1625 times

Overall, I think this machine is a standout, much more desirable than the Mignonette (which is itself kind of nice) or the other two (though the Sonora is a little interesting, it's not a high-end model, and the other Columbia is pretty average too).

Here's a short clip on YouTube of somebody's slightly later Nonpareil (sans center decoration at the top). It looks as if by the time this one was produced, the whole scale of the Nonpareil has been diminished slightly, though the carvings that remain are still pretty beefy. Still quite a contrast between the one currently on CL and the one sold on the forum in 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64GE1FkhGXc

Thanks for ID-ing this!

[De Soto Frank]

Thanks for the kind words, Cody...

It is kind of hard to certain of much in Columbia-land...


If the arm on that Nopareil matches that early #6, it is probably brass. I believe the brass bayonet arms have a small limit-screw through the back-side of the elbow, when this is removed, the arm will swing-up vertically, and pop-out of the elbow.

The pot-metal arms are usually secured via a spring-ring that snaps into a groove inside the elbow.

The Nonpareil you referenced in the other TMF thread, from Matt Brown down in Reading, was a first-version, with the "victrola" horn-doors.

By about 1912, or so, Columbia had settled into a fairly uniform complement of hardware / motors. The spring-motors usually shared the same basic frame and bed-plate, but could accommodate anywhere from one to four spring barrels. The bayonet-joint tone-arm and # 6 reproducer were used across the line into the 1920's.

The major differences were in cabinet-styles, finishes, and type of record storage.

Thank goodness for Baumbach and Lackey's Columbia Phonograph Companion Vol 2, which at least gives a pretty complete listing of the disc phonograph offering from 1901 through the Viva-Tonal era, but it does not show all the subtle cabinet variations.

Many collectors feel that there's no way Columbia machines compare with Victor, and they probably have a good case - Victor products were over-engineered (?) and over-built to a fault... but I feel that Columbia still made some decent quality and attractive machines...

I have a "200" ( formerly "Deluxe" ) in American Walnut with gold plating, that is simply stunning.

I have at least a half-dozen Columbia uprights, some of which I have yet to positively identify: Leader, Mignonette, Nonpareil, Mignon, 100, 150, 200 ????


I hope these machines in Worcester find good homes !

[Cody K]

Thanks for the additional information, Frank. If I hadn't automatically assumed that the plainness of Matt Brown's machine's cabinet indicated a later date, I would have noticed the doors. I have a first-year Favorite, with doors, and I'm aware of the problems the use of doors on the early cabinet models caused for Columbia. Or rather, the problems Victor caused Columbia over the use of the doors. I still find it surprising that Victor was able to win that particular contest, doors being about as basic and natural implement as possible for the task of controlling sound. It's nearly as odd as if Victor had sued to prohibit the use of wheels on casters and won -- though I guess the lawsuit regarding the doors hinged (oops! NPI ) on the combination of doors with sound-control.

So it's interesting that, contrary to my assumption, the Nonpareil had ornamentation piled on (and how!) after its first iteration, and then lost at least some of that ornamentation over time. Huh. In any case, the one for sale in Worcester almost has to be an example of peak decoration for that particular model, I'd guess. Pretty fancy.

Though I'm pretty fond of my one Columbia machine, based on Columbias I've seen, I think I'm squarely in the camp of those who feel that Victor machines are normally of higher quality. The too-frequent Columbia pot-metal issues are seriously detrimental, in my opinion, and they seem to have started early while as far as I know Victor used little pot-metal for anything until the Orthophonic era -- with the famously sad result that so many Orthophonic reproducers, as well as their brackets, are degraded today. The frequent use of pot-metal by Columbia is in itself enough to justify a little wariness on the part of a collector. Then too there are the amazing "disappearing" Columbia governor weights, among other potential problems, and, as I understand it, Columbia's tracking can be tough on records.

Victor also made a really clever design choice when they used their trademark curvilinear front (and sometimes back) posts, because those often simple curves, even on the cheaper Victors, break up the boxy look that so many phonographs of the period -- the lesser Columbias included -- tend to have. Even a VV-X benefits from those slight curves, while a Columbia at the same price point (would that be the 100?) looks very plain by comparison. But a Columbia like this particular version of the Nonpareil, with so much serious ornamentation baked in, is a great-looking machine indeed. If it does in fact have all-brass components, I'd think it would be well worth putting some effort into. Wish I had the room for it!