EMG Mk X Query

[emgcr]

Iain, I am wondering if your case is made from solid (hard)wood and unveneered ? I see it also has a continuous plinth around the base, both of which features are slightly unusual for Mk X EMGs. I am wondering if someone else made it (no less desirable, of course), particularly when thinking about the narrow width, the incursion into the tonearm bearing housing flange and the lack of deck-board blanking plate ? Sometimes original base units were treated badly and rotted resulting in only the "hardware" surviving, prompting A N Other to build a replica. I have done this myself when given surviving parts from an Expert Senior. Just a thought and I could be completely wrong.

[Steve]

So it's definitely not a D30 after all? It's a mystery unless as Graham suggests the whole base was a non original manufacture. In this instance I suppose any continental motor could have been used and it'll be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

[IainW]

That's an interesting possibility, but if making a new case then why the extra holes, unless the HMV motor was fitted later still to replace whatever was originally fitted to the 'new' case. If an electric motor was used I would have thought the cable would have been routed out of the back of the case rather than the side. The present handle just fits through the hole though it is rather tight.
I have taken a few pictures of the case construction to see if that can give any pointers. The case is solid rather than any fancy veneer work. I thought it rather reminded me of some of the Mk VIII machines. The back panel is set into the case rather than the type of joints seen elsewhere. Right hand side must have been sitting in the sun for some time as it is rather faded compared to the rest of the finish.
Looking at Fig 24 in the front of 'Modern Gramophones' I note that the lid has been removed for the photo, as evidenced by the hinge being present. Presumably to show off the graceful lines of the horn! Also to the right of the turntable, towards the tonearm, there is some fitting though I cannot make out what it is.
All lost in the mists of time.

[emgcr]

.....but if making a new case then why the extra holes, unless the HMV motor was fitted later still to replace whatever was originally fitted to the 'new' case. If an electric motor was used I would have thought the cable would have been routed out of the back of the case rather than the side.

I rather think there has been more than one iteration ending up with the HMV 34. On the subject of electric cables, I have seen them emerging from all sorts of places even though the rear or underneath would be logical !

The case is solid rather than any fancy veneer work. I thought it rather reminded me of some of the Mk VIII machines. The back panel is set into the case rather than the type of joints seen elsewhere.

Many of the cases of the MK VIIIs I have seen have comb joints at the corners. Interestingly, the back panel of the sideways-displaced horn model I referred to above did not have a veneer when I acqired it. Whether it had fallen off I don't know but I replaced it anyway with matching patterns. Your case seems to have been well made and solidly constructed by someone who knew what he was doing. Many of the later Mk Xs, Xas, and Xbs were constructed from veneered plywood.

Looking at Fig 24 in the front of 'Modern Gramophones' I note that the lid has been removed for the photo, as evidenced by the hinge being present. Presumably to show off the graceful lines of the horn! Also to the right of the turntable, towards the tonearm, there is some fitting though I cannot make out what it is.

Yes, I agree, the lid was removed in that photo and I have never seen an example exactly like it---probably the prototype. The fitting you refer to may well have been a brake---plenty of room---but, equally, such could have happened on the opposite side too---we shall never know !

[emgcr]

Iain, I noticed the top conduit ring seen in your last photo was raised. EMG usually made these inset and flush so this might be another pointer to the case being made at a later date by someone who had not appreciated the need for the defined distance between the top of the deck-board and the top of the case until it was too late ! I had a similar problem when remanufacturing the ex-Lumière cases to incorporate the EMG system and was unable to lower the deck-board due to integral construction and so had to make a thicker raised ring to compensate---see photo below.

[IainW]

Thanks Graham. Have just measured the depth from top of case to deck level at exactly 5", can you confirm what correct depth should be?
Attached is photo of the offending connection. What look like a leather washer is sandwiched between the flange and the wooden top. There are no screw fastenings I can seen and the flange is not drilled for them.
I note that the photo in 'Modern Gramophones' also appears to show the flange standing proud.

[emgcr]

Very interesting Iain and I must admit I hadn't spotted the top ring positioned above the case in the Wilson/Webb book photo. Thank you.

I have just measured ten cases and the heights from top of deck-board to top of case are mostly 5.4 inches. A couple are 5.3 and one is 5.5. The final end of the aluminium conduit would normally sit just proud of the inset and flush top ring.

Your first photo is intriguing---showing the underside of the emergent conduit. It would appear that what would normally be the top ring (with four chamfered holes) has, in fact, been used underneath. The stabilising ring, normally underneath (no holes) has been used on top ! If the conduit is too long for the case due to the five inch measurement I can see the sense in doing this and including the leather washer as a spacer. However, it is certainly not how it was designed. Are you able to see if the leather washer is let into the top of the case ?

I have attached below a photo of some of the constituent parts of another machine prior to nickel plating. The deck-board blanking plate is also shown.

[emgcr]

For the benefit of anyone who cannot access the photograph of what is thought to be the prototype EMG Mk X shown on the frontispiece of the Wilson/Webb book "Moderrn gramophones and electrical reproducers" (1929) here is the item referred to. The top ring securing the conduit outlet to the case is (uniquely ?) NOT fully rebated into the woodwork---but may be partially so. The ring was set into and flush with the top of the veneer in most subsequent examples as far as is known. Iain, it would be good to know if any rebate is present in your example ?

Regarding the external width of the cases referred to earlier, the ten examples I looked at last night consistently measured 19 ¼" with one at 19" and another at 19 ½".

[emgcr]

Here are workshop photos of the only other offset horn example EMG I have come across. It is perhaps strange to find an offset on a later swan-neck tonearm example. The case width is narrow at 17 ⅞". The veneer too is unusual but similar to the prototype. The original spring motor is unknown.

When I bought this EMG the tonearm had been recently replaced, the original having broken, I am told when the lid fell on it ! It is therefore just possible that the original was, in fact, a goose-neck example which would perhaps be consistent with thoughts of it being a semi-prototype itself ? I shall investigate further.

[IainW]

Have lifted off horn in order to unscrew and remove top flange. As you can see from photo below there is no rebate, nor is the case drilled for screws. What I thought was a leather washer is in fact of compressed cork, and there is a similar gasket between the bottom flange and the underside of the woodwork.
The conduit protrudes by exactly 10mm, so stands slightly proud of the top flange when assembled. Then the flanges are the wrong way round and the thicker, drilled flange, that should be on top would take up this difference.
If somebody built this case to replace a rotten original it rather begs the question why they did not copy the dimensions and arrangement of the old case. I note that EMG advertised all the components separately for 'the man who wishes to build his own gramophone' so I suppose its possible that could be the origin of this machine rather than an early iteration of the Mk X by EMG. Especially if the only reference the customer had for dimensions was a prototype machine in the showroom. Maybe the closing plate at deck level was not fitted because the cabinet maker made such a good job of drilling for the conduit.