the Edison Class M "escapee"

[MicaMonster]

George,

You bring up a very interesting point, and you are correct....the upper casting has no evidence of additional bosses or stanchions that would have been utilized on a spectacle model. This would thus not be derived from such. The proof is in the pudding. Thanks for helping with the detective work.

The governor frame is cast iron, confirmed.

I opened the front drawer, and tried fitting the Automatic reproducer in it. It fit like a glove!

On top of the little holder in the drawer, is a small panel that fits OVER it, with a little tiny brass knob on it. I imagine if there were 4 recorders/reproducers in there, that the cover would fit flat on top of the reproducer necks, allowing you to store other items in the drawer. Any insights into this?



Thank You again for your help.

W

[SonnyPhono]

So the cutouts were intended to hold the reproducer and recorder? I wonder why there are 4 though. Would it be common back then to have an extra of each with a Class M? If it was common practice, maybe the 4 holes would be to hold 2 of each during transport?

[phonogfp]

George,
How common are walnut cases?

Not common at all!

George, have you ever seen other records or documents of presentation Class M's?

Yes - a couple of Water-Motor Phonographs were sent to Europe, and I believe the serial numbers are mentioned in Discovering Antique Phonographs, but of the Class Ms such as the one sent to Josef Hoffman, I don't think I ever saw any specifics. With no numbers on this new example, it would be impossible to confirm.

George, here's another question for you. Is there a possibility that this Class M was built to show what a "regular" size M would look like while producing the "Military" or "Portable" M?

The "Military" or "Portable" was built for the Paris Exhibition of 1889, and carries the spectacle device that was in use at the time. Wyatt's example is slightly later, so i don't think that's a possibility.

George,

You bring up a very interesting point, and you are correct....the upper casting has no evidence of additional bosses or stanchions that would have been utilized on a spectacle model. This would thus not be derived from such. The proof is in the pudding. Thanks for helping with the detective work.

The governor frame is cast iron, confirmed.

I opened the front drawer, and tried fitting the Automatic reproducer in it. It fit like a glove!

On top of the little holder in the drawer, is a small panel that fits OVER it, with a little tiny brass knob on it. I imagine if there were 4 recorders/reproducers in there, that the cover would fit flat on top of the reproducer necks, allowing you to store other items in the drawer. Any insights into this?

Wyatt, it's my pleasure, so thank YOU. This early stuff is like mother's milk for me. So the reproducers/recorders fit in that drawer! Wish I'd known that 12 years ago...! And it makes me wonder if all Class Ms had that little feature, but they've been lost over the years. Seems like more would have survived if that were the case. Thanks very much for the additional information - the learning never stops, hopefully!

So the cutouts were intended to hold the reproducer and recorder? I wonder why there are 4 though. Would it be common back then to have an extra of each with a Class M? If it was common practice, maybe the 4 holes would be to hold 2 of each during transport?

That's doesn't make sense, does it? I remember wondering about this at the Edison Site when we were taking the photos, but we had a lot to shoot, and the Curator wasn't excited about us taking apart the machines! Having 4 cylinders in that drawer seemed to make more sense than having 4 reproducers/recorders, but the perfect fit certainly seems coincidental!

George P.

[TinfoilPhono]

That is an absolutely incredible find and I am very envious! At the same time, it is tremendously inspiring that so many amazing rarities still turn up. I seriously believed 30 years ago that all the good finds had been made, all the cellars and attics raided. Boy, was I wrong on that score! Your nickel Class M opens up a fascinating mystery to research and I'm glad you are pursuing it so seriously.

As a sidebar to this story, I cringe every time I see the term "Military" repeated in reference to the ⅓ scale miniature Class M in the collections of the Edison National Historic Site.

Back in 2001-2004 when the late Bill Ptacek and I were doing serious research on this machine we were particularly perplexed by that "military" designation. It really made no sense, given that a miniature phonograph -- with inconvenient battery power no less -- was in no way suited for any military purpose we could fathom. Not to mention one very critical issue: the recording and reproducing diaphragms are so small in diameter that they would have virtually no flexibility, and with tiny stylii and short tracks on tiny records would not be capable of making a decent recording even under the best of circumstances, let alone on a battlefield. Frankly, we seriously doubted it could work at all. Check out how tiny it really is:



As I started digging in various sources I was unable to find a single reference to the term "military" in any book, article, or other reference -- with one sole exception: George Frow's book on cylinder phonographs. But Frow cited no source for his use of the term.

In 2002 I made a phone call to Frow to ask about it. He was very old at the time and in the early stages of dementia, unfortunately. He had no recollection of where the 'military' designation came from, nor did he have any notes left that he could refer to.

I also posed the question to Paul Israel (Edison Papers Project), Ray Wile (noted researcher), and Ron Dethlefson (Edison expert and long-time volunteer at the Ford Museum). None had ever seen it referenced elsewhere. Paul Israel told me "As to the small "military" form of the Class M phonograph, I don't know anything about that particular machine other than what Frow has written about it. He appears to get his information about this machine from J. Lewis Young, Edison and His Phonograph (1890). I do agree that it seems unlikely that such a machine was actually intended for military use." I checked the book in question but while J. Lewis Young referred to it as "portable," he makes no mention of "military."

The only other contemporary reference I found was one referring to Edison carrying it under his arm as he boarded a ship to take to the 1889 Paris Exposition Universelle, but nothing mentioned or even implied a military reference.

I asked Jerry Fabris at the Edison Site whether there was anything in their files to substantiate the "military" designation. He replied that "I checked the catalog record, the catalog folder, and the original accession inventory here. There is no mention of the name "Military" in any of those sources."

The earliest known use of the term "military" remains Frow's 1978 edition.

Based on my research, and Bill's very intense study of the actual machine, as well as full-size Spectacle model Class Ms, we came to the inescapable conclusion that Frow's "military" appellation was his own fabrication. Everything about the surviving artifact itself, as well as the limited documentary record, would seem to indicate that it was made strictly as a display piece for the Paris Exposition -- where it was prominently shown and appears in many contemporary photographs, such as this one:



It is certainly an impressive piece of work that would have been admired by anyone with an understanding of the complexity of building such a miniature working phonograph. If it had any intended purpose whatsoever, other than a one-time public display, it would seem logical that there would be some reference to that, somewhere. It is far too detailed and finely finished to be a prototype, and given that it is exactly the same as a conventional phonograph, except in ⅓ scale, means there is nothing about it that was new or experimental. Its size was its only novelty, and evidently its only purpose as well. The fact that it never had any apparent useful purpose, and evidently went straight from Paris into Edison's home, makes it seem all the more certain that it was a decorative display item than a working phonograph or experimental machine of any kind. (It was displayed in a dark cabinet in a corner of Edison's dining room until the recent rebuilding of the Edison lab, where it is now publicly displayed for the first time in decades.)

I think it's unfortunate that Frow's unsupported designation has now been reprinted so often that it has become "fact." I really winced when I found it was on the new explanatory sign at the Site since that essentially certifies the name officially.

I had originally intended to write an article about the machine but unfortunately I set it aside when Bill died, and with him the project to replicate the machine. I still have piles of notes filed away somewhere. Bill and I had many hours of discussion about the "military" term, and we shared an absolute conviction that it's a total misnomer invented by George Frow, for no imaginable reason.

If anyone is aware of any contemporary citation that I have not found, I'd certainly love to know about it!

In the interim it is my hope that eventually we can eliminate this misnomer once and for all, just as researchers have finally done with the long-repeated but erroneous claim that the first tinfoil phonograph was completed in August 1877, rather than December. It took years to correct that flagrant mistake, this one may take even longer to overcome.

[SonnyPhono]

Thanks, Rene, for the clarification. Like you said, I called it by what I had heard others call it and didn't know any different. I will try to do my part to stop the confusion in the future.

Also, thanks for the pictures. They are great for reference purposes. George already dismissed the possibility of the M in question being an exact replica of the portable M in a full size due to the spectacle issue. But, for the sake of adding to that dismissal, the second photo you posted shows the full sized Class M with a black top works.

So are there any portable size cylinders to go along with the portable M? I see a few in the picture and would think they would have stayed with the phonograph when Edison took it home with him. Do they exist today?

[gramophoneshane]

It's interesting that only 2 drawers are known to have the reproducer/recorder cut-outs because I KNOW I've seen them somewhere before...but where?
I can only think of 2 possibilities.
1/ It was in the Encyclopedia Britannica I used to read in high school.
2/ It's in a Disney book I have here (somewhere). Yes...a Disney book!
In the mid-70's I got the first 3 volumes of these white hard covered books, and I'm pretty sure the set had "Knowledge" in the title. If I remember correctly, the third volume was on inventions & it had Scrooge McDuck on the front.
I've had a bit of search for the book but as yet I cant put my hands on it, but I will keep looking.
Maybe someone else knows the books I'm talking about & has them socked away somewhere?
I'm not positive this is where I've seen it, but I'm sure there's a Class M pictured & Bell-Tainter treadle machine. I'm really intregued now so I'm on a mission
If it's not hiding somewhere in one of the book cases, I'll have start searching the boxes of books in the shed.

[phonogfp]

Thanks, Rene, for that background on the "Mil..." errr..., I mean the "Portable" Phonograph. When we were at the Site in 1999 shooting photos, we asked Jerry Fabris about the origin of the term, and heard the same answer. (Jerry also told us that none of the small cylinders are known to exist.) We considered dropping the "Military" nomenclature for the book, but worried that some might think there were two different Phonographs; the "Military" and the "Portable," so we reluctantly included them both.

However, I'll gladly sign onto the "No More Military Phonograph" bandwagon. I'm all for accuracy.

Now, can we all stop calling the Type "AB" Graphophone the "Macdonald?"

George P.

[SonnyPhono]

Speaking of the "AB" and to touch on a point made earlier about rare phonographs still being discovered, there was a fairly rare one at an auction near me this past Saturday. It was a Graphophone Grand, or "GG". It's obviously not nearly as rare or desirable as the Class M, but still aren't too common. I didn't make the auction unfortunately, (kids were up most of the night before) but called and found out it sold for $1,600. It appeared from the pictures that it was missing the #4 reproducer. But it to it's advantage, there was a 56" horn with it that looked original to the machine and a group of 5" cylinders as well. Here is a link to the pictures from the auction. Sorry this is a bit off topic.

http://www.auctionzip.com/cgi-bin/photo ... kwd=edison

[OrthoFan]

"If it had any intended purpose whatsoever, other than a one-time public display, it would seem logical that there would be some reference to that, somewhere. It is far too detailed and finely finished to be a prototype, and given that it is exactly the same as a conventional phonograph, except in ⅓ scale, means there is nothing about it that was new or experimental. Its size was its only novelty, and evidently its only purpose as well."

It's so perfect a miniature, I'm wondering if it couldn't have been originally designed to be a patent model corresponding with # 499,879 -- http://www.google.com/patents?id=tvJAAA ... se&f=false
but for whatever reason, was never submitted. (I noticed that the patent, itself, indicates that "no model" accompanied the application.)

[TinfoilPhono]

Highly unlikely. There are quite a lot of Edison patent models in the Ford Museum; they are very small and crude in comparison. None were made to be functional; although the miniature Class M is unlikely to make audible recordings, it does have a complete and potentially working motor. Patent models had no need for such elaborate detail. Not to mention, until they were de-accessioned many years later, patent models were retained by the patent office. I have no doubt this machine was made solely for exhibit at the 1889 Expostion Universelle in Paris.