G&T Melba & Pedestal for auction.

[Starkton]

[quote=jamiegramo post_id=348444 time=1724421677 user_id=1043]
I think the Art Nouveau styling of the Melba is weak compared to the Spanish HMV No. 9 which has a definite fluid style. I love it.
[/quote]

I also think the design of the Spanish No. 9 is great, but you have to compare the two in relation to when they were created and marketed. Art Nouveau was only a short, intense phase before and after 1900. It was a major design movement, but there were differences between “Jugendstil” in Germany and “Modernism” in Spain.

When the No. 15 B design was registered in Germany in March 1904, Art Nouveau was still modern, new and considered highly artistic. By the time Spanish No. 9 reached the market, in 1910 or later, Art Nouveau had already passed its peak. It speaks volumes that the No. 15 B (called “Melba” in some countries from April 1905) was no longer on the market in Germany from 1907 and that the subsequent models looked completely different again.

Advertisement from August 1904:

[epigramophone]

By naming the Melba's comparatively bland successor the New Melba, the Gramophone Company ensured that in the public perception the original Melba was obsolete. Art Nouveau had indeed had it's day.
The G&T machine would have made an interesting Winter restoration project, but the auction fees went beyond what I considered to be reasonable. The amount charged to both the buyer and the seller totalled over 50% of the hammer price. I cannot imagine how this could be justified.
For all it's faults, eBay would have allowed the buyer to pay less and the seller to keep more of the proceeds.

[Steve]

I think the Art Nouveau styling of the Melba is weak compared to the Spanish HMV No. 9 which has a definite fluid style. I love it.

I also think the design of the Spanish No. 9 is great, but you have to compare the two in relation to when they were created and marketed. Art Nouveau was only a short, intense phase before and after 1900. It was a major design movement, but there were differences between “Jugendstil” in Germany and “Modernism” in Spain.

When the No. 15 B design was registered in Germany in March 1904, Art Nouveau was still modern, new and considered highly artistic. By the time Spanish No. 9 reached the market, in 1910 or later, Art Nouveau had already passed its peak. It speaks volumes that the No. 15 B (called “Melba” in some countries from April 1905) was no longer on the market in Germany from 1907 and that the subsequent models looked completely different again.

Advertisement from August 1904:

Very interesting and hard to disagree with but out of interest do you happen to know if the Spanish cabinets were made in Germany? I have a suspicion that they might have been. Even though the French branch of Gramophone Co. was responsible for supplying the Spanish market I'm not aware that the French branch was making its own cabinets at this time. The construction of the cabinet is not dissimilar to Parlophone or Lindstrom products I have.

[Starkton]

I have no evidence that the Spanish cabinets of 1910 and later were built in Germany. In mid-1910, "Kalliope Musikwerke A.G." in Leipzig took over the "Sächsische Holzwarenfabrik Max Böhme & Co. A.G." in Dippoldiswalde, Kingdom of Saxony, which built the Gramophone Co. cabinets for many years.

It belongs to the general picture that Alfred Clark, who had close contacts with Eldridge Reeves Johnson, became Managing Director of the Gramophone Co. in 1909 and subsequently the cabinets (sadly) became more and more similar to those in the USA. From that time on, Joseph Berliner's and the German branch's influence were increasingly marginalised. I have the impression that the cabinets were now mainly built in England.

The Spanish branch was brought up by Alfred Clark in the difficult years of constant conflict with Theodore Birnbaum, the Gramophone Co.'s Managing Director, whom he eventually replaced with the help of E. R. Johnson. Clark was very proud that his "brain child" flourished and this could explain why Spain was allowed to deviate so much from the "mainstream"

[Inigo]

.. The Spanish branch was led-owned by the French Cie Française until 1915, when a Spanish owned branch was created as Compañía del Gramófono S.A.E. with Juvenal Iglesias and other Catalonian investors capital.
Nevertheless, the French branch had opened a Spanish branch at least by 1903, and between 1903 and 1908, also built a dedicated factory in Barcelona to supply the Spanish market.
Yet to confirm all this re-reading the sources: Jaume Baró and Daniel Jones book 'La Industria musical a Catalonia' and Alan Kelly-Peter Copeland books and papers.
So from 1903 a dedicated Spanish catalogue existed, and records were pressed in Hannover, later in France, and finally from 1908 or so, in Barcelona. Spanish pressings of 1904-1924 are of variable quality as per their price (popular stuff or classical) and by the era, and yet I must study and correlate the quality of Spanish records with these dates and probable origins (french, German or Spanish pressings). A difficult matter...

[epigramophone]

G&T's Spanish business came under the control of the French company in June 1901.
The Spanish factory was opened in August 1907.
Source : "A Nipper Chronology" by Ruth Edge and Leonard Petts.

[Starkton]

When he was still Managing Director of the French branch, Alfred Clark was instrumental in setting up the pressing plant in Barcelona. The plant was founded to avoid import duties. Joseph Berliner was responsible for supervising this and other plants from Hanover.

But we still don't know who built the Spanish gramophone cabinets, especially from 1910.

[Inigo]

Thanks for that info!

[Sidewinder]

By naming the Melba's comparatively bland successor the New Melba, the Gramophone Company ensured that in the public perception the original Melba was obsolete. Art Nouveau had indeed had it's day.
The G&T machine would have made an interesting Winter restoration project, but the auction fees went beyond what I considered to be reasonable. The amount charged to both the buyer and the seller totalled over 50% of the hammer price. I cannot imagine how this could be justified.
For all it's faults, eBay would have allowed the buyer to pay less and the seller to keep more of the proceeds.

Yes auction fees getting a bit out of hand. I had a flashback to a "dealer" who sells on ebay who - a few years ago - tried to add his own 10% or so to the final ebay price as "commission" for the auction. Obviously smelt the bacon as well!

What are peoples thoughts on auctioneers who are also secretly dealers, ie many objects they are auctioning (like half of the lots) are in fact items they have bought & "consigned" themselves? thanks

[epigramophone]

What are peoples thoughts on auctioneers who are also secretly dealers, ie many objects they are auctioning (like half of the lots) are in fact items they have bought & "consigned" themselves? thanks

I have not heard that one before, but I can quite believe it. Is there no limit to their attempts to increase their profits?
I am old enough to remember when only the vendor paid the fees. In the UK Buyer's Premiums were introduced by Christie's and Sotheby's in 1975, originally at 10%. All the other auction houses soon jumped on the band wagon and their rates have been increasing ever since, particularly in recent years when 25% or more is not uncommon.