Random Thoughts on Over-Restoration

[Uncle Vanya]

If I remember (a major qualification at my age), Victor switched from shellac to a nitrocellulose lacquer right around the time the Orthophonics came out in the mid-1920s.

Clay

I believe you are correct. A very few extremely early Credenza machines have been found with the older shellac finish, and I ave been told of at least one example of a Granada, with a serial number of under 600 which was so finished. I've also seen a single 4-1, a regular mica diaphragm machine made exclusively for export which shared a cabinet with the Orthophonic Victrola Consolette which appeared to have an original shellac finish.

[Steve]

I've never understood the purpose of grain filler in contemporary refinishing but maybe the proper material no longer exists so this is why I have never been able to make it work?

Some years ago now I repolished an HMV mahogany horn and read up on all the Do's And Don'ts beforehand. I bought some Grain Filler but it was only more shellac based liquid material? I applied it as per instructions and then rubbed the finish down in the opposite direction to the grain but all that happened was that the 'filler' effectively came out again?!! As the final finish material was also shellac I couldn't see the point of the filler. It didn't work, fill the grain or improve the final result. Is the problem really one of skill? I haven't met anyone yet who can refinish a French Polished item with anything remotely equivalent to that wonderful piano gloss finish we are all referring to in those period photographs.

[FloridaClay]

I've never understood the purpose of grain filler in contemporary refinishing but maybe the proper material no longer exists so this is why I have never been able to make it work?

It does still exist and it does work beautifully. Living in a condo with no shop I get a local antique restorer to do that work from me and the difference is huge when it is properly done. There is a definite technique to doing it. Some of the other folks here can likely give you good advice on the what and how. And if you do a search for grain filler on this site, you will find it mentioned in many threads, some of which include that kind of advice.

Clay

[Uncle Vanya]

I've never understood the purpose of grain filler in contemporary refinishing but maybe the proper material no longer exists so this is why I have never been able to make it work?

Some years ago now I repolished an HMV mahogany horn and read up on all the Do's And Don'ts beforehand. I bought some Grain Filler but it was only more shellac based liquid material? I applied it as per instructions and then rubbed the finish down in the opposite direction to the grain but all that happened was that the 'filler' effectively came out again?!! As the final finish material was also shellac I couldn't see the point of the filler. It didn't work, fill the grain or improve the final result. Is the problem really one of skill? I haven't met anyone yet who can refinish a French Polished item with anything remotely equivalent to that wonderful piano gloss finish we are all referring to in those period photographs.

I can, and do, but generally only for resale, for I prefer my oen machines to have glossy, ever so slightly checked original finishes. Below are photos of a Sparton radio of 1925 or 1926 vintage which came out of a barn. It was the first set of the grandfather of a friend of mine. The finish had entirely fallen away, and the veneer on the lid was peeling and shattered. I re-veneered the top of the set with appropriate walnut, filled and stained the wood (I use Plaster of Paris rather than pumice, as the work sets faster) and then French Polished the resulting surface. The rather pronounced "Blended Finish" is directly copied from an original in my possession, and was produced with the use of Analine dyes, about half-way through the finishing process. In all, that rough radio cabinet took about four hours to restore, over a period of about a week. It is not a particularly good job, but the photos were at hand.



Now, this Atwater Kent breadboard was an alligatored, rusty mess. I disassembled the entire set, repainted the cans, rewound the audio transformers, replaced the brass parts with well preserved AK parts salvaged from an early AK Model 20 cabinet set, re-wound two of the RF transformers with wire salvaged from old Atwater Kent tuning coils, restored and overpolished the badly deteriorated, rough, nearly black original finish on the base-board, carefuly leaving a just a bit of checking, and then reassembled the set, offering it at auction as a restored radio. The buyer subsequently sold the unit on a well-known auction site as an extrordinarly well-preserved, working original example (for more than twice what he paid).







I do try to make my work unobtrusive, but as complete as was this restoration, it only occupied three evenings puttering in my shop last November. The photos posted above were taken by the buyer. He is a far better photographer than I.

I learned this technique when I was a teenager, and have always found the process to be fairly simple, though repetitive, but whenever I try to teach it to anyone else they end up with a gummy mess! I actually believe that that is the point, for I made utter gummy messes of a fair number of pieces of cheap turn-of-the-century furniture when I was learning the process.

[Starkton]

The buyer subsequently sold the unit on a well-known auction site as an extrordinarly well-preserved, working original example (for more than twice what he paid).

That's fraud, pure and simple, but the vendor must not fear to be unmasked, when I consider the knowledge of some chance buyers. Because, on one hand, this speaks for the quality of your work, which is very good indeed, judging from the images. But on the other hand, objects time-savingly restored with not contemporary methods or materials are also sold at high prices. Many collectors are amateurs when it comes to the question which craftsmanship would be appropriate on a 100 year old technical object. It is not enough to know which reproducer is correct on your phonograph.

[FloridaClay]

Beautiful job on the AK breadboard.

Clay

[Uncle Vanya]

The buyer subsequently sold the unit on a well-known auction site as an extrordinarly well-preserved, working original example (for more than twice what he paid).

That's fraud, pure and simple, but the vendor must not fear to be unmasked, when I consider the knowledge of some chance buyers. Because, on one hand, this speaks for the quality of your work, which is very good indeed, judging from the images. But on the other hand, objects time-savingly restored with not contemporary methods or materials are also sold at high prices. Many collectors are amateurs when it comes to the question which craftsmanship would be appropriate on a 100 year old technical object. It is not enough to know which reproducer is correct on your phonograph.

Well, this said, the re-seller, who is not personally known to me, doubtless knew nothing of the unit save its appearance when he purchased it. This was an ordinary auction situation. Little to nothing is known of the history of an item, save the visual cues offered. My personal opinion is that a properly restored item, and when I say properly restored I mean restored entirely with the use of materials and techniques which were used by the original maker, is very little if at all different from the perfectly preserved example.

I did not mark my work as restored, either, and the friend for whom I did the work thought nothing of simply offering it under ordinary auction terms (as he told me in a telephone call about a half-hour ago) as just what it was, a really nice looking, great performing, complete set. He told me that he never really thought of mentioning restoration in this listing, for the set was as far as he was concerned all that it appeared to be.

Should a restoration such as this be marred by the sort of indellible brand that we all believe should be appled to reproduced large parts or cabinets? How does one ethically deal with a truly excellent restoration thirty or forty years down the road? Frankly I tend to be of the opinion that if the work is intellegently, expertly and properly done, with no obvious intention to deceive, that no special identification is necessary. Should we all sign our work? Or should we rather use improper materials and indifferent workmanship so that restoration is painfully obvious to the tyro?

None of this was terribly important back when I began restoring these items in the early 1970's, for these units were then of so little value, and the "Keno Brothers" mantra "That chest-on-chest would have been worth a hundred thousand dollars had it not been refinished, but as is it is worth six" had not entered intonpopular consiousness, but as the interest in the better stuff increases, this question begins to assume troubling proportions.

How should we ethically deal with the better restoration? This is a thorny question which I had not much considered in the past. I have always indellibly marked large items such as cabinets, base moulding, or large castings, but should a replaced gear be noted? A replaced corner-column? A re-would transformer? A repaired finish? Touched-up plating? A re-stuffed condneser? Where then do we draw the line?

Should I have taken a wood-burning pen to the baseboard of that radio and signed it with my name and the date? Should my friend have included a notice regarding the restoration? I do know that in an auction setting such notice will often severely depress the realized price of the unit, while at the same time greatly increasing the potential profit margin to its purchaser, who may (and will) discard such notice if it is convenient for him to do so.

Are we to maintain that all attempts at restoration indelibly degrade these objects that we enjoy, or should we only object to bad restoration?

This is a dificult question, and one that we as collectors and sometime restorers should always keep in mind.

[De Soto Frank]

Uncle Vanya,

Your work looks to be stunning.


I am curious about Victor's supposed method for filling grain... I think it is in Baumbach's book "Look for the Dog", where he reproduces a Victor monograph on how the cabinets are made, and at one point in the finishing process, "the entire cabinet is rubbed-down with sea-weed, which smooths the wood and fills the grain."

Ever since I first read this, I wondered if it was true, or if this was a red-herring, intentionally plantd by VTM, to prevent other companies from achieving Victor-quality finishes ?

Any thoughts on that one ?


I also blame the dearth of badly "refinished" Federal period furniture and talking machines on DIY-articles in magazines from the 1950's - '80's, and "miracle products" like Homer Formby's restore-a-finish.

[Norfolkguy]

I would be thrilled to have that radio, no questions asked. If it had been plugged in, in its before state, it would have set the house on fire. Beautiful work! I don't collect radios anymore......nothing to listen to!

[FloridaClay]

I would be thrilled to have that radio, no questions asked. If it had been plugged in, in its before state, it would have set the house on fire. Beautiful work! I don't collect radios anymore......nothing to listen to!

AM is indeed a wasteland now. I solved that dilemma by getting something called a "Talking House," a very low power AM transmitter, downloading some old-time radio shows to my iPod, and hooking them together. Now get 30s and 40s big band or other shows on any AM set in the house whenever I want.

Clay