The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

studebakerphonos wrote:I have found there were particular changes to the carriage that are date / serial number sensitive.

Actually, no. Read George Paul's in-depth article here: viewtopic.php?p=258969#p258969

Various early features are intermixed throughout early production. The earliest Home known to exist, #138, has a normal suitcase carriage with normal feedscrew nut. Weighted versions are found somewhat randomly in early production. The same thing applies to the "skeletal" top and type of reproducer clips. Early parts were intermixed at the factory with later parts. Serial numbers were stamped as machines were completed so some machines with (relatively) high numbers such as 1534 have the early skeletal top, while closed tops are found as low as 524. So things are definitely not clear-cut with early Homes.

I strongly recommend reading George's article carefully -- he did a lot of research and the results are surprising.

TinfoilPhono wrote:

studebakerphonos wrote:I have found there were particular changes to the carriage that are date / serial number sensitive.

Actually, no. Read George Paul's in-depth article here: viewtopic.php?p=258969#p258969

Various early features are intermixed throughout early production. The earliest Home known to exist, #138, has a normal suitcase carriage with normal feedscrew nut. Weighted versions are found somewhat randomly in early production. The same thing applies to the "skeletal" top and type of reproducer clips. Early parts were intermixed at the factory with later parts. Serial numbers were stamped as machines were completed so some machines with (relatively) high numbers like the skeletal top are known with serial numbers as high as 1534, while closed tops are found as low as 524. So things are definitely not clear-cut with early Homes.

I strongly recommend reading George's article carefully -- he did a lot of research and the results are surprising.

Yes, I agree, but wouldn't the newer type attributes like a 2 clip 4 screw reproducer hold down arrangement not appear before a particular date/ serial number? I agree older items, like a 2 hole reproducer hold down could have been thrown into the mix and used later, but not visa versa???

Kind Regards, Bob

Check out the next to last paragraph on page 8 of George's article. Different clamp styles are randomly intermixed among early numbers. There is no specific cut-off point that can be determined by serial number. I used to own #1456, which was in unbelievably perfect original condition (finish, decal, striping etc. were flawless). It had Class M style clips with knurled screws anchoring the clips. The earliest known home, #138 (with clockwork motor and drawer in the cabinet) also has Class M clips. But I currently own #1104, it has single-screw clips. #394 has Emerson clips. There is no rhyme or reason, and certainly no definable sequence of one leading to another with easily determined cut-off points.

Parts were made and put on shelves. As improvements were made, they got intermixed with earlier parts. As they were pulled off of the shelves for production, no one cared about those details. Whatever part they happened to pick up went onto the machine being completed, which was then serial-numbered. So it's not possible to say precisely when these early features were changed. Eventually the old parts were used up, so you aren't likely to find a Class M clip carriage in the 3000s, but you definitely can find them in the 1000s. The same applies to skeletal tops, weighted feedscrew nuts, and blunt mandrels.

Many thanks to Dulcetto for pointing out that lid, I've bought it so now only looking for a carriage, any clipped carriage will do, I should add that i don't need the shaver as that was still attached to the remanence of the original carriage

Congratulations on getting that lid! That was a lucky find that is very appropriate. You're making fast progress.

That lid on German eBay looks to be exactly what you needed - - congratulations!

George P.

This is a truly fascinating historical post. Thank you for sharing your Home with those of us in the audience!

Cheers,
Fran

fran604g wrote:This is a truly fascinating historical post. Thank you for sharing your Home with those of us in the audience!

Cheers,
Fran

I'll second that. I have been following the various threads on this and am amazed at the fast (and high quality) progress on this project - makes me feel a bit bad about how slow I am on my own! It has also certainly been heart warming to see the community rally around Alex to help with this project.