The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Lucius1958 wrote:I certainly wish that had had the benefit of this forum when I obtained my Amberola 30 over 40 years ago: it might have saved me one or two abortive attempts at 'restoration' At least, I have got it into presentable shape by now...

I will concur with the majority opinion on WD-40: sewing machine oil or silicone spray are far better lubricants.

As for the finish, some coats of orange shellac ( and perhaps some dark paste wax afterwards) might mellow out the appearance…

Bill

Thanks Bill, I'm also to yet attempt 'restoration' of an A100 (minus the legs), that I purchased over 30 years ago, as well as one with legs, that
seems like it was stored in a dusty farm shed for a very long time. I'll wait until the restore a finish completely dries out on the subject Amberola,
then maybe wipe it over with methylated spirits (denatured alcohol) to remove any of that Howard product close to the surface, then apply some orange shellac….

I will have to wait until I build a work bench before I even think about pulling any motors apart. I'd also like to think about restoring the
black iron frames in the future. At least I have a plan for my impending retirement.. Regards

I've used the WD-40 trick quite successfully
in old manual typewriters. When one comes
across one of those that has been sitting
for years, with all the mechanism dry and
with old, sticky, gunky oil in it gumming it
all up, there's nothing quite like the WD-40
trick.

On those machines I tip it up vertical and
spray the WD-40 liberally all around aiming
in from the bottom.

Then, I set the machine down in its normal
position with a newspaper or cardboard underneath to catch the excess WD-40 as it drips off. Then, with it all soaked, I start
typing and so limber up the whole works.

However, I think that the use of WD-40 in
a phonograph motor would only serve as the
first step in limbering it all up and giving
it a bit of lubrication.

Sure, if the motor was totally dry beforehand,
then WD-40 is sure better than nothing!

But, if it was me, I'd go back and oil everything up with some sewing machine oil
afterwards.

Maybe some heavier oil down the geartrain
closer to the spring. I use many grades
and weights of oils, depending where in a motor they are used.

I recently took the advice of another forum
member here, and put a few drops of 140
weight gear oil through the hole in the spring
barrel of my Edison Standard Model D machine.
Boy, that works nice!

I have a little box that contains about ten
eyedropper bottles of several different weights and types of oil. Some of them are:
140 weight gear oil, 90 weight gear oil,
straight 50 weight, 20W50, straight 30 weight,
10W40, sewing machine oil, and the lightest
of all, some Marvel Mystery Oil. (red stuff)

That assortment of oils works nicely on
seriously worn-out old clocks, nursed along
to keep decent time by soaking them down
with the appropriately heavy stuff on the most
worn places.

I just recenty added a few drops of 140 wt
oil along the carriage guide-rod of my
Standard machine, so as to keep it nice and
snug so it does not have any slack nor slop
in it for making recordings. Works great!

But hey, nice work on the Amberola 30!!

Keep up the good work.

Chuck

I used to be involved in collecting and dealing in Arts & Crafts furniture, and the use of improper and/or historically incorrect products to restore finishes on that furniture would instantly slash the value and desirability significantly. It amazes me that there are no agreed-upon restoration standards for phonographs, like there are for classic cars which are also mechanical.

My own personal take on machines is that
I see a bit too much focus on cabinets and
finishes, and not enough attention paid
to properly operating mechanisms, contained
within the fancy furniture.

Always, always, when a machine gets discussed,
it's always the wood-type mentioned first, then the condition of the finish, then lastly,
almost as an aside...oh yeah, the motor is
in fair shape, and the thing actually plays.

I am completely, totally the opposite.
I could care less about the cabinet.

It's what's inside that matters to me.

Example: The museum in Atlanta, Illinois
has an Edison Standard Model B machine in their collection. Cabinet: stripped and stained, no decal, no shellac or varnish.

Outside of cabinet: Dry, dusty, flat looking.
Reworked. Kind of a hack-job. Half a job.

However, take the lid off, wind it up, put
a cylinder on, and it works like a dream.

I messed around for an afternoon last fall
with this machine. Oiled it all up, adjusted
the speed, did a bunch of test recordings
with my recorders and blanks.

Absolutely Wonderful!!!

It is a tight, tight, factory-new machine.
Very few operating hours on this machine.
Everything about the mechanism just screams
"Factory New"

But the cabinet.....oh the cabinet....
it would be considered a real disaster by most
here. But hey, the whole mechanical works
has hardly EVER been used.

It's so tight, it records perfectly, everything stays in absolute perfect alignment, the speed is absolutely stable
and constant, the spring is strong, and the
motor runs absolutely quietly.

It was a real pleasure spending that afternoon
with their machine. Cabinet needs professional work.

But that can either happen sometime, or wait.
Meanwhile, it is a fully functioning, nearly
new condition machine. That is what counts,
to me.

Again, good job on the Amberola 30!

Chuck

Chuck wrote:I've used the WD-40 trick quite successfully
in old manual typewriters. When one comes
across one of those that has been sitting
for years, with all the mechanism dry and
with old, sticky, gunky oil in it gumming it
all up, there's nothing quite like the WD-40
trick.

On those machines I tip it up vertical and
spray the WD-40 liberally all around aiming
in from the bottom.

Then, I set the machine down in its normal
position with a newspaper or cardboard underneath to catch the excess WD-40 as it drips off. Then, with it all soaked, I start
typing and so limber up the whole works.

However, I think that the use of WD-40 in
a phonograph motor would only serve as the
first step in limbering it all up and giving
it a bit of lubrication.

Sure, if the motor was totally dry beforehand,
then WD-40 is sure better than nothing!

But, if it was me, I'd go back and oil everything up with some sewing machine oil
afterwards.

Maybe some heavier oil down the geartrain
closer to the spring. I use many grades
and weights of oils, depending where in a motor they are used.

I recently took the advice of another forum
member here, and put a few drops of 140
weight gear oil through the hole in the spring
barrel of my Edison Standard Model D machine.
Boy, that works nice!

I have a little box that contains about ten
eyedropper bottles of several different weights and types of oil. Some of them are:
140 weight gear oil, 90 weight gear oil,
straight 50 weight, 20W50, straight 30 weight,
10W40, sewing machine oil, and the lightest
of all, some Marvel Mystery Oil. (red stuff)

That assortment of oils works nicely on
seriously worn-out old clocks, nursed along
to keep decent time by soaking them down
with the appropriately heavy stuff on the most
worn places.

I just recenty added a few drops of 140 wt
oil along the carriage guide-rod of my
Standard machine, so as to keep it nice and
snug so it does not have any slack nor slop
in it for making recordings. Works great!

But hey, nice work on the Amberola 30!!

Keep up the good work.

Chuck

Hi Chuck, what can I say, other than thank you for your welcome advice.

I also appreciate the time and thought put into all these responses.

I think that your signature quotation pretty well sums it up.
This forum is fantastic, and such fun learning. I'll have to
copy and paste all this good advice into a handbook for myself.

Regards
Adrian

JohnM wrote:I used to be involved in collecting and dealing in Arts & Crafts furniture, and the use of improper and/or historically incorrect products to restore finishes on that furniture would instantly slash the value and desirability significantly. It amazes me that there are no agreed-upon restoration standards for phonographs, like there are for classic cars which are also mechanical.

Hi John

I agree with you, and I was actually wondering what the actual finish would have
looked like on the original oak cabinets.

Regards
Adrian

Chuck wrote:My own personal take on machines is that
I see a bit too much focus on cabinets and
finishes, and not enough attention paid
to properly operating mechanisms, contained
within the fancy furniture.

Always, always, when a machine gets discussed,
it's always the wood-type mentioned first, then the condition of the finish, then lastly,
almost as an aside...oh yeah, the motor is
in fair shape, and the thing actually plays.

I am completely, totally the opposite.
I could care less about the cabinet.

It's what's inside that matters to me.

Example: The museum in Atlanta, Illinois
has an Edison Standard Model B machine in their collection. Cabinet: stripped and stained, no decal, no shellac or varnish.

Outside of cabinet: Dry, dusty, flat looking.
Reworked. Kind of a hack-job. Half a job.

However, take the lid off, wind it up, put
a cylinder on, and it works like a dream.

I messed around for an afternoon last fall
with this machine. Oiled it all up, adjusted
the speed, did a bunch of test recordings
with my recorders and blanks.

Absolutely Wonderful!!!

It is a tight, tight, factory-new machine.
Very few operating hours on this machine.
Everything about the mechanism just screams
"Factory New"

But the cabinet.....oh the cabinet....
it would be considered a real disaster by most
here. But hey, the whole mechanical works
has hardly EVER been used.

It's so tight, it records perfectly, everything stays in absolute perfect alignment, the speed is absolutely stable
and constant, the spring is strong, and the
motor runs absolutely quietly.

It was a real pleasure spending that afternoon
with their machine. Cabinet needs professional work.

But that can either happen sometime, or wait.
Meanwhile, it is a fully functioning, nearly
new condition machine. That is what counts,
to me.

Again, good job on the Amberola 30!

Chuck

Hi Chuck.

What you are saying sounds spot on to me.

I suppose the cabinets are easier and less of a challenge
for people to approach, and I suppose many see the interior
horn machines as pieces of furniture.

I have to say that I'm just itching to get the workbench
and setup organised. At the moment I don't have a proper
workspace, but I'm aiming to clear out a corner of the garage
and organise it there. Then I'll start to look at the motors as well.


I'd also like to have all my tools in one place and proper lighting.
I often scratch around for the right screw driver, so I don't burr
the heads of screws, and so on and so forth.

Edisons are absolute engineering genius and pieces of art in
my eyes.


Thanks again and Regards

Adrian

Just returned from Union so I'm late to the dance, but that Amberola 30 certainly came a long way. Nice work! You've received some excellent advice for the future, and your demonstrated patience and workmanship will undoubtedly continue to serve you well.

Congratulations - -

George P.

phonogfp wrote:Just returned from Union so I'm late to the dance, but that Amberola 30 certainly came a long way. Nice work! You've received some excellent advice for the future, and your demonstrated patience and workmanship will undoubtedly continue to serve you well.

Congratulations - -

George P.

Thanks for your kind words and support George, appreciated

I just have to learn how to resist what I consider a bargain now as I'm having
problems putting the brakes on!

Ade

SydneyAde wrote: ... and I was actually wondering what the actual finish would have looked like on the original oak cabinets.

I think many (if not most) better machines had a smooth glossy finish like a grand piano. One hundred years later, the weathered exterior finish gives no indication of that, but when you raise a lid, you will often find a high-gloss finish remaining inside. How did they produce such a smooth appearance? Wood grain fillers!

I have noticed that many people neglect replacing the filler after stripping the finish from a cabinet. As they strip the cabinet, they don't realize the gunk they remove includes the filler being leached from the pores of the wood. They later stain and lightly sand the wood before varnishing the wood. The final surface has porosity from the open wood pores and so it is not smooth.

The filler material is a fine clear silica dust that is applied as a paste with a rubber squeegee. I am a hardware guy, not a cabinet guy, but I am sure experts here can tell you more how to do it, or you could Google the subject.