Refinishing and Value Question.

[CarlosV]

Personally I never hesitate to rehaul everything that needs to be rehauled, if it lays inside the boundaries of my skills. I really don't like to have objects that are "all original" and that I would be ashemed to show to relatives or friends: it makes no sense. Also, gramophones were made to be a pleasure to look at, but also to play records and enjoy, and that's what I like to do. Keeping them as useless museum items behind a shrine is nonsense to me.

I clean my machines and wax or apply wood protectors to polished surfaces, but never tried to revarnish or repaint any, main reason being it is practically impossible to achieve the same results as the original. The materials available today simply don't match the old chemicals, loaded with lead and other hazardous materials that have been banned since that time. Having said that, I've seen cabinets that were completely redone by expert craftsmen, and they look quite attractive despite different from the original. The touch ups however are much more difficult to do and frequently end up looking out-of-place, like sticking a brand new white false tooth in the middle of worn nicotine-stained ones. I agree with Marco on the point that I buy my machines to play records, not to keep them on a display.

[startgroove]

Here's my two $ worth of opinion: After observation of various collections (mostly on the West Coast) I've recognized that about 50% of the displayed machines are restored. So, I've drawn a few conclusions on the subject. The first conclusion is it seems to me that more of the upper end machines are restored than the more common machines. Further, most of those restorations are well done and make the machine appear in better condition to near new condition. The next conclusion is that there definitely is such a thing as "over-restored", which is usually due to too much shine, improper choice of methods or materials or inaccuracy in translating what the factory appearance was. Sometimes high gloss plating or finish does not look good on a machine, and other times it does. And lastly, I've seen some machines that I would definitely restore if they were mine. Others I would leave original, or clean them up, touch them up, or polish them if warranted. It goes case by case. In any event, I've never known of a machine that had diminished in value because of a restoration, but I have seen restoration work that could have been done better. I display unrestored survivors in my collections and I am equally proud to display restored machines in my collection. Lastly, patina is something that cannot be stopped, and as time goes by, all of those machines, restored or not, will take on a more aged look. Fifty years from now, it might be hard to tell that a properly restored machine had once been restored.

[Lucius1958]

Here's my two $ worth of opinion: After observation of various collections (mostly on the West Coast) I've recognized that about 50% of the displayed machines are restored. So, I've drawn a few conclusions on the subject. The first conclusion is it seems to me that more of the upper end machines are restored than the more common machines. Further, most of those restorations are well done and make the machine appear in better condition to near new condition. The next conclusion is that there definitely is such a thing as "over-restored", which is usually due to too much shine, improper choice of methods or materials or inaccuracy in translating what the factory appearance was. Sometimes high gloss plating or finish does not look good on a machine, and other times it does. And lastly, I've seen some machines that I would definitely restore if they were mine. Others I would leave original, or clean them up, touch them up, or polish them if warranted. It goes case by case. In any event, I've never known of a machine that had diminished in value because of a restoration, but I have seen restoration work that could have been done better. I display unrestored survivors in my collections and I am equally proud to display restored machines in my collection. Lastly, patina is something that cannot be stopped, and as time goes by, all of those machines, restored or not, will take on a more aged look. Fifty years from now, it might be hard to tell that a properly restored machine had once been restored.

Agreed. I have tried to conserve original finish where possible; but when a machine is in very poor cosmetic condition, it's best to do restoration, using techniques as close to the original as possible.

Out of my collection, my Amberola 30 has served as the guinea-pig for restoration techniques. When I was first given it, it was quite shabby: dark and filthy finish, missing veneer, etc. After several metamorphoses (including an 'over-restoration' of the finish), I now have it in a condition reasonably close to original (some proper grille cloth would make it better).

While I would never try to sell it for profit, I enjoy what I have achieved with it.

Bill

[FloridaClay]

You touch on another good point Bill. That is, when learning about refinishing it is best to experiment and learn with a common machine. Then if something goes south there is not much lost.

Clay