fran604g wrote:Hi guys,
I'm upgrading to a new PC today (finally!) so, at this time I won't be able to address your questions as thoughtfully as I'd like (I'm using my not-so-smart phone currently).
I should be completely back online tomorrow.
I don't want you to think I missed your quedtions, and both of these topics are things I've planned for in one way or another.
Thanks for your understanding,
Fran
As I promised yesterday:
welshfield wrote:Hello fran604g:
Eventually are you going to post your spreadsheet for these machines so we all who submitted data for our machines can have reference to it?
Thanks
John
When I'm finished with the final installment (Part IV) of my article series in
The Antique Phonograph, I plan to submit my spreadsheet data in some easy to use form, to be posted on the APS website so that the collecting community can use it as a comprehensive guide in perpetuity.
My collected data file is much larger and comprehensive than the information contained in this post, with currently over 300 individual Chippendales across 18+ data points

(though my work isn't nearly as large as Martinola's work in his
Edison Standard Data). If you haven't yet read Martin's
Spotter’s Guide to the Edison Standard Phonograph (here:
http://www.antiquephono.org/spotters-gu ... honograph/) you owe it to yourself to check it out! His data file can be found at the very end of his article.
Much of my research is still ongoing, and the most difficult part -- my final interpretation of the actual production numbers -- probably won't be ready until late summer/early fall to coincide with the Part IV article installment; the longer the amount of time I have for this part of the project, the more accurate I should hope to be, obviously. Of course, in the meantime, all of the data provided to me by generous TMF members such as yourself (around 55 Chippendales, if I counted correctly), is all here in the public domain, and shall remain as long as the forum is alive. This post has become a pretty substantial cross-section of machines, and is a great resource in and of itself. I'm hopeful that it will continue to grow through future TMF member participation, and I will continue to maintain it's progress even after I've finished my research.
Of course, my articles in
The Antique Phonograph are intended to be much more detail-oriented than a spreadsheet could ever be, and I get into the much finer points of my research, which the spreadsheet only begins to encompass.
Pathé wrote:Hello, Fran
Before you get done with this have you given any thought to including the CC-32 console as it is technically a (official Laboratory Model)Chippendale also.
Regards, Ken
I have been following the Chippendale Console with interest, and have been recording the same relative data as for the Upright, but the Console falls outside of the parameters of my initial study, and will not be included in my final study. What I
may do in the future is expand my study of the Edisonics, LP Consoles, and other interesting DD Phonographs to include the CC-32.
The William and Mary is also an "Official Laboratory Model", and I haven't included that in my C 250/C 19 study, either. Perhaps at a future date, I will include this model, too.
BUT, where to "draw the line" so to speak? I've also been following the A and B 250 models with some interest...and then there are a universe full of accessories that I'd like to know more about, too. I'm not sure I'll live long enough to accomplish all I'd like.
Best,
Fran