Victor VTLA (XX) Victrola the Twentieth

[gramophone78]

I would like to mention something that occurred in the last few days. A customer of mine, who in the past has bought high-end, fully restored machines from me, contacted me about the VV-XX that I bought from Curt and is en-route to me by a specialty antique delivery service.

This customer said that he would like to buy Curt's XX in order to "save it from ruination" by my restorers. He also said that "well known major collectors" were horrified by the restoration that I did on the first XX.

Now really, is taking a machine that is missing moldings, trim, has chips and gouges, and a worn, dried-out and discolored finish "ruined" by repairing the defects, replacing the wrong parts with correct ones, and carefully (and expensively) saving the original finish and bringing it back to life? And having professionally applied real gold-leafing to the trim pieces, as original?

I fully understand that some collectors want 100% original machines and respect that. Neither I or my wife want that that genre in our house, and I have diligently built a customer base accordingly. I have been to many collectors homes over the years, and some display their collections beautifully, others are, well, like you see on American Pickers. There are all types, and one size does not fit all. But do I ever insult a collector by telling him that his house and collection are a pig sty? Of course not. Nor would I tell him that he "ruined" a machine (not even Brady Jeffcoat, RIP).

Bottom line, after almost selling the XX to my customer, I felt so insulted by his "ruination" statement that I backed off the deal. I could have made a nice profit and drop-shipped the XX to him, but there is more to life, business and collecting than that. And the first XX is in my living room, a place of honor that my wife only allows one phonograph and one music box (a Nicole Frères Grand Format Overture) and that's it.

Raphael

Well, "save it from ruination" may be a bit extreme on that persons part. It's not a holy relic. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
Some collectors like "over the top" restoration and others like machines as original as possible.

In the case of a Victrola XX, given the low number of survivors ( maybe 20 or less ), keeping them original may weight heavier with serious collectors.

Personally, if I had a choice of one fully restored and one untouched.....I would go with untouched (chips, gouges and all).....regardless of price. However, that's just me and no negative reflection on your restored machine.

I also believe when a very rare machine must be restored in order to save it, the process be documented with pics in order to preserve details that may be lost or questioned later (like the extra gilding). Again, that's just me... . Opinions may vary.

I take it you did not take any "before" pics of the gilding..??.

[Garret]

Forgive me, but what is this whole gilding fuss about? I don't see any difference between the postcard and Raphael's restored machine. Am I missing something?

Garret

[Hailey]

Forgive me, but what is this whole gilding fuss about? I don't see any difference between the postcard and Raphael's restored machine. Am I missing something?

Garret

On a few select examples of this machine model, you will find an added ornate applied carving w/ gold guilding on the front of the cabinet, both sides, mid-way down on the doors.
The postcard example is void of this feature.

[gramophone-georg]

I would like to mention something that occurred in the last few days. A customer of mine, who in the past has bought high-end, fully restored machines from me, contacted me about the VV-XX that I bought from Curt and is en-route to me by a specialty antique delivery service.

This customer said that he would like to buy Curt's XX in order to "save it from ruination" by my restorers. He also said that "well known major collectors" were horrified by the restoration that I did on the first XX.

Now really, is taking a machine that is missing moldings, trim, has chips and gouges, and a worn, dried-out and discolored finish "ruined" by repairing the defects, replacing the wrong parts with correct ones, and carefully (and expensively) saving the original finish and bringing it back to life? And having professionally applied real gold-leafing to the trim pieces, as original?

I fully understand that some collectors want 100% original machines and respect that. Neither I or my wife want that that genre in our house, and I have diligently built a customer base accordingly. I have been to many collectors homes over the years, and some display their collections beautifully, others are, well, like you see on American Pickers. There are all types, and one size does not fit all. But do I ever insult a collector by telling him that his house and collection are a pig sty? Of course not. Nor would I tell him that he "ruined" a machine (not even Brady Jeffcoat, RIP).

Bottom line, after almost selling the XX to my customer, I felt so insulted by his "ruination" statement that I backed off the deal. I could have made a nice profit and drop-shipped the XX to him, but there is more to life, business and collecting than that. And the first XX is in my living room, a place of honor that my wife only allows one phonograph and one music box (a Nicole Frères Grand Format Overture) and that's it.

Raphael

I tend to look at what a person does rather than what a person says and this person has bought high end restored pieces from you before, so that says how much he really thinks your restoration process "ruins" something.

My frank opinion is that finishes, etc. are originally put on machines to preserve them, so if a collector really wanted to preserve a machine he should CORRECTLY restore it. Even then, when he owns it, it's HIS machine and he can do whatever he wants with it! All the "critics" have no financial skin in the game and should just zip it.

Maybe this customer did you a favor. I'm a firm believer in "when someone shows you who they are... believe them".

You don't know me but I have seen your work all over and I think you are doing a great service to this hobby. Keep it up and to h-e-double toothpicks with the jealous haters.

[Raphael]

To answer Gramophone 78's question, no, I didn't take any "before" pictures.

To the others, thanks for your kind words. I rarely do a restoration like this on a phonograph, unless it's a high-end piece such as a Sonora Supreme or a Victrola XX.

The last XX I had was restored by the late Bob Johnson, RIP. (see picture below). A lot of people pooh-poohed it but then one day a local collector came to my house to buy a Victor VI, and took one look at the XX and bought it straight away without even asking the price. He just whipped out his checkbook and handed me a blank, signed check and told me to fill in the amount. It was the first of many purchases, all of which adorn his $10m waterfront house in Ft. Lauderdale.

Raphael

[Curt A]

My two cents on my XX, now Raphael's... I did nothing to it, but collected original record boxes and a reproducer box for it. If I had kept it, I would probably have made correct moldings for the bottom of the doors from mahogany that was salvaged from another Victor machine, since it would be a simple job and a nice improvement. The couple of missing pieces in the molding on the legs didn't bother me too much, but could have been fixed... My main issue was that this machine never had gilding applied and I think the numbers of manufactured machines without gilding is very low, so to me, the ungilded cabinet is rarer than the gilded one. However, this is only important to certain collectors and the overall opinion is that the gilded cabinets catch your eye and would appeal to a high end collector that is not so concerned with total originality... Raphael deals with those high end collectors, where money doesn't matter, so if they want the trim painted pink and are willing to pay whatever asking price, it's theirs - so what? Like Wayne said, it's not a holy treasure...

[Victor VII]

I am the customer who was the subject of Raphael’s most recent comments. Busy over the weekend and never intending to have this discussion in a public forum. But since Raphael has (to his credit) publicly sought input from the collectors, and people have responded, perhaps might be ok to add two cents on this very important topic. I am not against restoration-from the auction photos, I agree with Raphael that the machine from Maine required some level of restoration. Although I did express concerns, I unequivocally never resorted to hyperbole such as the machine needing to be “saved from ruination”--perhaps a liberal paraphrase of hoping to ‘save the machine from the re-finisher’. Review of photos of intact gilt XX’s on-line clearly shows that the original gold ornament has a subtle less opaque antiqued finish rather than bright opaque gilding. The VV XX illustration on the vintage brochure on this chain is done by an artist, who has (as is often the case) taken artistic license with the appearance including brighter gilding.

The more important overall issue is that the rarest machines require the most careful restoration. Clearly, a substantial component of the value of machines like this are their historical value and rarity. It is well accepted among major dealers and collectors in fine art and general antiques that there is a custodial responsibility to minimize alteration of historically important aesthetics of pieces, especially those pieces that are most rare and historic. That is one of the safest ways to preserve monetary value. This is of course a free country and no laws are being broken with any restoration. If someone wants to take a VV-VI and put on a high-gloss finish, alter the hue, and paint the edges, there are still plenty of VV-VI’s out there to tell the story. But losing even a few examples of the rarest machines to improper restoration can be a loss for the entire collecting community.

We have also seen that there are collectors who like the dirt and scratches, viewing these as an honest part of the history of the object. My personal preference is to restore them to a state that the Victor Company and the original owner had in mind, while not completely erasing some of the patina which shows that these are antiques. The best restoration is either no restoration or one that is more difficult to discern. An unrestored machine tells a story that can never be told again. The ungilded machine is an example of a later serial number XX, many of which were un-gilded. The lack of gilding is a significant part of its story. I admire the last owner who cleaned the dirt, but was secure enough to leave a few subtle signs of aging.

Also surprising that someone stated on a collectors’ forum that they don’t like selling to collectors, presumably because they are too picky. But the participants in this forum are the ones who truly care about the objects. The hobbyists who care about even the most minute history and details of these wonderful pieces should wear that as a badge of honor. Anyone who does not like to sell to collectors can easily find other non-collectible merchandise to sell. So whether you engage in collecting or commerce of the rarest and most historic pieces, please take utmost care to allow these pieces to continue to tell the story they have to tell. Grateful to all on this forum for their passion and knowledge-educational and inspirational!

[Curt A]

One last comment... If the new gilding appears to be too bright, it should be easy to fix by topcoating it with amber shellac (or tinted shellac), which will restore an "original patina" appearance to the gold. The existing gilded cabinets were (in my mind) once bright, also. 100+ years of aging has toned them down to their now aged brass appearance...

Any restoration has to consider the existing condition of an object and the desired restored look of an object... I like restorations that bring the item back from the dump to look like a well cared for piece, for example the restorations done by Wyatt... A phonograph in "as found" good condition may not need restoration, but one that has been neglected, dirty, water damaged, rusty, etc. absolutely needs preservation restoration. To me, rust and dirt is not a "patina", but rather a sign of mistreatment, neglect and lack of respect for the item....

[Raphael]

I am the customer who was the subject of Raphael’s most recent comments. Busy over the weekend and never intending to have this discussion in a public forum. But since Raphael has (to his credit) publicly sought input from the collectors, and people have responded, perhaps might be ok to add two cents on this very important topic. I am not against restoration-from the auction photos, I agree with Raphael that the machine from Maine required some level of restoration. Although I did express concerns, I unequivocally never resorted to hyperbole such as the machine needing to be “saved from ruination”--perhaps a liberal paraphrase of hoping to ‘save the machine from the re-finisher’. Review of photos of intact gilt XX’s on-line clearly shows that the original gold ornament has a subtle less opaque antiqued finish rather than bright opaque gilding. The VV XX illustration on the vintage brochure on this chain is done by an artist, who has (as is often the case) taken artistic license with the appearance including brighter gilding.

The more important overall issue is that the rarest machines require the most careful restoration. Clearly, a substantial component of the value of machines like this are their historical value and rarity. It is well accepted among major dealers and collectors in fine art and general antiques that there is a custodial responsibility to minimize alteration of historically important aesthetics of pieces, especially those pieces that are most rare and historic. That is one of the safest ways to preserve monetary value. This is of course a free country and no laws are being broken with any restoration. If someone wants to take a VV-VI and put on a high-gloss finish, alter the hue, and paint the edges, there are still plenty of VV-VI’s out there to tell the story. But losing even a few examples of the rarest machines to improper restoration can be a loss for the entire collecting community.

We have also seen that there are collectors who like the dirt and scratches, viewing these as an honest part of the history of the object. My personal preference is to restore them to a state that the Victor Company and the original owner had in mind, while not completely erasing some of the patina which shows that these are antiques. The best restoration is either no restoration or one that is more difficult to discern. An unrestored machine tells a story that can never be told again. The ungilded machine is an example of a later serial number XX, many of which were un-gilded. The lack of gilding is a significant part of its story. I admire the last owner who cleaned the dirt, but was secure enough to leave a few subtle signs of aging.

Also surprising that someone stated on a collectors’ forum that they don’t like selling to collectors, presumably because they are too picky. But the participants in this forum are the ones who truly care about the objects. The hobbyists who care about even the most minute history and details of these wonderful pieces should wear that as a badge of honor. Anyone who does not like to sell to collectors can easily find other non-collectible merchandise to sell. So whether you engage in collecting or commerce of the rarest and most historic pieces, please take utmost care to allow these pieces to continue to tell the story they have to tell. Grateful to all on this forum for their passion and knowledge-educational and inspirational!

I never mentioned you by name or intended this thread to be a personal dispute gone public. My intent was to seek diverse opinions. Thus, perhaps it is fair to quote your email of October 19, which I admittedly did condense but it specifically says "save it from your re-finisher" and "ruin the piece".

QUOTE

"Actually, one of the reasons I would like to purchase your machine is to save it from your re-finisher. I have spoken with other major collectors who are also very upset by the over-restoration of the gilded piece. Aside from a few nicks and missing molding strips at the bottom, the cabinet on this machine needs no major work. French polish would ruin the piece and also be inconsistent with how it appeared new."

UNQUOTE




Raphael

[Garret]