The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I have noted with concern that every gramophone originating from the Indo-Pak Subcontinent is invariably dubbed as fake or bastardised. Of course, the Indian cottage industry has the monopoly in producing cheap replicas with a HMV decal but there were some genuine gramophone manufacturing companies operating in the British India during the pre and post war era which are little known to the experts in the West. Often when a product of such companies is found, it is outright rejected as fake for little or no information available about the machine and it’s manufacturer. Here is a product by one such manufacturer.

Primaphone, Made in Switzerland, Head office Bombay, is the only information that I have about this wooden box portable gramophone, which I recently acquired from a gramophone dealer at Karachi, Pakistan.

Roughly of the size of HMV 97, inside the gramophone box is a single spring Swiss Thorens machine with Thorens Imperial soundbox. All fittings on the board are nicely cast and plated with good chrome which has survived over the time.

Google helped me retrieve several pictures of horn gramophones of Primaphone as well. I have uploaded a picture here. A gramophone enthusiast has also uploaded a video of this horn gramophone:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj5o0rbdDOA.

A friend of mine has a table top model of Primaphone which is somewhat similar in appear to HMV 113 b.

I have tried to find information about Primaphone and found that ( according to Micheal Kinnear) Primaphone was an imported product of Singer Phono and Record agency since 1910.

I also found a publicity notice published in Bombay Chronicle in 1911 reads “PRIMAPHONE TABLE GRANDS have retained their
position of unapproachable Supremacy and ate
acknowledged as Ideal Phones for Ideal Homes.
Equipped with Mechanical ly and Scientifically Per¬
fect Motors* Improved S Style Tonearms, amplify
mg sound chamber, and all metal improved Sound
Boxes ; they maintain tlieir proud position as
Quality Phonee of Quality Tone”. The Chronicle also introduces “ MODEL NO. 10L DOUBLE SPRING Rs, 10
Delivered FREE at any Railway Station
or Port throughout India, Burma and
Ceylon. Illustrated Catalogue on request. Sole Distributors : Bombay Phono General Agency,
520-22-24, Kalbadevi Road, BOMBAY.

I trust Primaphone was a Thorens product fully manufactured abroad and wooden cased in British India. But I am finding it difficult to have further information about Primaphone models and its connection with Thorens.

It will be very valuable to learn about colonial models of Thorens and document them. Members may like to share if they have any information.

Regards
Sheraz

Not every gramophone from the sub-continent is dismissed by collectors. The products of HMV's Calcutta factory are highly regarded by British collectors and their prices reflect this. You will find many threads about them on this forum.

HMV were not alone in in supplying the lucrative market created by the British Raj in India. You have already mentioned Primaphone, and other European companies including Beka had a presence there.

https://bajakhana.com.au/beka-record-re ... ls-part-3/

My reference to a general perception about gramophones from sub-continent as dubious is just a prelude to the main discussion on Primaphone. Thanks for pointing out that HMV of colonial origins have already been discussed here. Certainly, I will seek to scan the archives for reading.

What I am trying to gather from colleagues here is information about Primaphone.

I am not sure if Beka ever marketed any gramophones in the British India. What is known is Beka’s record catalogue.

Thanks for your response.

When I do a Google image search of Primaphone Gramophone OR Gramofon, I see a mix of authentic looking gramophones along with obvious Crap-O-Phones. In the top image you posted, for instance, there are some features that SCREAM Crap-O-Phone, such as the abruptly angled horn elbow which I've never seen fitted to any authentic outside-horn gramophone. In addition, the gradually tapered swan-neck style tonearm (similar to those produced by HMV for the 101, and many other manufacturers) was used after about 1925 following the introduction of electrical recording. Likewise, the sound box (reproducer) looks to be from the later 1920s, or beyond. The horn, itself, looks like a re-painted Victor or HMV horn. I can't tell if the case's finish is authentic to the period, but it seems to be a lacquer type finish, commonly used on Crap-O-Phones.

OrthoFan

Your post is very interesting. I was right when I wrote that a gramophone from the Sub-continent was very likely to be regarded as a crap. There is a rather strong likelihood of such suspicion arising if a gramophone does not fit in the so called colonial models category .

Your note has triggered certain questions in my mind that I would like to raise here. Should one treat something as crapo-phone if one has not experienced seeing something of that type earlier ? What is an ‘authentic type’ and who defines it ?

My knowledge of Primaphone external horn gramophones is limited to my experience of viewing their pictures on the internet so I cannot assume that they predated HMV 101 and by implication the former, if of authentic origin, should not have features similar to HMV.

The model of Primaphone appearing in the picture might be from the post 1920s. After all the production of external horn machines did not stop as late as 1927. HMV was itself manufacturing open horn gramophones till that time as informed by Eric L. Reiss. So the design of Primaphone open horn gramophone and it’s soundbox might or might not have been influenced by HMV swan neck tone arm. We cannot say anything without any evidence.

Since

Sherazhyder wrote: Sat Nov 19, 2022 4:02 pm The model of Primaphone appearing in the picture might be from the post 1920s. After all the production of external horn machines did not stop as late as 1927. HMV was itself manufacturing open horn gramophones till that time as informed by Eric L. Reiss. So the design of Primaphone open horn gramophone and it’s soundbox might or might not have been influenced by HMV swan neck tone arm. We cannot say anything without any evidence.
Since

A Primaphone catalogue featuring later models would be helpful. It would also be great to know how long they were produced.

In any event, it's still one I would not buy unless I saw it in person to see how the components fit together, check the cabinet finish, etc.. Certainly, the horn elbow is typical of the type used on Crap-O-Phones, and if that's not an HMV/Victor horn, then it's a copy. (The HMV/Victor horns have very distinctive features.) As for the swan-neck style tonearms, they are often used on the "replica" gramophones produced today -- https://www.ebay.com/itm/173837887976?h ... olid=10049 -- though I've also seen a few fitted with some very flimsy goose-neck style (reproduction?) tonearms that have a tendency to flop sideways.

As for the late production outside horn HMV models, they are easy to spot. The last ones produced by the Gramophone Co. were similar in design to this circa 1927 HMV Model 32 -- -- which was an extreme departure from the earlier outside horn gramophones produced by the company in that the length of the tone chamber was extended by mounting the tonearm onto the motorboard and connecting it to the horn by a tapered conduit running under the motorboard. The horn extension was necessary for the reproduction of a more solid mid-range and bass response. The Model 32 is fitted with the swan-neck style tonearm and #4 sound box-- also more acceptable for playing electrically recorded records.

Similar models during this period were also produced by the Gramophone Co. for the overseas market, such as the Colonial Model 31A -- https://www.radio-antiks.com/IndexRadio ... MV_31A.htm -- which is a fantastic performer based on a few YouTube videos I've seen over the years -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vObaIcq4ipA

So, while it's true, you can't always tell if something is a Crap-O-Phone solely based on a picture, there are some easy to spot distinguishing features--common to most; not necessarily to all--as has been noted on various sites for over 20 years now -- https://www.thegramophonecollector.com/fake-gramophones To make things even more frustrating, there are also Franken-phones!

OrthoFan

I am sure the brass or copper sheet horn of the replica or fake gramophones is a copy of some original horn which had once existed in the British India. Let me explain how I have made this assertion. It is based on the analogy that the wooden case of Primaphones were produced in India, therefore one may assume that the horns were manufactured locally as well. Later, the horns of fake gramophones simply replicated the existing Indian design.

Now comes the evidence to support this contention.
Here is a publicity poster of an Indian concern circa 1921 and you can see that the design and shape of gramophone horn in the poster has been replicated by the fake gramophones.

We should not be oblivious of the fact that a fake is a copy of something which is original.

I own an example of the machine you show above in the period advertisement. It has NO resemblance whatsoever to anything that we now refer to as Crapophones. The design of Crapophone cabinets and horns appear to be a total flight of fancy. Not a reproduction of anything.

I'm confused - can some-one just simplify the point being made on this thread for me ?

Is it that if someone makes a gramophone which is 'in the style' of a previous make of gramophone then this is not a crapophone ?

Where-as, if someone makes a gramphone which looks nothing like any gramophone you have ever seen before then it is a crapophone ?

Or am I missing the point entirely ?

Thanks for any simple clarification here.

Let me simplify my hypothesis for you:
A: a fake is actually a copy ( not a true one) of the original
B: the original ( Primaphone etc.) might have been lost (or relegated to anonymity) long time back while the fake in some crudely modified form still exists
B: when the original is found, it is likely to be treated as a kind of fake for its apparent similarity to the fake.

I hope I have been able to explain.
Cheers
Sheraz