John, The picture you showed of the other (Marty's) horn is just another variation. Moments ago a guy brought me, wouldn't you know it, an oak #30 horn. And while it has a different character than yours (they all do) it is quite similar. But I think what is distracting or at least exacerbating the randomness of yours has to do with the fact (it least it appears so) that someone stripped the horn and did not bother to apply shellac. By lightening the overall color and removing the glow that the original amber shellac would have provided, the rugged nature of the assembly is more obvious (even though it is there hiding underneath all the time). My criticism was of the very obvious amateurish attempt of someone to repair the (lengthwise) separations. These were not properly reattached and it is why I called them "gaping wounds".
WOOD HORN CONSTRUCTION STUFF: The reason that previously I mentioned the #30 being 2-ply versus the 3-ply of the spear-tip is significant. Andy had mentioned that he thought there might be different manufacturing standards that are the reason for differences between wooden horn types, but I rather think that the difference is not one of varying standards, but of the manufacturing process itself for a given type. This will make sense briefly. The total thickness of the #30 2-ply is about 1/16" whereas the 3-ply spear-tip is about 3/32". But the thickness of the horn is not the only factor affecting strength. Because only 2 layers of thin veneer are used in the #30, the primary strength of the horn body is achieved partly from the exponential shape but mostly by applying the oak sections in a cross-grain fashion. That is, no two side-by-side sections have the same grain lines and neither should there be grain running in the same direction when the inside and outside pieces are ultimately glued together. (Think of it something like modern plywood or perhaps the OSB concept.) Part of what you are seeing, especially in the pictures that show the decal "side", is the narrowing of the horn which necessarily requires the use of increasingly narrower sections of tapered veneer. This is what creates the "patched" look that you mention. It is present all over the #30 body but is always more pronounced as you approach the narrow taper. Here is the meat of the differences between the two types. It is difficult to think of veneer as a structural component because we are so used to seeing it used in a purely decorative sense on top of a substrate material. Nevertheless, the #30 horn is a fine example of using veneer in this way. And, with that in mind, it is easy to see why the thin tapered sections are more numerous as the horn narrows. A conical horn is easy to make out of veneer, but something resembling an exponential curve like the #30 is, well, exponentially more difficult. And there is somewhat of a practical limit as to how selective you can be when choosing and cutting veneer that must be simultaneously decorative AND structural. To create a #30 horn that has the more stave like appearance is certainly possible given a wealth of veneer to choose from, but it is exceedingly time consuming. I believe that Don Gfell's #30 equivalent horns have a tendency to look more uniform than the Victor horns because he does take the time to select his grains. The pictures you sent of Marty's horn are proof that Victor also did the same thing. But you really need to study the grain lines to understand the difficulty in creating the horn. Something to note, even though you see what appears to be "patched" sections, is that if you ignore the grain patterns, you will see some uniformity in the shapes and locations of the pieces themselves. The spear-tip is not only a significantly stronger, larger and heavier horn, but because it uses 3-ply construction, it truly has a substrate (in this case, the middle) layer which is built upon on both surfaces. In the case of the #30 2-ply horn each and every piece of veneer represents one decorative surface of the horn. But with the 3-ply scheme of the spear-tip, the middle layer needs ONLY to be strong (and not pretty) because it's particular grain alignment will never been seen. These center substrate layers of the spear-tip look very random or "patched", to use John's term. This process allows the inner and outer decorative surfaces of the spear-tip to, more or less, be chosen for appearance sake alone. If you put several #30 horns next to several spear you will definitely observe that the overall flow of the grain of the spear-tip veneer tends to flow with the overall length of the horn whereas the flow of grain on the #30s will vary quite a bit. As a spear-tip narrows toward the throat you will only see (unless it has been repaired) continuous strips of veneer that run from the bell end to the bayonet. Cross graining of the veneer pieces is not necessary on the outer layer of the spear-tip because it has a middle substrate layer upon which the inner and outer layers rest. This is the primary reason that a spear-tip horn features veneer that is often considered much prettier than the #30s. (Although, I personally enjoy the doubly difficult engineering/art feat involved to make the #30.) As you stare at the #30 you have, pretend you have the luxury of picking and choosing long pieces of veneer with straighter flowing grains that run exclusively front to back. You would start with a nice inside surface chosen for its appearance only, then apply the substrate (core) layer in cross grain fashion with concern only for cross sectional strength, and then you could pick and choose the outer layer for pure beauty since the strength of the horn is already fundamentally established. If you could apply just one beautiful layer over what you see on the #30 you have, almost all of the "patched look" that you observe would be hidden. And that is essentially what is (visually) accomplished with the spear-tip construction. But, let's leave that 3rd layer on the spear-tips and not "retrofit" or "upgrade" any of the others <wink>. Gotta get to work....Broken motors await me.... Walt -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of john robles Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:54 AM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: RE: [Phono-L] Victor Smooth oak horn question - sort of urgent Wow, it seems so...patched together! I always thought that the smooth horn was made of staves like a barrel, so to speak. There is another oak horn on ebay that doesn't seem to have the triangular portions. Mine doesn't have them all the way around, just most of the way. The inside of the horn looks almost perfect. J Walt <[email protected]> wrote: The seams (based on your pictures) are the most significant areas that need repair. The triangular sections are correct. Remember that the #30 is a 2-ply horn, not 3 like the spear tip. W -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of john robles Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:15 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victor Smooth oak horn question - sort of urgent QUestion - maybe I have been wrong about this - is it only the seams that need repair? I thought that all those long, triangular pieces on the horn were patch jobs. Maybe I am wrong. I saw another horn tonight that has those too....Can anyone clarify? THanks John [email protected] wrote: That's one opinion of course. You did get the horn at a good price ($695) which is well below what better condition horns are going for. Even if you spend $400 to get it repaired properly, which you will need to do, you still will not have too bad of a deal. His description is incorrect and misleading, as Walt says, but he does say in addition "Also a few seams reglued" which is correct. Almost all wood horns on eBay have defects or damage of some kind, and they seem to be going for well over $1,000 anyway. Find out what an expert will charge to do the repairs before sending it back. That's my opinion. ----- Original Message ----- From: "john robles" To: "Antique Phonograph List" Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 6:05 PM Subject: RE: [Phono-L] Victor Smooth oak horn question - sort of urgent > Good advice, Walt, and I think I will follow it! > John > > Walt wrote: > Hi John, > > I looked at your set of pictures and compared them to those on the eBay > listing along with the description. He describes it in the eBay auction as > having "TINY TINY REPAIRS WHICH ARE NOT EASILY VISIBLE WITH THE NAKED EYE" > (emphasis: his). But your pictures tell a different and true story. If he > had left the text as saying merely "tiny tiny repairs" I don't think you > could really complain because subjective language is a tough thing to nail > down, but he states definitively that the repairs "are not easily visible > with the naked eye". Maybe he is going blind - I don't know. But, my eyes > are pretty naked and those gaping wounds in that horn are egregious. If he > would just have dropped the word "NOT" in the sentence, it would be > accurate. > > That horn needs at least $400 in repairs and that assumes that the joints > that were botched would easily come apart (and I suspect from the pictures > that they might just jump at the opportunity). I'd pay about $300 to $350 > for a horn that was damaged like that only because I can do the repairs > correctly and could probably turn it around for a decent profit. > > If I were in your boat, I think I would send it back...Even if the guy > gave > you a $300 refund or something on that order, you would still need to have > it repaired the right way. > > Walt > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On > Behalf Of john robles > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 4:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Phono-L] Victor Smooth oak horn question - sort of urgent > > Hi All > This is such a great forum, and there's so much knowledge here...that > Edison Wrench discussion was really lively! > This time it is simpler. I bought an oak horn from eBay, from a guy with > 100% positive feedback, largely on phonograph items, and a 7 day return > policy which I am afraid I may have to use. I received the horn today, but > in spite of his saying there were a few minor repairs virtually invisible > to > the eye, it seems to me there are many major repairs totally visibile. > Problem is they all look old and the color match is good. But the patterns > of the angles at which the wood comes together don't make sense to me. > Check > the pics at this link and tell me if I should send it back right away!! > http://s197.photobucket.com/albums/aa39/john9ten/Oak%20Horn/ > Thanks > John > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/893 - Release Date: 7/9/2007 > 5:22 PM > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/893 - Release Date: 7/9/2007 5:22 PM _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.2/894 - Release Date: 7/10/2007 5:44 PM
