The very late outside horn Victors had the slot on the top of the elbow, rather than the bottom. This will make the decal of a late horn show up in the wrong place if used with an earlier elbow. See the Victor Data Book for an illustration of the late elbow.
On Jul 11, 2007, at 2:54 PM, john robles wrote: > Now there was something I can understand. Hmm...I noted that the > outside of my horn while pathcy looking, differes from the inside > which looks very uniform and beautiful. Maybe I am being > hypercritical. I could see that if this horn were properly reglued > and refinished well, it would be a nice horn to look at. > Hmm...you've given me something to think about. Maybe I should > unpack it again and take another look.... > I do think at some point the coupler was taken off, as the way > the horn goes on the machine, the decal is on the underside. > John > > Walt <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 . > > Gotta get to work....Broken motors await me.... > > Walt > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:phono-l- > [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 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:phono-l- > [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:phono-l- >> [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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
