Jump to content

Dating Lachenal Duet No 8816


Terry McGee

Recommended Posts

As you may have noticed over at Profiling, David Hornett and I have been working on documenting the reed dimensions of Lachenal Duet No 8816. And it's brought to my mind the question: when was it made? Do we know if Duets were incorporated into the usual serial number system? And if not, how would we go about putting a date on it?

 

Assuming for the moment that it is part of the usual numbering system, is Dating Lachenal Anglo Concertinas: A More Accurate Method still the most advanced dating approach or has more info come to light since?

 

Thanks in advance....

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lachenal's used seperate numbering systems for English, Anglo and Duet models ... so that is three lots of figures to figure out. There will be some guestimates available somewhere... I made some rough formulae for these back in the '70's which relate to production starting and finishing dates... but they would prove wildly inacuurate given the rises and falls in popularity, occurrence of Wars,dépressions etc etc.as well as more recent discoveries and histories.

 

If one were to search the Wheatstone ledgers and count the numbers of each keyboard type along with the production figures for each year and then relate these statistics to assumptions concerning Lachenal production one could get into a terrible pickle of complicated reasoning.... better to spend the time playing the things!

Edited by Geoff Wooff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry,

There are a number of problems here. It would be helpful to know more about the duet instrument (Maccann or Crane system? Number of keys? Wood or metal fretwork? Bone of metal buttons? Steel or brass reeds? Number of bellows folds?).

1. Duet No. 8816 is extremely unlikely and would only arise if there was a mistaken stamping of the serial number at the Lachenal factory. Lachenal had three under-5000 series for duets (a series for early Maccanns, a series for early Cranes, and a single post-1910 series that included both Maccanns and Cranes as well as a few New Model Anglos built in the late 1920s and early 1930s.) There was also an under-5000 series for early Lachenal Anglos. The point is that there was no duet series in the over-5000 range. Maybe close inspection will show that the serial number is No. 3816 instead of No. 8816. If so, the year of manufacture would be around 1920 (regardless of whether it is a Maccann or a Crane duet).

2. You cite the William Meredith article, "Dating Lachenal Anglo Concertinas: A More Accurate Method," available here at concertina.net. Since the Anglo and duet serial number series are totally independent, the content of this article has nothing to do with dating a Lachenal duet.

3. However, on the subject of the Meredith article, it would be more appropriate to subtitle it as "A More Inaccurate Method." Meredith uses so-called confirmed serial numbers. What does "confirmed" mean, simply that they are dates found inside, outside or along with vintage Lachenal conccertinas? The serial numbers and corresponding dates given by Meredith (obtained from David Aumann) are:

1 1850 (Note that in 1859, Louis Lachenal was still making for Wheatstone, and independent Lachenal numbering on English concertinas probably did not start until about 1858.)

11653 1860

18197 1868

51480 1895

140375 1908

Lachenal first advertised Anglo concertinas in 1863. There is no evidence that Louis Lachenal ever made Anglo concertinas (he died on 18 December 1861), and certainly the 1850 start date and 11,653 production by 1860 for Lachenal Anglo concertinas are implausible. (if you do not believe me, ask Stephen Chambers, Wes Williams, and Chris Algar.)

The No. 51480 and No. 140375 must refer to repair dates of 1895 and 1908, respectively. I have original purchase dates of 1888 (No. 104739), 1895 (No. 140871), and 1898 (No. 162849)--to cite just a few.

Only the middle serial number--No. 18197 for 1868--seems plausible.

For my database of more than 2,700 Lachenal Anglo concertinas, I have many handwritten dates, almost all of which are repair/retuning dates. Original purchasers seldom ran home, opened their new Lachenal concertina, and inscribed the date. It seems to have happened but very rarely.The first retune/repair seems to have been the most likely first peek inside, when the handwritten date was inscribed. The repair/retune dates are useful only after the manufacture years have been estimated, and then only to serve as a cross-check on the year-of-manufacture estimates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Dowright, thanks heaps for your detailed reply!

 

There are a number of problems here. It would be helpful to know more about the duet instrument (Maccann or Crane system? Number of keys? Wood or metal fretwork? Bone of metal buttons? Steel or brass reeds? Number of bellows folds?).

 

I've asked David if he can answer any of these questions.

 

 

 

1. Duet No. 8816 is extremely unlikely and would only arise if there was a mistaken stamping of the serial number at the Lachenal factory. Lachenal had three under-5000 series for duets (a series for early Maccanns, a series for early Cranes, and a single post-1910 series that included both Maccanns and Cranes as well as a few New Model Anglos built in the late 1920s and early 1930s.) There was also an under-5000 series for early Lachenal Anglos. The point is that there was no duet series in the over-5000 range. Maybe close inspection will show that the serial number is No. 3816 instead of No. 8816. If so, the year of manufacture would be around 1920 (regardless of whether it is a Maccann or a Crane duet).

 

 

We'll certainly entertain that suggestion - another one for David!

 

You cite the William Meredith article, "Dating Lachenal Anglo Concertinas: A More Accurate Method," available here at concertina.net. Since the Anglo and duet serial number series are totally independent, the content of this article has nothing to do with dating a Lachenal duet.

 

Ah, thanks, I wondered if that might be the case. We saw similar things in the flute world - Rudall Carte ran separate books once they started getting into multi-keyed flute systems. It continues to confuse people who think their 1930's Boehm system flute was made in the 1830's. The 8-key flute of the same number was.

 

3. However, on the subject of the Meredith article, it would be more appropriate to subtitle it as "A More Inaccurate Method." Meredith uses so-called confirmed serial numbers. What does "confirmed" mean, simply that they are dates found inside, outside or along with vintage Lachenal conccertinas? The serial numbers and corresponding dates given by Meredith (obtained from David Aumann) are:

1 1850 (Note that in 1859, Louis Lachenal was still making for Wheatstone, and independent Lachenal numbering on English concertinas probably did not start until about 1858.)

11653 1860

18197 1868

51480 1895

140375 1908

Lachenal first advertised Anglo concertinas in 1863. There is no evidence that Louis Lachenal ever made Anglo concertinas (he died on 18 December 1861), and certainly the 1850 start date and 11,653 production by 1860 for Lachenal Anglo concertinas are implausible. (if you do not believe me, ask Stephen Chambers, Wes Williams, and Chris Algar.)

The No. 51480 and No. 140375 must refer to repair dates of 1895 and 1908, respectively. I have original purchase dates of 1888 (No. 104739), 1895 (No. 140871), and 1898 (No. 162849)--to cite just a few.

Only the middle serial number--No. 18197 for 1868--seems plausible.

For my database of more than 2,700 Lachenal Anglo concertinas, I have many handwritten dates, almost all of which are repair/retuning dates. Original purchasers seldom ran home, opened their new Lachenal concertina, and inscribed the date. It seems to have happened but very rarely.The first retune/repair seems to have been the most likely first peek inside, when the handwritten date was inscribed. The repair/retune dates are useful only after the manufacture years have been estimated, and then only to serve as a cross-check on the year-of-manufacture estimates.

Very interesting, Dowright. The splattering of dates and numbers above having turned my mind to mush, I graphed it:

post-11004-0-80851900-1402209904_thumb.gif

(Let me know if I took any of your comments in error in the graph. I've dotted the lines to remind us that, with so few data, we don't really know where they go between the points.).

I can certainly see what you mean, Meredith's dates are generally much later than yours, apart from 1868. About the time needed to get something fixed?

If you or anybody else has more confirmable data, I'd be happy to drag it into a graph. If you've done that already and it's published somewhere, I'd like to know!

Thanks again, and I hope David can progress our knowledge of the instrument further with the benefit of the advice above.

Terry

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

I have sent pictures of the instrument to Terry, along with a closeup of the serial number which is definitely L8816, (wifey agrees with potentially purblind husband). The sites Limited MGs don't allow me to post them, hopefully terry will find a way around this.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, at the size David sent me, they fit easily. I guess his email program did a resize.

 

post-11004-0-62313200-1402213141_thumb.jpeg

 

Can someone tell us what Duet system this is (yes, as you feared, you're dealing with Aussie Angloists)

 

post-11004-0-67039500-1402213143_thumb.jpeg

 

post-11004-0-84239700-1402213144_thumb.jpeg

 

clearly L8816. Also marked elsewhere

 

post-11004-0-14266100-1402213147_thumb.jpeg

 

clearly Lachenal.

 

So, what next?

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got the magnifying glass out again: the bottom loop is a closed one on both numbers on the board, the top loop appears to be open. The number is also stamped on the cloth behind the fret (which is a cloth like calico not paper) where they both appear open on the top and depending how one squints open on the bottom. Wife says 88, but under the glass I think much more likely 3316.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's brighten that reed pan image up and increase contrast....

 

post-11004-0-25709000-1402221779_thumb.jpg

 

That sound you hear offstage is Dowright clapping himself on the back. And well deserved.

 

So, what would that make the year, Dowright?

 

Terry

Edited by Terry McGee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using my data on 458 Lachenal duets--311 Maccann (68%) and 147 Crane (32%)--my preliminary estimate for the year of manufacture is 1913. I can tell that it is post-1912. The Triumph model of the Crane duet was introduced in 1912. The earliest Triumph in my data is No. 3032. (In fact, No. 3322, which is close to 3316, also is a Triumph.) I emphasize that 1913 is very preliminary of No. 3316. Further refinement may show that it was made a bit later.

Incidentally, my data show that No 3316 was sold in Ebay and that the Ebay advertisement indicated that it had brass reeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...