I agree it looks very like a Lachenal, apart from the ends.
The only thing against the Lachenal with replacement ends idea, is the palm rests. Why would you make new ones, rather than re-use the Lachenal ones? In which case they would have had the trade mark.
Or would a Lachenal with the 1958 serial actually have the Lachenal reed trade mark on the rests?
No, a Lachenal with the serial number 1958 would have been very early, and not have had the Lachenal reed trade mark on the rest because trede marks were not introduced until 1875 (and Lachenal's only applied for their reed one in 1878). Also the rests would have been long on an early one, like these, becoming shorter on later models.
But I abandoned that hypothesis as soon as I learned that the serial number was rubber-stamped...
Stephen, Don and David,
Many thanks for your further comments.
I have a Louis Lachenal 20b Anglo #1950 and can confirm that it has stamped, rather than inked serial numbers. It also has wire staple pivots, a softwood action board and lettered buttons. As you concluded, this Baffling Anglo (BA) doesn't look like a Lachenal.
Just to confuse things, the BA pivot post looks like Fig 16 in Wheatstone's 1844 patent (interestingly refered to as a Bridge or Support; Keys are labelled as a Touch or Stop) which subsequently appeared on Lachenals.
I associate Nickolds with 'cut out' reed clamps.......again, this doesn't seem to add up.
If only they could talk as well as sing!!
Edited by nkgibbs, 13 April 2017 - 02:10 AM.