Early Lachenal Concertinas

[malcolm clapp]

Thanks for posting the photos. I can see nothing that would indicate that the bellows is anything but original Lachenal.

Certainly not at all similar to 1940s Crabb style, and nothing particular to indicate Jones.

Oh well, I did say my idea was "pure conjecture".

[drekth]

Hi Malcolm,

 

Your posts are more than welcome ....as are they all.

 

Thank you again.

 

I note you live in NSW. One of my sons lives not far from you in Newcastle, NSW.

 

regards

[Stephen Chambers]

I am of the opinion that the Bellows and the Reed Pans have always been together if only that the pencilled numbers in both are the same, but....I have attached a couple of photos for your perusal. The Bellows are in very good condition as are the reed pans (which have the Louis Lachenal reed identification circular labels) and I doubt that they are replacements.

 

In fact it's interesting that this particular instrument has 5-fold bellows, because this model normally has only 4-fold (and even the 28-key Anglo, in my photos, has only 5-fold) for reasons of economy, whilst the woodscrews, and many other features of the construction, were employed to the same end.

 

The mahogany-ended model was the cheapest 48-key English concertina in Lachenal's line, being introduced as "1. The PEOPLE'S CONCERTINA*, Mahogany, in neatly covered Box" on their 1862 Exhibition Price List and selling for only 2 guineas, whilst the cheapest model with 5-fold bellows was "3. Rosewood, best finish, Five-fold Bellows, best finished, Mahogany box" for 4 guineas.

 

So your instrument is a bit of an anomally in various ways, but I wonder if it might not have been something of a "trial piece" in the development of the 2-guinea People's Concertina, or part of a "special order" batch made to be sold by someone else?

 

Does it have a case?

 

[* I've been told, by the Lachenal family, that Elizabeth Lachenal (who was by then running the firm, after Louis' premature death in 1861) had Socialist leanings!]

[Stephen Chambers]

... no evidence of anything but wood screws which in this case have parallel shanks and tapered woodscrew threads unlike the sample photo by [stephen Chambers]

 

But, to my eyes, they appear to be the same un-tapered screws that I illustrated, even having the same number of turns (17) to the thread...

 

I'm convinced they are 100% original.

[drekth]

 

I am of the opinion that the Bellows and the Reed Pans have always been together if only that the pencilled numbers in both are the same, but....I have attached a couple of photos for your perusal. The Bellows are in very good condition as are the reed pans (which have the Louis Lachenal reed identification circular labels) and I doubt that they are replacements.

 

In fact it's interesting that this particular instrument has 5-fold bellows, because this model normally has only 4-fold (and even the 28-key Anglo, in my photos, has only 5-fold) for reasons of economy, whilst the woodscrews, and many other features of the construction, were employed to the same end.

 

The mahogany-ended model was the cheapest 48-key English concertina in Lachenal's line, being introduced as "1. The PEOPLE'S CONCERTINA*, Mahogany, in neatly covered Box" on their 1862 Exhibition Price List and selling for only 2 guineas, whilst the cheapest model with 5-fold bellows was "3. Rosewood, best finish, Five-fold Bellows, best finished, Mahogany box" for 4 guineas.

 

So your instrument is a bit of an anomally in various ways, but I wonder if it might not have been something of a "trial piece" in the development of the 2-guinea People's Concertina, or part of a "special order" batch made to be sold by someone else?

 

Does it have a case?

 

[* I've been told, by the Lachenal family, that Elizabeth Lachenal (who was by then running the firm, after Louis' premature death in 1861) had Socialist leanings!]

 

Hello Stephen,

This particular instrument would appear to be the anomaly, as you state. I bought it together with another 48 Button English Lach at a local auction. I haven't looked closely at the other one until now, but there is a stamped maker's number in the bellows (4 fold) and reed pans (circa 43000) but none in the action boxes or ends. Side by side these two instrument's look almost identical. On comparing the lever arms in the action boxes, the levers are again 'almost' identical, but not quite. They have the same action of course, but have been made on a different jig with just slightly... more shape on one than the other.....I will remove one from each and photograph them side by side.

The case that came with it is a standard hex mahogany with a simple keyed lock and probably will not help us much in determining anything.

Incidentally, I saw your article re the Oldham Concertina Band, of which I have a photo (circa 1930) taken on the steps of the Salvation Army Citadel in Union St, Oldham. Demolished circa early 1970s I think. The facade was retained and incorporated into the office block which replaced it. My full name is Derek Thorpe (Drekth for short) and I was born in Oldham and a L.A. Building Inspector of that area at that time. All the players appear to be in S.A. Uniforms. Photo attached but I can't remember where it originated.

I note your comments re Lachenal's 'The People's Concertina' and the Socialist leanings of some of the Lachenal family of the time.........quite an association in the early days of Socialism I think and very interesting.

Thanks again,

[drekth]

Hi,

I have attached the comparison photos of the lever arms from the original '37' Lach and the '43000' Lach referred to previously.

 

The top lever arm is from the '43000' instrument and the lower one from the '37'. It is obvious that the top one is much sturdier than the lower one, both in the depth of the lever and also very slightly thinner. The differing shape is emphasised by close comparison.

 

Perhaps the differences are simply brought about by development of the instrument over the years of manufacture.through

 

Another obvious difference is that the '37' has three screws securing the end to the padboard, whereas the '43000' has only two, with a supporting wooden 'block' in the triangular location of a third screw.

 

Do these indicate anything?