Opened Up My Lachenal: Repairer's Inscription...

[HansiRowe]

"Who is to decide at what point an instrument has received so much repair and rebuilding that it no longer deserves to bear its original makers name".

 

Not really sure Rod how you came to this… there seems to be some misunderstanding. I don't think anyone has mentioned anything in this thread about the original maker's name being removed because it doesn't deserve to be there, or otherwise. We've been discussing quite the opposite really, we've mainly been discussing how to make the original maker's name more permanent… as on an engraved metal plaque!

 

This discussion has only been concerned with how to store data from repairers and owners without cluttering up the inside of the concertina with labels, pieces of paper, and hand-scrawled signatures and dates, etc. as the instrument goes its merry way through the years, passing from owner to new owner and being serviced and repaired from time to time. Storage of its history is what this thread is all about. It was started by me after I discovered the repairer's signature and address in my Lachenal.

 

At no point was the removal of a maker's name discussed or implied. It would be an absolute crime should a maker's name ever be removed. For most people, I'm absolutely sure, the maker's name is one of the most important things about their instrument, along with its sound of course, and I can't imagine anyone ever considering removing it… and such a crime certainly hasn't been the topic here…

[Rod]

You invited other views on the subject, but obviously not mine.

[MatthewVanitas]

For technology that contains a lot of info, but isn't subject to decay, or dependent on an outside database, what about simple QR codes?

 

 

I used a free QR-generator online to make one saying "Morse Beaumont Hayden Duet, made for Matthew Vanitas, Wash. DC 2013.

 

As long as it's clearly printed/engraved (I don't think you could just directly ink it onto porous wood), the data won't decay, and afaik the QR technology is primitive enough that reading a 2013 QR in the year 2103 won't be unduly hard barring massive technological collapse (which means we have far larger problems in life).

 

Not sure what the best way to print it is, though there's probably some small biz out there online that for a few bucks will mail you a QR code printed onto some durable plastic, and you could just glue it inside the frame. For real, I might actually to just that for when I send my Beaumont back to BB for it's final warranty checkup in December, ask them to just glue it inside while they're mucking around in there.

[Terry McGee]

Who is to decide at what point an instrument has received so much repair and rebuilding that it no longer deserves to bear its original makers name.

 

It's certainly an interesting question, and I have an example. I bought a refurbished Lachenal anglo from Neville Crabb in London in 1974. On the outside, it bears the Crabb label where once the Lachenal label would have been. Inside the RH end, in pencil we find: Made by G Jones. A second entry says Renovated By followed by the H. Crabb & Son inked stamp. The LH end has no writing, just the Crabb stamp.

 

It doesn't appear to me that extensive work was done on it, so "renovated" seems like an apt description. In that light, replacing the Lachenal label with the Crabb label seems to be overstated. I still think of it as a Lachenal, nicely refurbished by Crabb.

 

This has been discussed before, and does it really matter ? What it sounds like and how well it is played is ultimately all that should really matter. I fear that I have said all this before.

 

I guess "of historical interest" is not necessarily of interest to all. Like HansiRowe, I really appreciate knowing what has happened before. But keeping such records disadvantages nobody, so we can probably cater to all tastes.

 

Terry

[Mike Franch]

"Who is to decide at what point an instrument has received so much repair and rebuilding that it no longer deserves to bear its original makers name".

 

Not really sure Rod how you came to this… there seems to be some misunderstanding. I don't think anyone has mentioned anything in this thread about the original maker's name being removed because it doesn't deserve to be there, or otherwise. We've been discussing quite the opposite really, we've mainly been discussing how to make the original maker's name more permanent… as on an engraved metal plaque!

I wonder if Rod is being misunderstood here. I think he was asking a philosophic question: does there come a point when an instrument isn't what it started out to be? Kind of like the old joke: "I have my grandfather's ax. Of course, it's on its third handle and its second head, but it's still my grandfather's ax." [Or, if you prefer, 'axe.']

[HansiRowe]

"I wonder if Rod is being misunderstood here."

 

Yes, I sent Rod a PM straight after, apologising for any misunderstanding… because the thread has only concerned the question of how to store data in the least obtrusive way, to help preserve this beautiful instrument's history and, more importantly, protect its origins & identity with sensitivity and integrity, Rod's comments about the actual intentional removal of data and loss of identity, and "what it sounds like and how well it is played is ultimately all that should really matter", seemed… well, quite the opposite and almost confrontational to the theme of this topic (to me at least) and I just couldn't see anything positive in it… my fault entirely and I hope that Rod continues to post here about this potential problem and how it can 'possibly' be overcome, so that future generations can enjoy, not just the playability and musical sounds, but also the full historical side to these wonderful and delicate instruments...

 

I do like the "axe" joke Mike!

 

Cheers, John

Edited September 25, 2014 by HansiRowe

[alex_holden]

A possibly related point that just occurred to me is security tagging. How best to uniquely mark instruments so that a dealer when asked to consider buying an instrument can quickly determine if it is stolen goods. Are the existing maker's name and serial number (typically stamped into the wood in several places) sufficient?

[Rod]

Mike Franch. Thank you Mike. Your interpretation of the first of my two postings yesterday was spot on. I sometimes wonder why I bother. !

[HansiRowe]

"A possibly related point that just occurred to me is security tagging."

 

Another good point Alex… although I'm beginning to have nightmare visions of security tags, micro-chips, QR codes, invisible ink, X-Ray, finger-print recognition, secret code, morse code… aaagh.. oh dear, the poor concertina! Maybe we're going too far with this… what started as a simple, passing comment about a repairer's pencilled signature covering a whole end, might be turning into a bit of a monster...

[MatthewVanitas]

I don't think QR codes are particularly invasive, since they're simply a condensation of text into blocks. They're not magnetized, not RFID, traceable, etc, but are simply just readable patterns of black/white.

 

I'm genuinely considering now getting a QR code tag made with the basic maker/date/model/for-whom, and asking Button Box to affix/glue/whatever it to the inside of the frame during my warranty servicing. The main place I found isn't cheap-cheap (like $20 for a custom tag) but they offer all kinds of materials, including titanium. If I could get a small tag, smaller than a postage stamp, that'd be pretty simple and unintrusive on the inside.

 

Edited September 26, 2014 by MatthewVanitas

[HansiRowe]

That sounds pretty good Matthew… something small like that would be perfect. A simple enough operation for anyone to install… I guess the downside to all this is that it could be easily removed and a replacement with false information installed in its place, although, having just said that there wouldn't be much to gain for a dishonest person going to all that trouble… removing records of previous owners and repairs and replacing it with 'One Careful Owner' will gain nothing!

 

It's low cost, unobtrusive, data can be retrieved easily… I can't see why something like this wouldn't come supplied as standard on new instruments in the very near future. It would be equally beneficial for those owners with an older concertina who would like to preserve its history without cluttering up the inside… simply enter all known information about your instrument and keep it updated each time it's serviced, repaired, or passed on to a new owner… simple!

 

Cheers, John

[Theo]

Or you could just write the same information with a pencil, zero cost, and anyone can read it with just a standard human eyeball.

[Mike Franch]

Or you could just write the same information with a pencil, zero cost, and anyone can read it with just a standard human eyeball.

 

Best idea yet, Theo. Maybe a second best would be for folks to use a simple rubber stamp with name, place, and pencil in a date. Kind of like how some Japanese block prints carry the seals of the various owners.

[HansiRowe]

Thanks Theo & Mike… yes, most certainly a pencil is the easiest, in fact a pencil takes us right back to the start of this thread… the problem though is if each repairer or owner writes right across the board, as with my Lachenal, it will soon become cluttered with names and dates… hence the need for something that could hold a lot of information but use the least amount of space…

 

As you know, probably most old concertinas have sat for a long period of non-use, after it lost popularity when the accordion and saxophone took over at dance halls, etc. and so they may possibly have had a few more entries had they been used constantly and needed repairs over the years, or maybe they would have changed owners. All of this is, of course, pure presumption (and we all know what that can lead to!) and, as yet, nobody has mentioned that they actually do own a concertina that has its insides cluttered up with names, addresses, and dates from previous owners & repairers… so all of this is a bit 'tongue-in-cheek' and 'what if'… It's just a passing thought that, if concertinas continue to grow in popularity again and a modern concertina is played continuously and passed on to future generations, there may possibly be a need for a better way to store its history, other than using a pencil or sticky label… something more permanent maybe and professional looking. And once again, it does need to be said that this is something for those owners who feel a need to preserve their concertina's history, or in fact, want to know a concertina's history before buying…

 

Okay, now this could be the start of a new thread… it's sort of related to this topic so I'll leave it here. There's no right or wrong answer and is just a humorous questionnaire… here's the title….

 

ARE YOU A SILLY ROMANTIC or ARE YOU A SENSIBLE REALIST?

 

Imagine this scenario… you enter a shop with the intention of buying a concertina. After explaining in detail the sort of concertina that you're looking for, you are offered the choice of two, both at the same price… the first is in excellent condition for its age, its stamped serial number shows a manufacturing date of circa 1880, it's been serviced and obviously well looked after, there's no damage at all and it's a beauty. Unfortunately, the owner knows nothing at all about it other than the well known make and the service that they just carried out. It plays well and has a nice tone.

 

The second of the two is in poor to fair condition for its age, also stamped with a serial number showing a manufacturing date of circa 1880 and is also the same well known make, it's been serviced but has taken some hard knocks here and there, it has a a few cracks in the ends, some chips and scratches, the palm rests are well worn, the buttons are discoloured and one is missing, and the straps need replacing. It's shabby looking but has a certain ugly beauty. Evidence was found inside that it belonged at one time to a famous player, found its way to Ireland from London, was carried into the trenches during the 1st World War, was sold on and used in the dance halls in Scotland, entertained the miners in a Welsh coal mine, and was later used as a prop in a painting by Walter Sickert. It plays well and has a nice tone.

 

Would you choose the first or the second… be honest now?!

Edited September 27, 2014 by HansiRowe

[alex_holden]

I'd go for the battered one with the interesting history.

[Terry McGee]

Wow, you can't afford to sit around here for long, they change the topic while your back is turned! Harking back to our earlier discussion, I did check with my musical instrument conservator friend (Bronwen Griffiths, ex of the Powerhouse Museum in Sydney), and she just came back to me with these observations:

 

The question about how to write things on objects comes up a lot in Museums, because in almost every case, an object / catalogue number needs to be written on for identification. Everything is tagged too, because a tag is easier to see, but tags can get lost or mixed up. What you use to write the number depends on the materials of the object.

Have a look at

http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/pdf/preservation/A_Simple_Guide_to_Lablling_Museum_Objects.pdf

http://www.tepapa.govt.nz/SiteCollectionDocuments/NationalServices/HowWeHelp/Marking%20objects%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

Lead pencil is great in that it's stable unless it gets rubbed, cheap and generally won't damage the object. That's used on bare wood or on paper items.

If pen is required, a removable barrier layer (just big enough to write on) like paraloid B72 (polymethyl methacrylate resin which can be mixed with acetone or ethanol or similar) goes first, then when it's dry, number with either a light stable permanent black or white pen. The PDF has got brand names of some and we've also used India ink pens. A barrier layer goes over the top once that's dry to protect the writing. Museums use paraloid B67 because it dissolves in petroleum spirits, so won't dissolve the first later. Sometimes when you're labelling over a varnish layer, you might not want to use any of the above solvents, so you might need to change the barrier layer. If water's OK, there's a tissue paper method in the Powerhouse PDF that you should read.

Pens with a soft tip (eg. Fibre tipped) rather than ball point are preferable, so you don't dig into the wood, same with pencils - softer is better.

I know you can get small quantities of paraloid from http://www.preservationaustralia.com.au .

Obviously pen on the object directly would be more useful if you were trying to prevent theft, being harder (or impossible) to remove, but that's a pain if you want to take it off again.

I've noticed repair names and dates inside all sorts of instruments and even more in instrument related items such as organ blowers (maybe people feel more free to write on things they think are more "disposable"). You're right, it is nice to be able to see some kind of record from the repairers as well as the makers.

....I also like getting to read the newspaper pieces you sometimes find inside things.

Hope that helps. If you're ever trying to write on plastics, things get trickier, but hopefully you can ignore them.

So, pencil seems fine (which is born out by general experience such as HansiRowe's instrument above). Choose a hardness that doesn't dig in too much. Pen is OK (black is usual, but white is OK if needed to stand out on a dark surface), with fine fibre-tips preferred to ball-points on wood to avoid digging in. Given the action board wood is usually a pretty fine and firm hardwood, digging in probably isn't a problem, since we shouldn't need to remove the markings. (A museum might decide to de-accession an item and therefore have to remove its accession number.)

I did wonder if pencil markings on those parts of the action board that are exposed to the vibrating air inside a reed cell might degrade faster than those that are not. I'd be interested if any repairers have noted such degradation. The first few letters of "Tuned" in HansiRowe's instrument are close to the hole and could have been blurred because of that. But the letters in the middle of "Repaired" are probably closer and seem OK.

Terry

[HansiRowe]

Me too Alex… I'm proud to admit that I'm a silly romantic!

 

Thanks for that thorough explanation and insider advice about marking valued objects Terry… very interesting indeed. There seems to be two points of interest here… the first concerning the best way to directly mark something valued, as with pencil, ink, etc. and secondly, how to leave information without too much space being taken up… we just need to combine the two! Sorry about throwing in the questionnaire… (which you didn't answer Terry!) I think it's still relevant to the original theme, inasmuch as the silly romantics amongst us might be the ones applying the, as yet still undecided, best method to store history data! This wouldn't always be the case, of course, as a sensible realist might want to quite correctly protect an investment with a similar device… please remember that this theme is not to make accusations or decide which type of person is better than the other… I think that most people are a bit of both, I just thought that it might interesting and revealing to hear what other members would do if they found themselves in the above scenario… just the usual heart v brain situation…

[Geoff Wooff]

I recall the comments made by an experienced profesional player who had often been asked to help select a good concertina from those offered by a dealer. He said he would always start with those that looked ' well used' as that was usually a sign of a good instrument.... the Pristine originals may well have also been good instruments but usually needed a longer ' Wake Up' or 'Playing-in' period.

 

Though I have had a 'looks like it was never played' concertina that was totally original and served me well for ten hard years of session playing, and it looked as good at the end of that as it was when I started... perhaps it sounded better... and I made a small profit when selling it on.

 

One of my current concertinas is very much in the ' well used' category , patched, glued back together, has loads of repairer's scribbles inside... and it SINGS!

Edited September 27, 2014 by Geoff Wooff