Jeffries

[Donvon]

• 
• Members
• •  
  •  

 

I was recently asked to take a look at a Jeffries concertina acquired from an estate. All I know about Jeffries is what I read on the web so I would be interested in comments on the instrument.

 

I have attached some photos.

 

It is not playable – many of the pads are detached from the levers. One of the few notes that sounds - left-hand, middle row, second down from the top (it would be an E on my C/G instrument) - sounds a C#.

 

Compared to pictures of other Jeffries instruments, it seems unusual to me to see the “piercings” on all six sides of the action pans.  Is that common?

 

It is difficult to tell if the bellows is leaky since the whole instrument is leaky but I do not see any obvious holes or damage.

 

I could not easily remove the action pan to look at the reeds and, since it is not my instrument, did want to risk breaking something by levering it out. I did take the metal action cover off of one side of the instrument. The action is rivet pivots although one had been replaced at some point in its life with a slotted pivot. Levers and springs appear to be functional.

 

What advice should I give to the owner (a musician but not a concertina player)?

 

[Alan Day]

The arm in the middle of the picture looks like a Lachenal one.(the rest look OK) I have never seen a Jeffries with action plate cut away . The C Jeffries stamp is identical to mine and in the same position.

Al

[alex_holden]

It looks like it's in need of a full restoration, but it's a desirable maker so could be quite valuable once restored.

 

The bellows gold tooling stamp is interesting - it isn't normally that finely detailed.

[Alex West]

Donvon

There's a few features that suggest that it might not be a Jeffries.  The stamp looks genuine at first glance, but the fretwork pattern doesn't look like a Jeffries 30 key pattern to me, including but not limited to the scroll-work and the third screw into the bushing board.  The piercing to the side frames isn't completely unusual for a Jeffries (or similar Victorian) but it's by no means common.

 

But the action; Apart from the one obvious Lachenal lever and post, the rest of the action looks to be either Jones or Shakespeare - probably Shakespeare and definitely not Jeffries.  I couldn't make out the bellows gilding to confirm Alex H's comments, but do you have a clear picture of the papers?  And what about the reeds - what do they look like?

 

Your single note identification could indicate that it's a Bb/F instrument (or B/F# in old pitch). but that's a guess without seeing and hearing the other reeds

 

None of the above means it's a bad instrument and won't play well once renovated, just that it isn't worth what a 30 key C/G Jeffries would be, restored or in existing condition.

 

Alex West

[malcolm clapp]

1 hour ago, Alex West said:

Your single note identification could indicate that it's a Bb/F instrument (or B/F# in old pitch). but that's a guess without seeing and hearing the other reeds

Are you sure, Alex? My calculation would favour A/E as more likely.

That said, I note that the concertina is housed in a Salvation Army case; a fair number of SA players played Ab/Eb instruments (as the SA recommended) and even published a tutor for that pitch. So possibly the push reed that "sounds a C#" could be closer to C than C#, making it an Ab/Eb instrument.

Just supposition. Who knows how the ravages of time may have effected this poor thing, and a sample of just one reed cannot be accepted as conclusive imho.

[Alex West]

32 minutes ago, malcolm clapp said:

Are you sure, Alex? My calculation would favour A/E as more likely.

 

Malcolm

 

I just did a quick mental sum and I made a mistake.  So yes, you're correct.  However, if the instrument is in old pitch, A=455Hz, then Bb might well sound as A on a tuner calibrated to A =440Hz pitch? (or close to it).

 

I didn't clock the SA case so missed that possible connection but ravages of time, one swallow etc.  Who knows?  I have come across an instrument recently where the entire bottom row was shifted one button along so the reed that you might expect was a B, was in fact a G ...

 

Alex West

[Donvon]

Alex,

 

Thank you for your comments. Here is a better picture of the papers on the bellows.

 

Donvon

[Alex West]

Thanks Donvon.  These aren't Jeffries papers

 

Alex West

[Donvon]

Alex,

 

The papers, in fact, look identical to those on the Crabb Anglo here: https://theboxplace.co.uk/product/crabb-30-key-anglo/

 

The gold imprint on the ends of the bellows are also almost identical to those on the Crabb.

 

Thanks for your expertise.

 

If I took a picture of the other side of the action, do you think you could positively identify it as Crabb rather than Jeffries?

 

Don

[Alex West]

Donvon

 

Yes, the papers are indicative of a Crabb.  I haven't done the detailed comparison myself.  A Crabb would normally have a number written or impressed into it in one or more of a number of places, unless it was an instrument made by Crabb for one of the other maker/re-sellers, so look on the inside of the bellows frames, the underside of the action boxes and the reed pans for a number.

 

I have to say that neither the fretwork nor the action looks like a Crabb to me.  That's why I suggested Shakespeare or Jones.  But others with more experience may care to chip in

 

Alex West

[Clive Thorne]

I have a 1890s ?  36 key Crabb/Jeffries and the fretwork is pretty much as per photos above, apart from the three screws holding the bushing plate on.  The bellows on mine are Rosalie Dipper from about 35 years ago, but the papers on it are very much like the ones in the above photos.  Lever pivots are quite different however.

 

[alex_holden]

Weren't the early Jeffries instruments actually made by Crabb and/or Jones?

[Stephen Chambers]

10 hours ago, alex_holden said:

Weren't the early Jeffries instruments actually made by Crabb and/or Jones?

 

The earliest Jeffries Anglos were made by George Jones, and they look like old-style metal-ended Jones's.

 

Then they started getting them from John Crabb, and it was his style that became ever-after associated with Jeffries.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 28 by Stephen Chambers
Typo

[Stephen Chambers]

16 hours ago, Clive Thorne said:

I have a 1890s ?  36 key Crabb/Jeffries and the fretwork is pretty much as per photos above, apart from the three screws holding the bushing plate on.  The bellows on mine are Rosalie Dipper from about 35 years ago, but the papers on it are very much like the ones in the above photos.  Lever pivots are quite different however.

 

 

The fretwork looks a good bit fancier to me, whilst I've only seen a third screw like that on a fancy Tom Shakespeare, whilst Shakespeare seems to have used whatever parts he could get at the time, and sometimes used levers with bell-shaped pivot posts.

[Stephen Chambers]

18 hours ago, Donvon said:

The papers, in fact, look identical to those on the Crabb Anglo here: https://theboxplace.co.uk/product/crabb-30-key-anglo/

 

The gold imprint on the ends of the bellows are also almost identical to those on the Crabb.

 

The papers, and the general style of the gold-tooling design, were used by several makers, but that's a new bellows anyway - so no clue as to who made it.

 

But I'd very-much associate that exact form of gold-tooling with Tom Shakespeare...

[Alex West]

18 hours ago, Donvon said:

The papers, in fact, look identical to those on the Crabb Anglo here: https://theboxplace.co.uk/product/crabb-30-key-anglo/

If you look carefully, you'll see that there are some subtle differences between the papers on your friend's instrument and the ones on Theo's site. 

 

Off topic slightly but I love the spelling corrected text which Theo uses to describe how wonderful his concertina is:- "Any angle paler would be delighted with this instrument."

 

Alex West

[Geoffrey Crabb]

I am somewhat hesitant to suggest the instrument was made in the Crabb workshop. Adding to Stephen’s, valid comments, the differences present i.e.

   The uprights (pivot posts) are not Crabb.

   The crimped edge to the tops is wider than that of pre 1900 Crabbs. See note.

   The fretwork, whilst to the established Crabb design, if of finer cut could point to Shakespeare, or, of outside specialist ‘pierces’ of the time, who were often used by various makers, even Crabbs.

    I have never come across the piercing of the wooden instrument endbox sides on a Crabb instrument. This has to be done before the endbox is assembled and may be possible for a small maker with minimal orders. Looks good initially but weakens the integrity of the endbox and becomes shabby eventually.

   The printed bellows papers were readily available from some printers.

    Three screws to secure the bushing woods on a 30 key was not a Crabb feature.

 

Note. The narrower crimp on early Crabb Anglos tops could not allow the endbolt heads to lie flat. To allow this, an area of the raised portion, adjacent to the end bolt hole, was machined flat. Removing metal could cause weak spots at these points, so, solder was built up on the underside of the tops, carefully, to not encroach on the edges of the endbox and preventing the tops lying flat.

[Clive Thorne]

Seeing Geoffrey's comments above I realise that the ends on my 36 key Crabb/Jeffries* are different to the above photo's as it does have the thinner edging with the end bolts recessed into the raised part, and the solder re-enforcement. To my untrained eye the fretwork does look very similar - I wouldn't claim identical.

 

* I had Colin Dipper do some work on the Instrument sometime in the early 2000s and he said that he thought it was probably built by Crabb, and possibly originally had wooden ends. I've never really questioned it since, but that could be wrong.

 

Photo for information: 

 

 

 

EDITED TO SAY: Alex (West) has been in touch with me and pointed out some of the areas of difference between my Concertina's fret work and the OP's example. Although, at first glance, the  overall pattern is very similar there are definite distinct differences there in the detail.
 

 

Edited September 29 by Clive Thorne