Aël
MM Forum Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by Aël on May 17, 2011 10:15:49 GMT
Hello every body. I just find something that I see for the first time today. entertainment.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7047&LotIdNo=11353It is a Triplate with a style O sandblast design. The design variation seem to be (for me) a mix between varitaion 01 and 03. The global design is varaition 1 but the palm tree looks like variation 3. The serial number of the guitar is 766 and it could be made in the middle 1928. But the Style 0 design in variation 3 seem to be used around 1931-32. The sanblast design could had been made a lot of year after the contruction of the guitar. The owner of this triplate could have a style 0 1932 and decided to create the same design on his triplate (?). But the design of the hawaiian scene look very good and it look like factory work. I know the very rare special style 0 design that they tried on triplate round or SQ neck (number S 1602 on page 82 of Bob's Book), maybe it could be something in this spirit that they tried at hte factory. Maybe Mark, Colin, Michael, Mike, Pascal.... or the other great specialist on this forum will have some information about this incredible guitar. I hope that every body will understand my poor english ! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by pascal on May 17, 2011 10:59:46 GMT
Very nice palm tree Aël, but the leaves are short cut... The back looks like a variation 1 or 2 . You have another one # S 1602 on Brozman's book but with an unusual square headstock. (1931)
I still need two more posts to be a very big red stars "total conehead"...
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on May 17, 2011 15:15:17 GMT
Hello Ael and Pascal Nice interesting find! This seems to be very close to a Variation 2/3 front and back as you both suggest. Whether it was done in the factory is not quite so clear. My gut reaction is that it probably was. Remember that the reason for sandblasting brass instruments was that they were softer metal. German silver was ALWAYS engraved because it was a harder metal and allowed the cuts to be clearer and more defined. However, someone COULD have requested this decoration as a "special".
Be careful about S1602 in Bobs book. At the time, Bob had not seen this instrument and assumed it was sandblasted through to the brass. This is because the pattern is actually gold coloured. Since that time, three instruments done by the same person have now surfaced - S1913 Style 0 (The "Cowboy") and square neck tricone 172? (personalised to Eddie Valencia). The second Triplate is known to have heavy duty gold lacquer patterns painted on the surface and the design is identical to S1602 but with engraved additions. I don't believe any of them are National factory decorated. This lacquer would account for Bob's assumption 17 years ago that National were making brass instruments 5 years earlier than they said they were. A nickel silver instrument does NOT show yellow when sandblasted through the plating so the assumption must be that it is brass.
Best regards to you both. Hope you're well Pascal. Hope to see you again soon. (By the way - you always were a conehead!!) Mark
|
|
Aël
MM Forum Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by Aël on Jun 18, 2011 16:48:37 GMT
Thank you very much for your awnser Mark. Sorry for the delay, I was out of my home for some gigs. All the details that you gave us are very interesting. The story about the S1602 is fascinating. The # 766 had been sold for 3100 dollars.
Thank you very much for all
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jun 18, 2011 17:38:25 GMT
Hello again Ael Interesting Triplates keep turning up at the moment !! Here's another one - cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-National-tricone-resonator-Style-4-engravedbody-/110703473707?pt=Guitar&hash=item19c670f42bThis is the SECOND ONE that I've seen like this. The other is similar but with a completely different rear pattern altghough definitely the same engraver. I should guess that it is around early 1930 from the number. This guitar seems to be engraved by two distinctly different hands. The early Style 2.1/2 coverplate could be a replacement from another guitar. It was certainly NOT engraved by the person who did the rest of it. Best Mark
|
|