|
Post by tark on Jul 17, 2011 15:41:10 GMT
I'm somewhat reassured by Mark's comments about the Triolian body construction. I had always assumed that all the National Triolians and Duolians were pressed top and sides with a soldered back and that this was somehow superior in terms of sound than a 3 piece body.
I now feel better about owning a 3 piece body, NRP Triolian. As far as metal gauge is concerned I had always understood that this was the objection people had to the earlier NRP Delphi's which they now appear to have dropped as a model. The new NRP single cone models are, I believe, supposed to be made from thinner steel that is the same gauge as the old Nationals. The ebony nut on the Duolian would seem to make sense as a cost cutting measure since the factory would have plenty of ebony off-cuts from the fretboards of the higher priced models.
Its interesting that fitting a mahogany neck, unbound fretboard and ebony nut would allow National to sell the Duolian as a cheaper guitar. I would have thought that using imported mahogany rather than local sourced maple for the neck would be more expensive although apparently some Duolians had maple or basswood necks. The ebony nut of course cost them nothing in terms of materials. The biggest cost difference would seem to be the labour/time taken to fret and bind the Triolian necks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2011 16:15:02 GMT
Thanks Mark for posting such a detailed answer. From a player's point of view it is true that early metal-bodied Triolians are superior to later Triolians and most Duolians. That doesn't mean to say that all Duolians and late Triolians are not good guitars. Quite the opposite, they are wonderful guitars, but there is a certain something about those early metal-bodied Triolians. The problem these days is finding one that hasn't been tampered with by an over enthusiastic dealer, or a repairer that needs to bump their profit up by fitting new parts. Shine On Michael. It's probably worth mentioning that the sound is very much influenced by the player. I could play the finest early Triolian in the world and it wouldn't sound as good as you on a cigar box reso.
|
|
|
Post by televiking on Jul 17, 2011 17:59:52 GMT
Amen to that. And apart from the sound it is equally important what to play and what not to play.
I definitely have a LOT to learn in this regard.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jul 17, 2011 18:19:20 GMT
Hello Alexandre Yes - your Triolian (184W) is a 3 piece body. The zinc coating is only a light, flash coating. It is difficult to see whether yours has the zinc coating as it doesn't show any wear on the body. The coverplates are not really part of the issue - they could be anything, brass, steel etc.
As an example - When M3 painted Tricones succeeded Style 1s in the late 1930s - they are assumed to be brass covered with yellow paint. The earliest examples are brass with German silver coverplates and GS handrests. The next run coverplates are brass with steel handrests and even old slot head Style 1 round necks are used on them. It's all about what was left in which parts bin when others ran out. Even the last examples of Style 1s are made of brass NOT German silver (these are numbered in the elusive 'L' series of 1939 around L10003). It is not an exact science, less so as more and more examples appear.
If I understand your second point correctly - W series (and for that matter P series) Triolians had PAF stamped on the top of the headstock until around #1800. From 1800 or so to around maybe 2300 they were stamped PAT.PEND and after this (single cone patent issued June 1931) they had the patent numbers stamped there.
|
|
|
Post by alexandre on Jul 17, 2011 19:20:55 GMT
If I understand your second point correctly - W series (and for that matter P series) Triolians had PAF stamped on the top of the headstock until around #1800. From 1800 or so to around maybe 2300 they were stamped PAT.PEND and after this (single cone patent issued June 1931) they had the patent numbers stamped there. Thanks for your answer, Mark. Here are two pictures I've just made, concerning the coating... And another one showing the top of the headstock In fact, my point was just that I was curious about this way to stamp the patent, that I've never seen on another vintage National before...
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jul 17, 2011 19:35:00 GMT
Hello again Alexandre Yes - all single cone instruments from "Pat. appld for" to "Pat Nos" are done like this with, I think, the exception of the wooden Triolians. These had Pat. Appld Fr stamped at the end of the fretboard on the body top.
After the patents were granted in 1931, there was no need to state the obvious. The relevant patent numbers were stamped into the metal of the coverplate behind the bridge and remained like that all through the 14 fret era of Duolians, Triolians, Style 0s etc..
|
|
|
Post by wolvoboy on Jul 17, 2011 20:32:57 GMT
Hi Mark Ihave a 1931 Duolian does this mean that iff it has the patent number,am i right in saying it was made after july, my Duolian has the Patent number but also it says ( other pat pend )what does that mean,thanks wolvoboy
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jul 18, 2011 8:55:49 GMT
Hi Wolvoboy If you look at the listing of board minutes of the National Company in the back of Bob Bs book (page 284) you will see that George Beauchamps presentation engraved single cone guitar has MCMXXXI on the headstock. This was presented to him in celebration of his work for the company and also "the granting of the single cone patent No 1808756". It was engraved June 1 but the Patent Office records the granting of the patent as June 9, 1931. --SO! - technically if your guitar has those numbers that were granted on that date - it must logically be made AFTER that date. Most Nationals, in other ranges, add "OTHER PATS PEND" as time progresses. The logic is simple. Once the design is protected, the company would then refine, modify and add various elements. For example. After the Fiddle edges were patented, other patents were taken out to modify the neck by making it solid aluminium for strength. This was applied for in 1936 (and granted) but never applied to production. Years later, this became the "Stylist" bolt on neck idea. It is also necessary to add patents to protect it in other sales areas, countries etc.. Lastly, Rudy and John Dopyera (mostly Rudy!) were inveterate "patent appliers??"" - Rudy is on record at the patent office with no less than a DOZEN different ways of designing Dobros - sailors hat cones, upside down cones, twin cones - one under the other, and it seems that only the original and the best made it into reality. I mention all this because, as a family, they were terrified about legal protection of their ideas. The court case that they fought with Schireson typifies this. Once they had won the case (a 5 year battle!), they completely destroyed all trace of Schiresons - selling off their entire factory piecemeal for a few dollars.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jul 18, 2011 10:01:33 GMT
Hi again Wolvoboy Just as an afterthought to demonstrate the "wacky world of Rudy Dopyera" - inventor of strange patents!!
|
|
|
Post by alexandre on Jul 18, 2011 16:58:18 GMT
The thin gauge sheet steel was zinc galvanised. This accounts for the flaking paint loss on these instruments. The galvanising was done to strengthen the metal. In mid 1930, probably due to complaints about flaking, the galvanising was stopped and shortly after Triolians, and the recent 'new' Duolians were made of two pieces by stamping the top and sides together and soldering the back on. (The paint finish also dramatically improved!!) Hello, I'd like to discuss another point on this information of Mark... - If galvanization (which is protecting the steel of the rust action) has been dropped by the National Corp. due to some complaints about the flaking of the paint, does this means that the sheets of steel they used later wasn't particularly treated in any way, before application of the (new) forms of finish ?? - having a '30 (12 fretter) Triolian and a '34 (14 fretter) Triolian, both in "Walnut" finish, I can say, concerning the finishes, that they certainly look different... (check the picture I've joined yesterday) The early one seems definitely lighter & thiner (a bit like pastel compared to oil, in paintings)... Does anyone got information about those differences ?? By the way the '30 Triolian weights lighter than his little cousin, despite the fact that its steel body his bigger (in volume). - If anyone can explain me that ... Different gauges of steel ??... Density or weight of neck woods (maple vs. basswood) ??... The result in matter of sound is that the early 12 fretter got more volume AND sustain than the later 14 fretter (with same set of strings installed)... But both have great tone for sure !! I actually couldn't part with anyone of them for that exact reason : they sound different so that I play them for different tunes, in different moods (I personally find the early one "nocturnal" or "darker" than the other one, which has a more "jolly" tone, but it's just my idiosyncratic perception... ) Here are two video-samples (old webcam recording) for your consideration about sound... (you can raise the volume of you computer to get a bit of the "natural" presence of the real sound)
|
|
|
Post by Michael Messer on Jul 18, 2011 18:16:59 GMT
Hi Alexandre, The sound of a guitar is subjective. Each person will hear it in a different way and play it in a different way. Your comment about 12 fret Nationals sounding darker than 14 fretters is how you perceive it and that in turn affects your playing. The 12 certainly has a different tone to the 14 which in your hands translates to one being dark and one being light. In my hands that could be the other way round. As I said, it is so subjective that nobody will ever really have THE answer and that is how we end up with rooms full of resophonic guitars - always searching for that magical tone and each one offers something different. Your guitars both sound wonderful to me - to my ears the 12 doesn't sound darker than the 14, but your playing on the 12 is definitely darker. Hmmmmmm....... I like the two Rudi Dopyera patents; other things that the Dopyeras claim to have invented are spring-loaded clothes pegs and believe it or not, a circumcision machine! I wonder if they came in Styles 1, 2, 3 and 4 A good thread! Shine On Michael.
|
|
|
Post by steverino on Jul 18, 2011 21:46:15 GMT
This is a tremendous thread; my thanks to all.
Mark, I was so surprised when I bought Triolian #42P a few months ago and found that it has a three piece body. The instrument has been refinished but still has its original body, neck and cone. It is a real cannon with big bass and a rich, mellow rather than trash can tone. Now thanks to you I know how its construction and sound fit into the scheme of things.
Alexandre our Triolians share several features, such as the early short headstock with straight slots at the top. The three piece body has a relatively sharp corner between top and side, where the drawn two piece has a larger smooth radius. As best I could tell from your video our instruments sound similar.
|
|
|
Post by thebluesbear( al) on Jul 18, 2011 22:21:20 GMT
Hi
i just wanted to say how much im enjoying following this thread very interesting indeed
al
|
|
|
Post by televiking on Jul 19, 2011 6:45:02 GMT
I am happy i asked a "Stupid question". A great thread and thank you all for information. You gotta ask to learn.
And this forum is an excellent place to do just that.
Televiking
|
|
|
Post by alexandre on Jul 19, 2011 17:11:28 GMT
Still learning more & more... Steverino, thanks for the triolian details I haven't noticed before your post !! So, at this point, I guess that I can have a try and ask if the gauge of steel used for the flat F-holes is different than the gauge used for round F-holes ??
|
|