Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2011 6:09:16 GMT
were there any patents for the triplate triloian? i'm wondering if anyone has an idea what it would have looked like. tt
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Jul 20, 2011 6:56:52 GMT
Hello tt You have slightly the wrong end of the stick! The patents are applied for and granted according to 'concepts' not instruments. What I mean is - the 'Triplate idea' is the patent not the instrument. This is why Patent Number 1808756 (which we are discussing) covers the Triolian, Duolian and Style 0 - in effect it is the 'single cone' which is the subject of the patent. The concept of the Triplate was patent 'applied for' firstly - in Oct 1926. A further patent was submitted in Apr.1927 (This one became the patent closest to the finished instrument). Another different Triplate patent was applied for in March 1928. All this time, the ACTUAL instruments being made are carrying 'PAT APPLD FOR' or 'PAT PEND'. In December of 1929, Patent No 1741453 for Triplates is granted. After this date , the instruments will carry that number. Throughout 1930, other 'refinements' to his triplate patents were granted (patent 1750881 - this covers the possibility of him making triplates with 'horns' and other 'numbers' of cones. Patent 1762617 covers the possibility of John Dopyera making a large orchestral 'harp' with 12 cones connected by a 'ladder' bridge!!). - are you getting the idea? As the so-called 'Triolian Triplate' is nothing more than a Triplate inside a 'wood box' and also considering it is more of a concept than a reality - the patent is either unnecessary or irrelevant. On a positive note - the 'wood Triplate' instrument "exists?" in what looks like a heavily re-touched and redrawn photograph. This was available in National's earliest catalogue. It is featured with a wood mandolin (also never seen in reality) and a very different looking wood triolian single cone tenor ( also never seen in reality) It seems that National were probably trying to appear as creators of many more things than they actually had (a not unusual idea for a nascent company) This is what it looked like Over the years, we have speculated on its existence. Mike Lewis has built one to 'test' how it worked. It is almost a pointless instrument. The cones are crushed in tightly under the 'tiny' coverplate ( unnecessary!) The coverplate is a 'different' size to any other (why?) It is too small for a single cone plate and 2 or 3 inches bigger than a uke plate.!! The plate is hopelessly attached with only 3 coverplate screws ( ). You have to ask what the point is as they already have a perfect working tricone system. All they had to do was make it out of wood -like Mike Lewis has been doing for years!! Until it turns up - I shall remain sceptical. Best Mark
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2011 8:22:39 GMT
thanks very much for that reply mark - great stuff / great picture. maybe it was designed for playing quietly at night! tt
|
|
|
Post by wolvoboy on Jul 23, 2011 19:11:01 GMT
Hi Michael My Duolian does have an ebony nut,at first i thought it had one of those ebonizied carboard fretboards, but it is definately ebony exept for a couple of tiny splits at the body end its allmost perfect no wear at all and the neck is dead straight ,mine used to be a hooks on coverplate but was converted i dont know when,maybe at the factory when it was made i dont know,but i noticed that the coverplate is a little bit more domed than normal coverplates,i read on another forum in trying to research this,it was said that for some reason hook on cover plates wear slightly more domed than none hook on coverplates but no one knew why , any idea's wolvoboy
|
|
|
Post by leeophonic on Jul 23, 2011 20:32:52 GMT
There is probably some collector living in a Volcano like a James Bond villan who has the Triolian leaning against Sol Hoopii engraved Tricones, the Tampa red Tricone was mythical until it turned up! Keep um peeled as Shaw Taylor used to say!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2011 7:40:15 GMT
it'll be in oxfam in reigate tt
|
|
|
Post by Michael Messer on Jul 24, 2011 10:36:52 GMT
Hi Wolvoboy,
I don't know if Mark knows the answer, but I assume they used a different mould for those cones and it was a slightly different shape.
I recently had a similar discussion with Mike Lewis about his cover plates. He made a new mould a few years ago because his original one was getting worn out, and even though he thought it was the same, it is a slightly different shape to his original mould and his cover plates are slightly more dome shaped than his originals.
These days with CNC machines, everything comes out identical. I prefer the old way with variations.
Shine On Michael.
|
|
|
Post by alexandre on Aug 5, 2011 23:07:55 GMT
Hello, While I was surfing on the vintagenationals website, another detail appeared to me : it seems that Lenny means that the "squared headstock slots" about vintage triolians determines the "very earliness" of the guitar considering its serie (we talk about 1929 for P-serie & 1930 for W-serie, right ?)... BUT... ...as I've checked another picture of two triolian of the W-serie ( pickinparlor.nationalguitar.com/_Tweedle-Dee-38-Tweedle-Dum/photo/14641902/51645.html?enlarge=true ) on the same website, I've remarked that those two guitars (# 917w & # 928w) have "squared headstock slots", contrarily to mine which have "rounded headstock slots" and is # 184w (pictures are included in the precedent page of the discussion) !! Soooo ?? Is there really a direct link between "squared headstock slots" and "earliness in its serie", now I can doubt, but if anyone as any other element of response... Could it be another production hazard ?... (... and I know that nobody cares about that, but sometimes, I just need to understand ;D )
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Aug 6, 2011 0:35:57 GMT
Mark or someone will answer this with an answer backed up by actual knowledge, but it could well be which file was sitting on the bench of the guy who cut the slots... I think you'd need to have found a lot of triolians to draw that conclusion about early serial numbers/ 'always' having a detail so subtle. Or maybe I'm talking rubbish.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Makin on Aug 6, 2011 12:59:17 GMT
Hello Matt/Alexandre
Matt, your assumptions seem to be reasonably correct. It would be convenient if things happened or changed in National's production scheme of things at a specific time and date. However, what you have noticed with Triolians is similar to a lot of other quirky occurences in National's output. Firstly, remember that at this time, these headstocks were mostly cut by hand saw or hand router. This is likely to be a matter of personal choice rather than design. Early Dobros in California were hand cut (square slots) whereas later, Regal-made Dobros were routed (round ended slots). So in the case of Triolians - I would expect to see 'more' early instruments square cut and 'less' routed - not necessarily in a 'correct' order.
If you look at all the other instruments you will see the same anomalies. When the I2 fret change to 14 frets arrived, existing instruments seem to show a number of older 12 fret items made well AFTER the 14 fret is introduced. Style 0s, Triolians and Duolians all show this. The same happens with flat and rolled f holes. Quite a number of flat cut instruments with later numbers than some rolled instruments exist. Ribs or no ribs on coverplates? These appear quite randomly. Just as you think you know when the ribs appear - they disappear again!. There are MANY examples of slot headstocks reappearing in a batch of the 'new' flat headstocks.
As you suggest Matt, examination of large amounts of instruments DOES help to clarify some of these 'grey areas'. For example - I have been trying to understand the 'so-called' Long F hole National Trojans. The handful of examples that I know of seem to have lost their logos. HOWEVER, in conversation with a friend of mine in Memphis Tennessee (who has seen a lot more than me!) - he has sent me pictures and details of a further 50 instruments. They have ALL lost their logos.....or maybe they NEVER HAD ANY. See what I mean? It subsequently turns out that they are technically not Nationals at all! They were anonymously branded as 'Supertones' for catalogue sales by Sears.
I think all of these anomalies are typical of normal business practices. Changes and modifications are made and then changed back again. Things are done by accident or by mistake. Michael Messer and I often talk about the changes that occur to Blues and Lightnings just because some part of the communication chain between here and China breaks down. In a couple of decades - people will be having the same discussion about why some of these have coverplates that are brass yet most are steel, why the wood in the neck of 20 instruments or so is different to the ones that came later.
I guess with hindsight, we would love the story of National Dobro to fall into convenient little chunks of 'timeline' and all the serial numbers to work in a perfect sequence but after all - these instruments, as far as National in 1929 was concerned, were not the revered instruments that we see from an '80 years on' perspective - they were just PRODUCT. it's human beings making the story!
|
|
|
Post by alexandre on Aug 6, 2011 23:21:07 GMT
Thank you for your answers, Matt & Mark. As I've played & seen a lot of Valco made guitars (still a Dopyera brother at the head of the factory, but in the electric field), I've already seen a lot of those "anomalies" too... Like Socrates suggested: "the more I learn, the more I learn little I know"... ... Still consistent, isn't it ?! Anyway, thanks again for sharing your experience, it's highly appreciated ! P.S. By the way, have you seen this GS 3-piece body Style N ? cgi.ebay.com/1933-National-Style-N-Guitar-Beautiful-and-Rare-/150642919034
|
|