old supertone mando rare body

[henrya 1953]

Hank here, Just got this crasy mandolin from a friend to try to identify, all I know is it has a supertone sticker in the sound hole and the # is f13410. I have been searching and cant find what the heck this strang little instrument is. Help me out if you can. Here are attached pics of the body shape. Thanks Hank

[Link]

Here's a similar one.

[devilsbox]

The Supertone name was used by Sears Roebuck before they went to Silvertone. IIRC. Don't know which of their suppliers might have made it though.

[barney 59]

At the time that was made Harmony was owned by Sears and Roebuck so,maybe Harmony. There is one like that listed in Vintage Guitar price guide but with the decals.

[MikeEdgerton]

I've seen them labeled Lyon & Healy products as well. They weren't made by Harmony. Actually there are several discussions here someplace about these. The decals and the color look more like a Regal built instrument to me though.

[jeff mercer]

The change from "Supertone" to "Silvertone" in Sears catalogues occured in 1941, or very close to thereabouts.
Anything stamped inside ?

[Jake Wildwood]

Well, a mandolin of this type is not much of a mystery -- it was built in Chicago by Harmony (I believe, as construction and materials compare nicely) in the mid-to-late '20s and early '30s.

Ones in this body shape come in a variety of finishes and styles and labels -- the nicest one I've seen is one I'm actually working on for a customer that's unbranded and and has a spruce top and mahogany neck, back, sides.

I've also seen these with the Regal brand name, and like the one I'm working on, the Regal-branded ones tend to have multicolored binding and natural finishes.

[mandolirius]

Yeah, I've seen them around. I know one that's a wall-hanger. Looks good up there.

[MikeEdgerton]

Well, a mandolin of this type is not much of a mystery -- it was built in Chicago by Harmony (I believe, as construction and materials compare nicely) in the mid-to-late '20s and early '30s.

Ones in this body shape come in a variety of finishes and styles and labels -- the nicest one I've seen is one I'm actually working on for a customer that's unbranded and and has a spruce top and mahogany neck, back, sides.

I've also seen these with the Regal brand name, and like the one I'm working on, the Regal-branded ones tend to have multicolored binding and natural finishes.

I know they weren't Harmony built, they were either L&F or Regal.

[MikeEdgerton]

Why don't we merge these threads?

[Jake Wildwood]

Mike, maybe so -- I used to think they were Lyon & Healy-built, too...

Except I also know that a bunch of Regal instruments (a lot of their guitars, in fact) were built by Harmony, and these look and feel the part of other Harmony instruments.

These Chicago builders and catalog sellers really make it all confusing, too, in their quest to completely contradict things that I used to think were true by going and cross-pollinating all their work!

[Ted Eschliman]

Why don't we merge these threads?

Just so there is no confusion, these threads have now been merged into (hopefully) one coherent thread.

As you were...

[MikeEdgerton]

Mike, maybe so -- I used to think they were Lyon & Healy-built, too...

Except I also know that a bunch of Regal instruments (a lot of their guitars, in fact) were built by Harmony, and these look and feel the part of other Harmony instruments.

These Chicago builders and catalog sellers really make it all confusing, too, in their quest to completely contradict things that I used to think were true by going and cross-pollinating all their work!

It's well documented that there was a relationship between the Chicago builders. I think you're wrong on the direction that the building went. I think you'll find there are Harmony instruments that were obviously built by other builders (one on a known site is obviously a Kay body). I've never seen a Harmony date code stamp or model stamp inside any of the other branded or known instruments.

[Paul Hostetter]

I've seen them labeled Lyon & Healy products as well. They weren't made by Harmony.

Harmony made lots of things marketed as Lyon and Healy. Why not this one? Sure looks like a Harmony to me, especially the board and headstock. L&H contracted everything out, but I never heard of Harmony doing that, except to complete a contract, in which case you'd see Kays labeled Harmony (or more likely labeled Silvertone). The recent book Washburn Prewar Instrument Styles: Guitars, Mandolins, Banjos and Ukuleles 1883-1940 by Hubert Pleijsier helps demystify this Chicago stuff pretty well.

[MikeEdgerton]

L&H contracted everything out? I don't think so. I've never read that. After the Tonk Bros. purchase the brands moved over to Regal. This little catalog page from Frets.com might argue the point a bit. As for the Harmony connection to that mandolin, it looks more Regal than Harmony to me. I have a branded Regal with an A style body sitting here that has the same headstock, tailpiece, tuners, etc. I've had a few of these that were branded with L&H brand names, I honestly don't know if they were made before or after they started selling off the assets.

I'm sure that Jim Garber has a catalog page or two with these listed, it would be interesting to see what they were branded as. I have several Harmony pages, I don't have any that look like this.

By the way, anyone looking for some interesting reading on the early years at Harmony should look at this article. Basically Harmony was started by a some folks that left Lyon and Healy. So much for farming out all their work.

[jeff mercer]

I have to agree there, Mike..
Lyon & Healy had an in-house manufacturing division until around 1928, when Tonk Bros took over and closed it, only then farming out the manufacture of a nearly endless line of "labels" to ( initially ) J.R Stewart, who lasted only a year before the depression hit, & that's where Regal enter the picture, buying up all of Stewarts' manufacturing equipment etc.

Regal & Harmony were competitors in the very lucrative "affordable" mandolin, banjo & guitar entry-level instruments of the time, and it was'nt until 1954
that Harmony ended up buying the Regal marque..( previously, they'd bought the trade names Stella, Sovereign & La Scala from the Oscar Schmidt company around 1937 ).

I just can't recall ever seeing a Harmony made Lyon & Healy instrument, being it uke, banjo, mando, guitar etc..

Best to everyone,
Jeff.

[Jim Garber]

I'm sure that Jim Garber has a catalog page or two with these listed, it would be interesting to see what they were branded as. I have several Harmony pages, I don't have any that look like this.

I can't seem to find any of these shaped instruments except under the Supertone label. I will keep looking tho.

[brunello97]

I agree with Paul (and everyone else I know that has read it) that Hubert/Keef's book on Washburn is a fantastic resource--and great read. (Yes, I am shilling it.) A companion piece sorting through the various Regal/Harmony/Kay/Tonk/L+H Leftovers would be a very welcome--and no doubt head-banging piece of work. Keef dips his toes there and provides a good start, but I have a hunch that there is quicksand there.

Jim and Mike would be the obvious choice for such a book (or website) and I know they have a LOT of free time on their hands. :-)

Mick

[MikeEdgerton]

Wheeler and everyone else that has written anything about the history of these instruments dips their toes, that's more because there really isn't anything more than bits and pieces. Gibson may not be run by the same people that started it but it was an ongoing entity as was Martin. They may not have great records but they have records. The rest of these builders apparently just dumped everything when they stopped doing business. Harmony gives you some help with some date stamps and such, Kay and Regal have some instruments with stamped numbers that probably meant something to somebody but nobody knows what that might be. There was a relationship between all of them that intertwined their operations, they all had to be buying from the same jobbers. I would have assumed that everything that Sears sold was a Harmony built instrument except I have seen so many Sears branded instruments that were obviously built by other companies through the years. If you can find a Harmony date code (generally something like W-28, F-34, S-62) inside one of these I'd believe it was Harmony built. I've never seen one with a Harmony date code.

[brunello97]

This whole topic cuts across so many interests that it remains tantalizing, however frustrating: mandolins, woodworking, traditional handcraft rubbing up against early 20th c. industrialization, old factory buildings, material sourcing, parlor music, etc. Did I include mandolins? I've only seen a photos of the inside of the Gibson Kalamazoo plant and there was an interesting read posted here awhile back of a journalists visit into the L+H factory in Chicago. I don't have much of an idea of the daily production, degree of mechanization or space requirements of much of this work at the Harmony, Regal, etc. scale. Jim's catalog collection paints one picture, behind-the-scenes is another, which might mean some sleuth delving tax records, old leases, maybe CoC files.

(As a digression, the Larson's shop, for instance always sounds like it was a small family concern but seem to have put out a lot of instruments, if every Larson attribution is to be believed. If LRicca employed as many folks back east as is suggested, how come so few Riccas seem to show up on the auction sites?)

Enough said, but I really do enjoy these type of threads here. Every conversation, debate or attribution adds something for me. Some day the macro data bank will emerge. Thanks to everyone for pitching in.

Mick

[Paul Hostetter]

Mike, I think you're still under the sway of old and incorrect information. We all were, at one point, starting with believing L&H's own claim of the biggest factory on earth, etc. If you actually look critically at the stuff they marketed, you have to ask questions, or else accept that the earth is flat. Please read the Hubert Pleijsier book. It suggests lots even more undocumented crossovers than it explains, but pretty much cinches the fact that L&H as a monolithic manufacturing entity was a myth for much of the 20th century.

[Jake Wildwood]

At any rate, here's a link to the one I just finished work on:

http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=47914

[keef]

Mike, I think you're still under the sway of old and incorrect information. We all were, at one point, starting with believing L&H's own claim of the biggest factory on earth, etc. If you actually look critically at the stuff they marketed, you have to ask questions, or else accept that the earth is flat. Please read the Hubert Pleijsier book. It suggests lots even more undocumented crossovers than it explains, but pretty much cinches the fact that L&H as a monolithic manufacturing entity was a myth for much of the 20th century.

Hubert here - sorry for entering this late...I cannot access this site from my home computer for unkinown reasons, so I occasionally browse the cafe during working hours.

I may have been not clear enough in the Washburn book about this issue, but L&H operated big factories since the mid 1880s. Apart from the large size of the factory buildings - most of which I have floor plans of - there are also many period photos showing the actual instrument building operations.

There is no doubt in my mind that L&H operated the largest (or one of the largest) instrument factories in the US between the late 1880s and WW I. They also imported a lot of instruments from other makers, mostly budget stuff. You could compare L&H's strategy at the time with the concept of the post 1970 Yamaha factories - both had a goal to mass manufacture many different types of affordable quality musical instruments, but did not cater to the lowest end of the market. The cheapest instruments were imported by L&H.

Based on a number of sources I deduced that around 1909-10 L&H's Union Park factory had reached its full production capacity. This was at a time that L&H were conducting a massive advertising campaign for their own make pianos.

The period (insurance) floor plans of the factory also show that a huge warehouse for finished pianos was built right behind the Union Park factory somewhere in the early 1900s. The size of this building alone is an indication of the large scale of L&H's piano manufacturing activities at the time.

The floor space needed for the expanding piano manufacturing division resulted in the need for a bigger factory, which was ultimately completed in 1914. While the new Fullerton factory was being built, L&H decided to outsource certain of its manufacturing activities. Wm Lange and Cole were contractors for new Washburn banjo models that were added to the existing banjo line, which was as before being made by L&H. I also strongly believe that Regal made certain guitar and mandolin models (which were still being designed by L&H). The 1915 Washburn guitar and mandolin lines are one example.

The outsourcing scheme was temporary and pertained only to a small fraction of L&H's overall instrument output. Cole, Lange and Regal made Washburns until 1922, when newly designed guitar, mandolin and banjo lines were introduced. These not only bear the L&H makers stamp inside, but are moreover completely different in looks and construction as compared to the 1915 Regal made lines (which also are a complete departure from the pre 1915 L&H made Washburns).

A long post, but basically I am saying that I agree with Mike and Mick's points. L&H's own claims about being the largest music house in the world stopped appearing somewhere in the 1920s.

About a Regal book - that will be a lot harder to research due to the scarcity of relevant sources. I've done a brief article about more findings that emanated from research relating to Regal's history and the connection with L&H, which fell outside the scope of the Washburn book and was therefore not included. I don't know how to get it published though - I sent it to VGM but never received a reply...

[MikeEdgerton]

If you take into account the fact that there are written accounts of people leaving L&H to start their own companies, such as Wilhelm J.F. Schultz leaving L&H with 4 other employees and start Harmony in 1892. In Dave Hunter's book Acoustic Guitars, an Illustrated Encyclopedia on page 145 of my copy under Kay guitars it says "In 1926 Stromberg-Voisent hired former Lyon & Healy luthiers Joseph Zorzi and Philip Gabriel to refresh the line." Stromberg-Voisenet became Kay. I'm going to guess that if there are accounts of luthiers leaving L&H that L&H was building something at sometime. By the way, Zorzi and Gabriel added those two point Kay "venetian" guitars and mandolins to the line. I don't think that it's coincidence that these little mandolins bear some resemblence to the Kay's.

[keef]

Mike, I've found that there still is a tendency to downplay L&H's role in musical instrument history, design and innovation. If we are to believe some of these completely unfounded notions, Regal, the Larsons and who have you made and/or designed all of L&H's instruments, and L&H were only marketing these. That makes you wonder what all those people in the huge L&H factories were doing all day. Maybe they were all sales reps who dressed up as workmen any time a photographer walked in.

Regal's (post 1908) role on the other hand tends to be greatly overrated, mainly due to the lack of dependable research on that company. They did not much else than to churn out decent, budget type instruments. This only changed after Regal hired some (or all) of the former L&H workmen after the bankruptcy of J.R. Stewart. These were talented builders who had been involved in making world class instruments such as the Style A-C mandolins.

But wait - wasn't Joe Zorzi the genius behind those instruments? Nopey nope. Sources state that Zorzi worked for L&H between 1898 and 1926/7. But his name is not on a list published in 1916 in a commemorative booklet available to the genital pubic that stated all L&H employees who had been with the company for five years or more, regardless of their position.

Now wouldn't you be pissed off big time if they left your name off that list after eighteen years of hard work? Joe Z. apparently wasn't, since he stayed on another decade with L&H carving those nice mandolins for them ungrateful bastards. Hmmm.

Walter Kirk was the creator of the L&H Styles A-C mandolins. He is listed as the author of the patented designs, and of close to 30 other patents that were filed for L&H. I could not find one patent anywhere that states Mr Zorzi as inventor of any musical instrument.

I tend to see those interesting Kay guitars as a ripoff from the reverse scroll mandolin patented by Regal in 1914 (one of only three rather unspectacular patents issued to Regal in five decades of musical instrument making....), the 1921 Style A Washburn mandolin (body shape), plus the 1922 Washburn Style A guitar (soundhole, gold leaf decoration). Nonetheless they are nice enough.

The internet has accelerated the parrotting of many badly researched opinions and plain BS. Hopefully someone will set the record straight on the Chicago music scene.