Lyon and Healy Tailpieces: Differences Pre- and Post- Patent Date

[Nat]

I'm interested in discussing the varieties of tailpieces for Lyon and Healy Style A, B and C mandolin family instruments.

Perhaps we can say these tailpieces fall into at least three categories:

1. Very early tailpieces with the prototype tailpiece cover. I have never seen pictures of one of these without the tailpiece cover on, so I can't say much about them. A good picture can be seen on Andy Irvine's site, here. There is also a nice pic on page 125 of Hubert Pleijsier's book.

2. Early tailpieces that have "PAT. APL'D FOR" stamped on the base just above where the bottommost screw goes into the mandolin.

3. Later tailpieces that do not have anything stamped on the base, but which have "PAT-4-15-19" stamped into the top of the tailpiece, just below the glued-in piece of felt.

I'm particularly interested in whether there are, in general, any structural differences between the second and third categories of tailpieces I mention above.

Here are three pictures of a tailpiece which has the "PAT. APL'D FOR" stamp. The first picture shows the base of the tailpiece where the words are stamped. The next two show the top part of the tailpiece, above where the “lever member” pushes down against the strings (as described in the tailpiece patent, viewable here.



The idea, according to the patent and to the Pleijsier book, was that each set of strings would touch against one of four “beads.” These four beads were varying distances from the bridge, mirroring its compensation. The idea was that the length between each bead and the bridge allowed for “preset overtones.”

Resting above each pair of strings was a separate metal plate (held snug against the strings by virtue of the “lever member”), which likewise varied in length to match the bead arrangement. These four plates were each attached to each other, and so really comprised one piece of metal, which was in turn connected to the tailpiece by loops that went through four holes drilled in the tailpiece. This arrangement allows you to lift up the plates so you can sneak the strings underneath them.

[NOTE: I will admit to stringing the strings on my Style A above, rather than below, these plates for a few years, until I wised up. I couldn't tell any difference in sound.]

Now take a look at the pictures in the next post...

[Nat]

Now take a look at the following five pictures of a later tailpiece (recently provided to me by a kind fellow cafe member) that falls into the third category above. The first picture shows that there is no “PAT. APL'D FOR” stamp at the bottom, the next picture shows that "PAT-4-15-19" is stamped on the top, the next two pictures show the plate arrangement, and the last shows the underside of the tailpiece.



As you can see, this tailpiece has a single uniform bead, rather than four staggered beads. In addition, each of the plates is of uniform length (there being no reason to stagger the plates because of the uniform bead).

Interestingly, as shown by the last picture, the bottom of the tailpiece shows that it was originally constructed to have staggered beads (since you can see their imprint there).

So, I am hoping that some of you might take a look at your own post-patent instruments and give me some insight on the following:

1. Do I have here a tailpiece that underwent skillful repair or modification (i.e. someone cut the plates even, chipped off the four individual beads and inserted the uniform bead)?
2. Or, did Lyon and Healy at some date make a modification to their tailpiece design (to cut costs, etc.) and what I have here is some transitional tailpiece between old and new styles?

I'm not bothered at all if I have a repaired tailpiece, (everyone nowadays seems to want to dampen string vibration between the bridge and the tailpiece, rather than perfect it), but I am curious as to whether any other tailpieces have a uniform bead like mine.

EDIT: It looks like similar modification might have taken place to the tailpiece of mrmando's mandola, as shown in the first image of this thread. While his is entirely missing the lever member and the plates (they used to be there), it also seems like he has a uniform bead at the end. Maybe a similar repair as mine? I've always been told that L&H mandolas and mandocellos used the same-sized tailpieces as mandolins, but I have no way to verify that fact.

[MANDOLINMYSTER]

excellent observations. I have an early style B sn# 75 and the tailpiece base has the pat applied stamp and the compensated "beads" perhaps some other owners will chime in with what is on theirs. What I want to know is what is sre the 2 metal loops on the bottom for??

[Jim Garber]

Here is a 1916 patent (early version of this tailpiece.)

[Starrshine]

My style C, SN 1303 looks like the second set of pictures. Could the loops on the underside be for a strap? There is no button on the end of mine for a strap. Still looking for a cover!
Bob

[Gregg Henry]

My style B - #77 - a fairly early one - has the patent date beneath the strings on the tailpiece and does not have the compensated beading. Bit it does have the marks where the compensated beading would go if it were there. Just like in the second set of pics, and like Bobs #1303, which is a little distant. But, different regarding both the beading and patent stamp from Michael's #75, which is a very close cousin. Perhaps the patent happened between #75 and #77? And perhaps the compensated beading is early (pre-patent) and the non-compensated is later (post -patent). Or, maybe someone switched out tailpieces on my instrument sometime in its life.

Which leads to another question. Is there a manufacture timeline that can be established by serial number?

Gregg

[ktbown]

My style C, SN 1303 looks like the second set of pictures. Could the loops on the underside be for a strap? There is no button on the end of mine for a strap. Still looking for a cover!
Bob

I just yesterday purchased a banjo with one of these tailpieces with the cover on it ... which as a banjo player I will be using a different tailpiece ... banjo is in transit now ... but the tailpiece will soon be available .... if anyone has interest let me know ... or keep an eye on ebay ..as I will list it there.. a picture of it although a little fuzzy is here http://www.banjohangout.org/myhangou...5743&albumid=0

[Nat]

I thought people might be interested in what a Lyon and Healy Style A mandola tailpiece looks like.

The pictures below are from a "PAT. APL'D FOR" mandola (note the four beads, as described above). The tailpiece cover is exactly the same as those used on the mandolins. However, the tailpiece itself is a Frankenstein arrangement of two mandolin tailpieces stuck together, with the upshot being that it extends an extra quarter inch over the body of the instrument.

The comparison shots show the larger mandola tailpiece compared to a (long-scale) Style C. The Style C tailpiece extends two inches over the body of the instrument, while the mandola tailpiece extends two and a quarter inches.

I have no reason to believe this tailpiece is unoriginal in any way... but who knows? If you happen to own a L&H mandola, chime in and let us know if yours looks the same.

[For those of you wondering, one of my D strings broke so creative measures had to be taken...]

[mrmando]

Nat, what's the serial number on that mandola? We had another thread about L&H mandola serial numbers after one of them came up on Antiques Roadshow.

I'll have to take a gander at my tailpiece. I don't recall it being Frankensteined like that. My instrument is from a later batch ... serial # is 1500.

[Jim Garber]

Since I have both early and much later examples of style As, I will also take a look and post some pics.

[Nat]

Attached is a photo of a tailpiece for a Lyon and Healy mandocello. The instrument has a single-digit serial number.

I have concluded (by looking at another example and from hearing from another mandola owner) that all of the L&H mandolas did have the extended tailpiece described above. If you look for it, you can spot the tailpiece extending past the top of the tailpiece cover in various photos of mandolas. For instance, you can see it in the picture of the Lyon and Healy mandola on page 97 of the Gruhn and Carter Acoustic Guitars book.

[Jim Garber]

Well I did take photos of my two L&H As but I guess I never posted them here. So here they are. This is the earlier SN 495 symmetrical long scale.

[Jim Garber]

Here's the later SN 2199, Washburn label, asymmetrical, short scale.

[Steve Weeks]

I have an early style B sn# 75 and the tailpiece base has the pat applied stamp and the compensated "beads" perhaps some other owners will chime in with what is on theirs. What I want to know is what are the 2 metal loops on the bottom for??

Here is an image of the base of my L&H "B", serial #41. It has "PAT.APLD.FOR" on the same place as shown in Nat's first post. By some miracle, I have run the strings under the metal plates... I'm guessing they were correctly installed when I got the mandolin many years ago.
Those loops are attached to the underside of the metal plates (one loop for two plates). They project downward, then turn toward the bottom of the instrument and finally turn upward again to pass through two holes in the base plate. The last couple of images in Nat's second post show this pretty clearly. The plates would be loose until the clamp is closed down on them; the loops would hold them in place while changing strings.
I've also included a couple images of the cover plate for reference.
Steve

[morgan]

Resurrecting an old thread here...

The initial post of this thread identifies three kinds of L&H tailpieces, the first of which is:

"Very early tailpieces with the prototype tailpiece cover. I have never seen pictures of one of these without the tailpiece cover on, so I can't say much about them. A good picture can be seen on Andy Irvine's site, here. There is also a nice pic on page 125 of Hubert Pleijsier's book."

Does anyone know if those very early tailpieces were also the lever-action tailpieces, or were they simpler cloud-tailpieces? In another L&H thread there is an indication that the famous tailpiece cover also fits a Waverly cloud tailpiece, which makes me wonder if there are "original" L&Hs that lack the sophisticated tailpiece.

[Altmandw]

Resurrecting an old thread here...

The initial post of this thread identifies three kinds of L&H tailpieces, the first of which is:

"Very early tailpieces with the prototype tailpiece cover. I have never seen pictures of one of these without the tailpiece cover on, so I can't say much about them. A good picture can be seen on Andy Irvine's site, here. There is also a nice pic on page 125 of Hubert Pleijsier's book."

Does anyone know if those very early tailpieces were also the lever-action tailpieces, or were they simpler cloud-tailpieces? In another L&H thread there is an indication that the famous tailpiece cover also fits a Waverly cloud tailpiece, which makes me wonder if there are "original" L&Hs that lack the sophisticated tailpiece.

My L&H Style A has serial number 26. It's in very good condition and has been deemed to be original by other luthiers. The tailpiece is like the lever-action ones posted in this thread. Hopefully this is useful to assess what was done with the initial batches manufactured.