(Login SoFew) Forum Member from IP address 220.127.116.11
This is the first time that we have used this site to show the Type 18 mic that we have been working on. It has been very carefully reproduced from an original as can be seen in the pics. The bakelite components have only been placed to give some idea of what the finished item should look like. We have replicated these parts in bakelite and resin. The aluminium shell is a converted Type 21 pat mic assembly, which allowed us to play around with it until all measurements were correct, it also saved the original from getting damaged in the development stage. Watch this space we are getting closer to our first of a limited run/Users/tonysach/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Originals/2012/7 Feb 2012_5/DSCN0628./Users/tonysach/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Originals/2012/7 Feb 2012_5/DSCN0629./Users/tonysach/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Originals/2012/7 Feb 2012_4/DSCN0634.JPG
As i have said , this is the first time we have used this site to show you our Type 18 microphone and unfortunately it is proving rather difficult to show you the photo's. Any help on how to get a photo on this site would be appreciated , thanks .
Bizarre!!! I saw your new post with three photos, had it on screen, and then within about a minute it had disappeared from the site and two new ones had appeared here with only two photos!
This is my original Type 18 (Type 19). As can be seen it was bare when I got it, but otherwise complete (the 'before photo was after I had taken some of the parts off). It took about an hour to remove the components and add the chamois. Since then its had a loom, bell plug and phones added and is now in my B Type and D mask.
It does raise the question once again about repro v real. Obviously, given the choice most collectors would have a real one, however these are pretty much never seen now. I had someone interested in mine, and several people, including Steve Silburn and Mick Prodger basically said 'you'll regret it, as you'll probably not find another'. I know Dave Farnsworth had one on his site, with loom and bell plug but no phones, and it sold in minutes, I think at £1395.00. This one looks superb, but like many of the very good repros, its rather worrying to think of the effect they might have on prices of real ones.
I know a few years ago I was the under bidder on a green '32 Pattern Mae West. I think it eventually went for about £1500.00, but (in those days where you could see the bidders ID) I was contacted by someone, I think a member of this forum, to say it was a Steve Silburn repro. Steve confirmed it and I emailed the winning bidder who I think got his money back. It was sold as genuine with 'provenance'.
I dont know what yours will retail for, but even if say £500.00, it only takes a devious soul to add a few nicks and scrapes, and that price can be tripled in days. Would you add something to confirm its not genuine, for example a stamped 'copy' in small letters on the inside?
Hi Alex ,
You have made a lovely job on your covering, might set you on, lol. My original was in a similar state but it did retain most of it cork insulation and some of its chammy covering. I have kept the chammy as it was the two piece type. When I find a machine that can replicate the stitching I shall then recover mine.
Yes its shame there have to be scammers out there, I think I remember the saga of the 32 pat mae west you mentioned, I think it was even washed in salt water. To be honest Alex we can all do our best to try and make life difficult for the schemers and scammers out there, but its an uphill struggle Im afraid. Press on regardless, onwards and upwards.
Excellent job!! It looks perfect!
Have you been considering a sales price?
BTW: I do agree with Alex; if you produce perfect copies (and we all want perfect copies, right?) who can distinguish the Real McCoy frrom a repro.
I think his is a great idea; a small stamp saying "copy" or "repro" on the inside round metal microphone cover plate, would prevent our more devious brothers to pass it off as real.
I for one would welcome it. Especially with a quality piece like the one you are making.
I'd suggest a small stamp on the inside of the case. For one thing its there but not so obvious, secondly the inner cover plate unscrews. Again, a £500.00 repro, with a new or original cap (I know, not likely to be found!) could add £1000.00.
Thank you for your question , this is an area that we have thought about quite a bit, both Alex and yourself are quite right about having some sort of distinguishing mark as a deterrent. We did think about stamping all components with the letter C. There will however be suttle differences that will set them apart.
Anonymous (Login jb76) Forum Member 18.104.22.168
February 10 2012, 8:33 AM
will the parts that make up the switch gear be available as a separate item? I have already converted a type 20 mic shell to represent a type 19 but am not entirely happy with the switch unit I made. If I could get just those parts for my shell I would be very happy.
Here's a photo showing how the chamois does not extend behind the bakelite switch.
The broken switch reveals the bare black paint.
Most of these switches are broken or repaired on surviving originals.
So reproduced parts would be welcome!
Thank you very much, and yes your quite right about the bakelite parts being fitted direct to the housing, we did a trial run and found it easier to cover the entire housing and then cut away the area where the bakelite fits. Trying to fit the chammy after the bakelite parts were fitted proved rather challenging and very time consuming. The rear cap is actually aluminium as per the original, we really wanted to make it look as genuine as possible, we are quite pleased with the results so far.
Funny you should mention Blended Cork , there is a way, I had to repair a damaged cork floor a few years back and the only way to achieve this was to catch the cork dust from some finely sanded cork and mix it with pva glue, result cork filler. Admitted we could not spray it on ,so we used a soft brush after thinning and the results were very good.
Point noted, on the genuine mic the original two piece type covering or what was left of it had the hinge plates cut out this is the only reason why we opted for the same, but upon trawling the net it is as you say covered. Well done Alex, and thank you.
What a wonderful question lol. As of yet there is no fixed price in mind, we would like to produce these at a very reasonable cost, we have a couple of options to keep the cost down , one being to have the rear cap fixed as apposed to screw on , this will save time with the thread cutting. the problem with cutting back is that you end up with something that doesn't really resemble the item what you first started out to produce. We shall know more when we time how long it takes from the raw material stage to the finished item.
The inner microphone with the rear cap is almost identical to a helmet receiver. If one owned a receiver they had no wish to keep, could the prospective buyer supply this for fitting into the microphone shell? Or would this be too complicated?
Sorry for all the questions! lol. It's a very interesting project!
No need to be sorry for asking questions , if I can answer them I will and if I cant then we're both scuppered, lol. Please find attached (HOPE) photo that might answer part of your question, this is the internals from a non salvageable type 26 mic and it fits almost perfect and not a problem to fit. In answer to the other part of your question , yes we would be delighted to fit your own inner mic parts.
Tony that looks brilliant! I need to have a look for my spare receivers now. Is the rear cap that you have reproduced the same size as the original? (Probably sounds like a silly question but IIRC the rear cap on a type 19 is larger in diameter than that of a type 21).
Yes those were the days, I remember when Steve was selling at those prices , I thought, I must get one of those but when I finally got round to it all production had stopped, never to be seen again.
The last one I saw on Ebay sold for an impressive £700 plus , I thought I had won it with a £350 bid, how wrong I was. All the best, Tony
It's one of those things isn't it - thinking something will be around for a while, not buying it and finding you've missed out. To get mine I bought a complete Sefton B/D/MkIV set up (formerly of a chap on this forum) - fortunately by moving on the B/D it turned out to be a good chance taken
Your replica, when it hits the streets, is going to prove very popular!
I thought I'd won that repro type 19 with a £200 bid! I was shocked to see it sell for that price. I honestly don't think it's worth this amount though. As you yourself have shown Tony, all it takes is a committed effort to reproduce these and the results can be awesome. With Neil's plans as well posted in another topic, the winner of that auction may well have wished he had waited around...
Hi, you mentioned that you are close to a 'limited run' of these mics , I think they look superb and was wondering if you will be taking reserve orders for them as i don't want to miss out ! Regards Terry
We are still playing catch up after our move , hope to have more news for you soon.
I did take the mic to a Spitfire photo shoot (see photo) and to the 2012 Flying Legends show at Duxford , those that viewed it up close were very impressed with what they had seen , which was just the result we were hoping for.
Please dont worry, we hope to start on them very soon,
All the best, Tony
Thanks for your encouraging comment. It was a fantastic day , couldn't stop grinning .
We are also looking forward to starting the mic production. I must stress though that we will not flood the market with them. As for the D-Type, we certainly wont be touching this area, I have always had the maestro and good friend Steve Silburn make my D-Types , he still makes them and I personally would feel uncomfortable making them , just wouldn't seem right somehow. The B-Type helmet is also one of Steve's as is the oxygen tube.
One reason we decided to take up the reins to make the 18 type mic with good detailing is that no one else is producing one thats accurate enough for the serious collector / re-enactor. I for one will not use my original for re-enacting , toooo risky.
Dont want to sound like a party pooper, but have asked before, what mark are you going to put on it to identify it as a reproduction? Whilst you might have good intentions, many dont, and with them being so accurate, it would not take much to turn your (lets say) £150.00 mic into a £1500.00 mic.
Mine is original although missing the chamois when I got it. So it has a new chamois, albeit a bit dirty now, but nevertheless its an original. Would hate to see yours going as originals a couple of years down the line, especially if its some of my friends here shelling out for what they think is an original.
Its something that I think needs addressing as they are clearly as good as the real thing.
So sorry for the delayed reply, we are currently very busy with our main source of income at present which makes a pleasant change. Please don't worry , after doing the rounds at Air Shows and 1940s events around the UK there is quite a bit of interest in the mic , so we hope to get on with them asap, but there is an important problem to get over first.
There are some concerns that they are too good / too accurate and that some undesirables will try to pass them off as genuine, this is something that we absolutely do not want to happen, so we thought it would be a good idea to have some external input as to what would be acceptable to include as a safeguard against fraudulent practice. Any thoughts or ideas will be welcome.
We've touched on the subject before: I believe the consensus was there should be a tell.
For me, the tell shouldn't be visible from the outside, not should it be removeable. Would it be possible to stamp an "R" for Reproduction, or perhaps better (for more readily understandable to the layman) the word "repro" into the inside rim of the housing?
I could certainly live with such a tell...
Another requirement would be that the tell shouldn't delay production of these mics any longer than need be!
Being the owner of an original, and concerned at the value should a load of good repros come on to the market, the question of a tell tale mark is something I have asked about more than once on this thread. Previously my queries have been largely ignored and you have simply hinted instead at making 'subtle differences' without saying what they might be.
If they are to be sold as reproductions I don't see the problem in making them 100% accurate, but with both the inner cap and outer shell stamped 'repro', 'copy' or similar. Both can be marked in a place that can easily be found if known, but otherwise not blatently obvious.
To some, a reluctance to do so might reflect poorly on you, especially considering the price, and the values of the originals.
I am also an owner of an original and I dare say there are a few more of us out there that own the real deal, and the last thing that we want is to devalue any original. Yes we did agree with your concerns and as I remember we did suggest that all components were stamped with the letter C as well as having subtle other differences. At that time we was not exactly sure what differences we could include without spoiling the overall appearance, one was to make the mic housing and cap all in one , another was to make the mic housing and cap a different size to the original. Although some of you will welcome Copy or Repro stamped and we totally agree with this, there are others who prefer not to have it stamped, this became apparent whilst taking it around to different shows, thats why we said there will be subtle differences, this will also insure against any repro part not being interchangeable with an original .
To be honest with you Alex and I mean this in a friendly way, I have a repro Mae West, a repro B type helmet , a repro D type mask and repro Oxygen hose, none of which have the word repro or copy stamped or printed anywhere on them, but they do have subtle differences to be able to tell them apart from the originals plus none of these have affected the originals values.
We will take on board and welcome any suggestions or concerns that anyone may have. All we are trying to do is produce a good quality Type 18 mic that can be used to fill a gap in someones collection or to be used by re-enactors, nothing more nothing less.
No one is suggesting you are out to con anyone, its those who buy them and then sell them on as originals. To be fair repro tubes and D masks in particular are fairly easily spotted as the materials are different from the originals, usually not by intention but because the original materials are not available. Original B Types are in good supply too. However, I know that in the case of repro green 32 pattern mae wests someone I know bid over £1000 for one about 9 years ago, only to be outbid. Afterwards he was contacted by a member of this forum telling him it was a repro. The person is well versed, but it took a mail to the maker to confirm it was a repro, as he didnt have enough experience in handling originals.
I dont think that applies with the Type 19, which are very hard to find, but (with a loom etc) are worth £1500 upwards.
One trouble is that in the case of rare items, few have the chance to own one and thus get a feel of what an original looks like. So subtle differences are not easily seen or known as they have little to compare it with. One example that has conned people for years is British Airborne berets. Post war large crown berets were found and then had the linings substituted with a wartime one from something like a tank or RAF beret. That post war beret, worth about £50, with a lining from a £35 tank beret is suddenly a high price item. An unissued Maroon beret with a 1943 or 1944 date can fetch £750 quite easily. Since the scam was found it has been widely publicised what to look for. But for many, all the details are there and many have been fooled.
If you are aiming to produce a repro for reinactors or as a gap filler, I dont see the problem with it being marked in a place that can be easily accessed but not blatently seen.
Alex I think your fears that an original type 19 will be devalued from the production of these microphones is largely unfounded. Real type 19's are so rare that if one appeared on a dealer's website for £2000 I wouldn't be surprised if someone had the wallet to buy it. There is always a market for the real thing, a number of repros won't change that. It hasn't affected, as Tony said, the prices of original 32 pattern Mae Wests. And some of the repros are so close to the original, buyers can be duped. At the end of the day, I can't think of any repro items that can't be separated from an original when in a line up or when under inspection. A buyer just has to be knowledgeable and know what they're looking for. If someone is intending to pass repros off as the real deal, it will take a lot more than a stamping to stop them. This has to be expected: they are always going to find some-way to achieve their dirty work.
Regarding the 'tell' I think it is a good idea. As others have said, I think an internal stamping which can't be seen when the microphone is on a mask is a good idea. I also think the microphone should come with an explanation of the tell, perhaps with pictures to compare to an original, so that potential buyers know the differences.
It's not so much devaluing originals, its stopping people getting duped over high value items. You make the exact point at being able to identify repros when you have others to compare them with, which generally isn't the case. I know many who have been fooled by green Mae wears and B Types, indeed numerous times examples have been discussed on here.
It begs the question of how you might feel spending £1000 or £1500 on something like a Type 19, only for someone who is used to handling the item saying a year or so later, 'its a repro because...'
The thing is that this is true for every repro item: it's largely unavoidable. A buyer just has to compare a lot of photos of original items. A worn Sefton Mae West can look exactly like an original, but do some research and you can notice slight differences (serif font for example). Of course it's not the same as having the item at hand, but I have no type 19 mic at hand but feel very confident that I could separate an original from a replica.
At the end of the day, it is sad that people get duped but I really don't think a lot can be done to stop this. In 30 years, worn Sefton b-types may be sold as originals. He's had masks sold as originals before.