The First Victor . . . or the Last Berliner? Part 1
By Michael W. Sherman

Sometimes follow-ups to stories appear in the next issue; other times over seventeen years elapse. This is an example of the latter case. The June-July, 1975 issue of Antique Phonograph Monthly (Vol. III, No. 6) contained a fascinating article by Tim Brooks which discussed three double-sided 7" discs that represented a transitional phase between the Berliner Gramophone Company and Eldridge Johnson's Consolidated (later Victor) Talking Machine Company.

These three discs had been first mentioned in Jim Walsh's column in Hobbies Magazine in 1968, but at that time, the owner was unwilling to provide details. The discs surfaced later, and Brooks' APM article contained photographs as well as information on the recording dates, titles and the interesting announcements heard at the beginning of the records. They had etched centers like Berliners, but contained the stamped words: "THIS RECORD IS LICENSED FOR USE ONLY ON THE BERLINER GRAMOPHONE, PATENTED IN U.S. AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES" at the top instead of the usual heading "E. Berliner's Gramophone." The design was almost identical to that shown in Figure 1 of Johnson's patent application for the paper record label (#739,318 filed Aug. 8, 1900 but not granted until Sept. 22, 1903) except for the omission of the words "IS LICENSED" and Berliner's name on the patent filing document.

The most unusual feature of the records however, was the numbering system; it was Eldridge Johnson's. The records featured an "A"-prefixed two-digit number, which matched the number used on the Consolidated, Improved and Victor label pressings that followed later in 1900 and 1901. (Remember Berliner's last releases - recorded in early May, 1900 - bore "0"prefixed numbers in the 01300 - 01304 range.)

At a recent phonograph show on the East Coast, a fourth record of this type appeared - but this one was single-sided. The label is identical to those previously discussed, and bears the number A-29 (the number looks like A-23 on the disc, but that was another title from ‘The Ameer’). The title is "Continuous Performances" by S. H. Dudley, and like the double-sided discs, later appeared with a conventional paper label. Recorded June 2, 1900, it is one of about 200 titles recorded by Johnson between May 1 and July 28. At the end of July, recording activities were suspended for about six weeks, and did not resume on a regular basis until mid-September.

The reverse side of the record displays a listing of patents, arranged in a 2" diameter circle around the center hole. All of the five principal Berliner patents are shown: Nov. 8, 1887; May 15, 1888; May 6, 1890; Feb. 19, 1895; and Oct. 29, 1895. In addition, Berliner's patent for photoengraving a reciprocating glass disc (filed Nov. 7, 1887 but not granted until July 28, 1896) also appears. As Berliner abandoned this recording method early in his experiments, its appearance could be taken as somewhat unusual. However, when one considers the extremely litigious environment of the industry in 1900, the "if you've got it, flaunt it" mentality becomes more understandable. The possession of any recording patent, regardless of its immediate commercial viability, was a valuable asset.

A final interesting aspect of A-29, as well as the double-sided pressing of A-18 & A-23 (in the original article) concerns the announcement heard at the beginning of the record. Due to problems with piracy by Frank Seaman and others, Berliner had requested that Johnson devise a way to discourage this practice, as pirates could simply bypass the first few grooves of the record thereby removing the announcement. Johnson decided to record part of the announcement after the music had begun. In this manner, an attempt to excise the introduction would also remove the first few bars of the piece, resulting in a suspiciously sounding start. These three sides announce the title and artist, then after the piano has begun, the speaker continues: "Berliner Gramophone Record," or in the case of A-23, "for the Berliner Gramophone Company!"

To fully appreciate the tumultuous events of the spring and summer of 1900, a bit of background would be helpful to review. Berliner's problems with Frank Seaman and the National Gramophone Co. had been brewing for years. Berliner's first attempts at marketing the gramophone through his United States Gramophone Company (of Washington D.C.) in the fall of 1894, and through the Philadelphia-backed Berliner Gramophone Company in the fall of 1895 had been unsuccessful. Local marketing groups such as The New York Gramophone Co. and the New England Gramophone Co. tried throughout early 1896 to build public interest in the primitive device, but the lack of a cohesive and co-ordinated effort led nowhere. The key figure behind the New York Gramophone Co., Frank Seaman, persuaded Berliner to grant him exclusive personal rights to distribute the Gramophone on a national basis, except for Washington, DC (Oct. 10th), and on October 19, 1896, the National Gramophone Company was incorporated for that purpose.

This marketing effort, combined with Eldridge Johnson's improvement of Levi Montross' new spring motor, resulted in a rapid increase in business in late 1896, which continued to build over the next several years as Johnson developed his own motor and improved reproducers. Cracks in the alliance however, appeared fairly early. In mid-1897, William Barry Owen (a Director of the National Gramophone Co.) obtained rights to market the Gramophone in England, and left the U.S. to begin his overseas sales effort. In the fall of 1897, the Berliner Gramophone Co. requested that Frank Seaman provide company financial statements. His formal rejection of this request resulted in Berliner's refusal to recognize the National Gramophone Co. as a legitimate sales agency on October 1, 1897. From now on, all business was technically conducted with Frank Seaman personally (as per original contract).

Seaman quickly began his efforts to circumvent the Berliner group. Much of his discontent stemmed from what he considered to be an excessive (double) mark-up taken on the gramophones by the parent company and Johnson. Seaman believed he could have others manufacture an equivalent machine for less, and felt constrained by his agreement limiting him to the Berliner/Johnson product (he would be allowed to bring in another machine only if costs were at least 5% less).

In late 1897, the National Gramophone Co. placed an ad in the ‘New York Sun’ advertising the ‘Vocophone’ and in February of the following year, an ad appeared in the ‘New York Evening Post’ advertising the ‘Zonophone’. Despite Berliner's protests to the above advertisements, the Universal Talking Machine Co. was then organized (Feb. 10, 1898), ostensibly for the purpose of converting the Gramophone for coin operation. In June 1898, Orville La Dow, manager of National Gramophone, noted in a letter to Trevor Williams in London that the National Gramophone Co. was independent of the Berliner Gramophone Co.

While internal pressures continued to mount, a new assault on the fragile alliance came in November, 1898 when the American Graphophone Company brought suit against Berliner, Parvin, Johnson, National Gramophone and Frank Seaman, alleging infringement of the Bell-Tainter patents. Seaman continued his efforts to distance himself from Berliner Gramophone by transmuting the National Gramophone ‘Company’ into the National Gramophone ‘Corporation’ (the ‘Corp.’ was organized on Mar. 10th, 1899 and the Co. was dissolved June 12th). By the fall of 1899, Seaman was demanding that Berliner purchase Universal's ‘Zonophones’ (covered by Valiquet's patents), in place of Johnson's ‘Gramophones’, citing lower cost and improved workmanship.

Illustration shows “Continuous performances” by S.H. Dudley.

Article and image courtesy of Antique Phonograph Monthly - Vol X, No.4