Edison Tinfoil Phonograph 1878

[AtRicky1]

Many thanks Rod and all for allowing me onto your forum.

 

I'm attaching some photos of a phonograph that has recently come into my possession. It is an Edison tinfoil phonograph, according to the printing, manufactured in 1878. It is a Bergmann "104" but stamped in various places with no. 205. I believe Edison or Bergmann shipped it to Henry Edmunds, who was an English entrepreneur. Edmunds had visited Edison in 1877 (I think) and was so impressed with Edison's machine that he wanted to become the representative for it in the UK. That didn't happen but he ended up with this machine after pestering Edison to send one. I have a copy of the letter from Rutgers. 

 

I last saw this as a kid 60 years ago when my Dad showed it to me. I was absolutely amazed and the memory has stuck in my mind ever since, as clear as day. I'm 90% certain he played a recording on it and it was "Mary had a little lamb". I doubt very much that it would have been Edison though. Anyway that tinfoil has long since gone although it would appear it has spares. I'm unsure if they are recent or not. Some have striations on them.

 

My grandfather, I believe, had bought it from Edmunds. Anyway it ended up with my uncle and has since come to me, which as you can imagine is totally unreal. Is seems to be almost identical to the one in the Henry Ford Museum. The Edisonium has one too I think. I feel incredibly privileged to have this in my possession.

 

Although it really doesn't need much refurbishment, it's just a little rusty and dirty, I would like to clean it up. Obviously, I need to be ultra, ultra careful with what I do. The first thing I thought would do is to remove the light surface rust on the flywheel - if that is what it is called. I was thinking just a plastic cleaning pad and some WD40, testing  a small portion to make sure it doesn't discolour. I am engineer so I know about the implications of using the right tools and chemicals. Anyway I'd be really grateful of any suggestions. I know some of you will say don't touch it!   

It has some spare styluses and a diaphragm of some sort, I think unrelated to to this apparatus.

 

Thanks all.

This is the Henry Ford example. 
https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/76722/

Edisonium:
https://hub.catalogit.app/edisonium
 

 

Edisonium:

[Tinfoilphono]

That is a truly astonishing find! 

 

The bedplate as well as other parts are marked with serial number 205, so that is without question the correct number. I'm not sure where you are getting model 104. It was common for Bergmann (and other manufacturers) to stamp parts with the serial number assigned to the bedplate casting to keep them together, since in that era parts were not easily interchangeable among similar machines without some modification.

 

Some records of the Edison Speaking Phonograph Company survive. The sales ledger shows that #205 was sold to T.A. Edison himself, so it is entirely plausible that he bought it for shipment to the UK.

 

I wrote a book about tinfoil phonographs 25 years ago. It is now out of print, however a digital copy is available for free download to members of the Antique Phonograph Society on the main website (antiquephono.org).

 

There were 3 versions of the phonograph commonly called the 'Bergmann,' like yours. (Bergmann made other tinfoil phonographs before and after this model, but this was the most significant of his creations.) Yours is the base model, priced at $125 (Edison paid $90 according to the sales log). This was entirely cast iron, except for the brass mandrel, halfnut, reproducer, and steel shaft. The next model cost $150 and looked basically the same, except for a brass support arm for the halfnut, and brass speaker arm. It also had brass oil cups on top of the support uprights, while the lesser model only had a small oil hole. For $200 buyers could buy the "Drawing Room Instrument" made of hand-filed polished brass, with an inlaid rosewood box for support in place of common boxwood used for the cast iron machines. It also differed by having 40 threads per inch on the mandrel and shaft, versus 24 on the cast iron machines. Only one brass Bergmann is known to survive, in a museum in Scotland. 

 

The tinfoil sheets and part of wooden box in your picture is entirely consistent with the original box of foil supplied with the machine that was formerly in the Charles Hummel collection, now in the Edisonium collection. The spare stylii are also consistent with those originally found in a Bergmann in the late Ray Phillips collection. The Edison recorder in box is entirely unrelated to your Bergmann, and was used for wax cylinders in the early 1900s.

 

I've been keeping a census of known Bergmanns for decades now. I have 12 recorded in various collections and museums, plus 3 prototypes with dual flywheels in the Smithsonian, Ford Museum, and Edison National Historic Park collections. I already had your #205 recorded, listed with a different owner's name in the UK, perhaps your grandfather's name. I had heard of the machine many years ago but I no longer recall where I got that information.

 

Cleaning is advisable since rust (and corrosion on brass) is considered damage, which will continue to degrade the machine. It sounds like you know to be very careful in that regard. I would use a mild detergent to clean the entire machine, drying it very thoroughly, and WD-40 as a rust remover/inhibitor. 

Edited Tuesday at 04:04 PM by Tinfoilphono

[AtRicky1]

This is the only letter I can find from Edmunds to Edison re. the phonograph. I have another letter from Edison to Edmunds I think.

 

"Please write me soon and let me have the phono at once." 

 

That's the way to get delivery!

 

https://edisondigital.rutgers.edu/document/D7802ZFV1

[Jerry]

What an absolutely astounding piece! Just amazing! Thanks so much for sharing it here. Your photos are excellent

[AtRicky1]

1 hour ago, Tinfoilphono said:

That is a truly astonishing find! 

 

The bedplate as well as other parts are marked with serial number 205, so that is without question the correct number. I'm not sure where you are getting model 104. It was common for Bergmann (and other manufacturers) to stamp parts with the serial number assigned to the bedplate casting to keep them together, since in that era parts were not easily interchangeable among similar machines without some modification.

 

Some records of the Edison Speaking Phonograph Company survive. The sales ledger shows that #205 was sold to T.A. Edison himself, so it is entirely plausible that he bought it for shipment to the UK.

 

I wrote a book about tinfoil phonographs 25 years ago. It is now out of print, however a digital copy is available for free download to members of the Antique Phonograph Society on the main website (antiquephono.org).

 

There were 3 versions of the phonograph commonly called the 'Bergmann,' like yours. (Bergmann made other tinfoil phonographs before and after this model, but this was the most significant of his creations.) Yours is the base model, priced at $125 (Edison paid $90 according to the sales log). This was entirely cast iron, except for the brass mandrel, halfnut, reproducer, and steel shaft. The next model cost $150 and looked basically the same, except for a brass support arm for the halfnut, and brass speaker arm. It also had brass oil cups on top of the support uprights, while the lesser model only had a small oil hole. For $200 buyers could buy the "Drawing Room Instrument" made of hand-filed polished brass, with an inlaid rosewood box for support in place of common boxwood used for the cast iron machines. It also differed by having 40 threads per inch on the mandrel and shaft, versus 24 on the cast iron machines. Only one brass Bergmann is known to survive, in a museum in Scotland. 

 

The tinfoil sheets and part of wooden box in your picture is entirely consistent with the original box of foil supplied with the machine that was formerly in the Charles Hummel collection, now in the Edisonium collection. The spare stylii are also consistent with those originally found in a Bergmann in the late Ray Phillips collection. The Edison recorder in box is entirely unrelated to your Bergmann, and was used for wax cylinders in the early 1900s.

 

I've been keeping a census of known Bergmanns for decades now. I have 12 recorded in various collections and museums, plus 3 prototypes with dual flywheels in the Smithsonian, Ford Museum, and Edison National Historic Park collections. I already had your #205 recorded, listed with a different owner's name in the UK, perhaps your grandfather's name. I had heard of the machine many years ago but I no longer recall where I got that information.

 

Cleaning is advisable since rust (and corrosion on brass) is considered damage, which will continue to degrade the machine. It sounds like you know to be very careful in that regard. I would use a mild detergent to clean the entire machine, drying it very thoroughly, and WD-40 as a rust remover/inhibitor. 

Thanks so much for all this information - incredible. I will definitely take look at your book. 

My mistake, 104 I think relates to the address of Bergmann, 104 Wooster.

Might tinfoil sheets be original?

Regarding owners. It was sold to my grand father - who passed it on jointly to my father and uncle. No bill of sale AFAIK. From there it passed to my cousins and now to me. Same last names throughout. They had it in their garage.....I also have the original wooden carrying box but the front is broken and needs fixing. It is also is covered in white paint splashes which I just could not believe.   

Either my uncle or cousins researched it before. It was lent to the Science Museum in London, UK in the 1930s and then again later I think.

Thanks for the info on cleaning. Once I get it into a more reasonable state I will post more pics.
 

[Tinfoilphono]

I think it's quite likely that the tinfoil sheets are original. 

 

I found the photo from which I had gotten information previously. Unfortunately I didn't keep a record of where this was originally published. Nor can I recall where I got the serial number for my records. 

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:03 PM by Tinfoilphono

[AtRicky1]

29 minutes ago, Tinfoilphono said:

I think it's quite likely that the tinfoil sheets are original. 

 

I found the photo from which I had gotten information previously. Unfortunately I didn't keep a record of where this was originally published. Nor can I recall where I got the serial number for my records. 

Brilliant photos - thanks.

[phonogfp]

Wow!  Advanced collectors are aware that "good stuff" continues to occasionally come to light.  This machine, however, far exceeds "good stuff!"

 

Congratulations on acquiring not only one of the earliest talking machines in existence, but a family heirloom as well.  Just wonderful.

 

George P.

[Valecnik]

Wow indeed!  What an amazing piece.  Thanks so much for sharing with us, not only the instrument but so much of the history.  Just amazing!  Congratulations!

 

[AtRicky1]

Thankyou all very much guys for your kind words and info.

[AtRicky1]

Another photo of the machine.

Also some letters to / from Edison / Edmunds. I haven't been through them all but I think the final ones are typed up versions of the handwritten ones.

[Tinfoilphono]

Remarkable letters. Wow. I'm astonished to see some new information there, notably Edison's comments about a sapphire stylus being very successful. He never followed through with that in any tinfoil phonographs. The late Charley Hummel put a sapphire stylus on his Bergmann and it worked exceptionally well. I did not realize there was actual historic precedent for that.

 

Do you own the original letters?

[Kiwiatlarge]

What a wonderful machine to have!  It looks like it needs very little doing to it.  I recently won a Victor Type A at auction that had a lot of surface rust. A clean with soapy water and then 0000 steel wool and WD 40 did the trick. 

 

Before:

After (yes WD40 magically changed the horn from a  Zonophone to a Victor horn!).

 

 

Best

Michael

Edited Wednesday at 03:34 AM by Kiwiatlarge

[AtRicky1]

9 hours ago, Tinfoilphono said:

Remarkable letters. Wow. I'm astonished to see some new information there, notably Edison's comments about a sapphire stylus being very successful. He never followed through with that in any tinfoil phonographs. The late Charley Hummel put a sapphire stylus on his Bergmann and it worked exceptionally well. I did not realize there was actual historic precedent for that.

 

Do you own the original letters?

 

Now that would be something. but no original letters unfortunately.

[AtRicky1]

4 hours ago, Kiwiatlarge said:

What a wonderful machine to have!  It looks like it needs very little doing to it.  I recently won a Victor Type A at auction that had a lot of surface rust. A clean with soapy water and then 0000 steel wool and WD 40 did the trick. 

 

Before:

After (yes WD40 magically changed the horn from a  Zonophone to a Victor horn!).

 

 

Best

Michael

What a wonderful gramophone - and beautifully restored. Amazing.

I have WD40. Thanks for the tip on the 0000 steel wool - I'll get some.

[phonogfp]

2 hours ago, AtRicky1 said:

I have WD40. Thanks for the tip on the 0000 steel wool - I'll get some.

 

Of course, you shouldn't use the 0000 steel wool on anything other than bare steel/iron.  I wouldn't use it on brass, and certainly not on paint.  Good luck!

 

George P.

[AtRicky1]

1 hour ago, phonogfp said:

 

Of course, you shouldn't use the 0000 steel wool on anything other than bare steel/iron.  I wouldn't use it on brass, and certainly not on paint.  Good luck!

 

George P.

Many thanks George. I was going to start off with soft plastic scouring pad on the iron just to check what it removes. Noted about the steel wool on other materials.

What about the brass? The tin foil 'drum' (I still don't know the correct terminology) is pretty grimy. Brasso I would guess is wrong for this being slightly abrasive plus does it have ammonia in it? What else could be used to clean the grooves? It would be nice to get a little shine off it if possible.

[phonogfp]

Richard,

 

Here's a thread on this forum which will hopefully help:

 

 

Frankly, I wouldn't do much/anything to the decorations.  They look very nice and I don't know if there's any type of overcoat on them.  Those paints are nearly 150 years old and may be quite delicate.  A very gentle cleaning with a mild soap, and possibly a coat of wax (not car wax - preferably something like Renaissance Wax would be all I'd do on the paint.

 

Good luck!

 

George P.

 

 

[AtRicky1]

1 hour ago, phonogfp said:

Richard,

 

Here's a thread on this forum which will hopefully help:

 

 

Frankly, I wouldn't do much/anything to the decorations.  They look very nice and I don't know if there's any type of overcoat on them.  Those paints are nearly 150 years old and may be quite delicate.  A very gentle cleaning with a mild soap, and possibly a coat of wax (not car wax - preferably something like Renaissance Wax would be all I'd do on the paint.

 

Good luck!

 

George P.

 

 

Brilliant. Thanks George.

[phonogfp]

Happy to help!

 

George P.

[Andersun]

Absolutely beautiful machine! Rarety, provenance, history cant top that! I hope you have offspring to hand it down to! Thanks for sharing your treasure!

[Jerry]

On 1/7/2026 at 8:02 AM, AtRicky1 said:

Many thanks George. I was going to start off with soft plastic scouring pad on the iron just to check what it removes. Noted about the steel wool on other materials.

What about the brass? The tin foil 'drum' (I still don't know the correct terminology) is pretty grimy. Brasso I would guess is wrong for this being slightly abrasive plus does it have ammonia in it? What else could be used to clean the grooves? It would be nice to get a little shine off it if possible.

 

I would not dare to touch the brass. Its current patina is due to honest aging. It does NOT need to be shiny. As to the grime on the brass drum, as others recommend, use mild soap and a toothbrush to clean it up. Place a towel under the drum to protect the painted finish below it. Honestly, consulting with a professional museum conservator would be well worth any cost it may incur. At the very high level of value here, (both historic & monetary), any misstep could be something of a tragedy. Treat this piece as if it were the Lincoln rocker. 🙂

Edited Thursday at 04:57 PM by Jerry

[AtRicky1]

1 hour ago, Jerry said:

 

I would not dare to touch the brass. Its current patina is due to honest aging. It does NOT need to be shiny. As to the grime on the brass drum, as others recommend, use mild soap and a toothbrush to clean it up. Place a towel under the drum to protect the painted finish below it. Honestly, consulting with a professional museum conservator would be well worth any cost it may incur. At the very high level of value here, (both historic & monetary), any misstep could be something of a tragedy. Treat this piece as if it were the Lincoln rocker. 🙂

Very wise words Jerry, Thanks. I had actually ordered some Flitz that I think George had used. I saw it on Amazon but some were saying is discolored brass, so was wary. Some of the photos looked like it had changed brass to a slightly copper color, which didn't look good. I will as you suggest use a toothbrush and soap, with some clingfilm underneath to protect the paintwork. I had also actually ordered a screwdriver with a 12mm blade to unscrew the brackets/bearings that hold the 'axel' in place, so that I could remove it. I then thought what if using the screwdriver marked the bolts and how would I protect the paintwork around it if the screwdriver slipped? Anyway, I have decided on balance that this was a very, very bad idea. Maybe if the 'axel' was fused to the brackets/bearings, then it would be needed but the 'axel' can be rotated, moved and lubricated, so I'm 100% not doing that now.

 

I would like to remove the wooden box to restore it., but again I am concerned that it the screws that hold it in place might shear,  or the heads be burred. Caution again, no removal but mask off wood/metal with electrical tape where required. 

 

The only thing I will do is try to remove the rust on the 'flywheel' and 'axel' which should be straightforward with some plastic scouring pads, 0000 wool and WD40. I feel like 0000 is too scratchy - maybe a 100% cashmere wool pad would be best!

 

Can't afford a conservator unfortunately, but I know, if in doubt, leave it out..

I should really look up the terminology for all the component parts....

Best -

 

Richard 

Edited Thursday at 06:44 PM by AtRicky1

[AtRicky1]

I've just remembered about Castille soap. I used once it as it was recommended for removing bugs/mites from plants, without damaging them.

It's exceptionally mild and better than dish soap or other soap which may have 'nasties' in their composition. Looking it up it's SLS,SLES and paraben free.

I think this may the cleaner to use as a start?

[AtRicky1]

Thanks again everyone for your input. It is so nice to come to a forum where everyone is so pleasant, so dedicated, to what are quite amazing objects and their preservation. Long live early analogue and none of the digital c***!