Scott Models evolution - consolidating what we are discovering.

[David C. Poland]

Been interesting to follow threads on this site. Some recent threads have delved into considerable detail on the nuances that reveal evolution on a model and challenges during restorations. Unfortunately, as time goes by, very good information becomes buried in old site threads.

E H Scott Labs was, after all, a custom builder. Scott made running changes to improve production models, some changes were minor, some not so minor. Riders is incomplete. Diagrams found do not keep pace with actual set variations found. Some diagrams appear to have an error or two, or omit a standard sub-circuit.

For example, I am aware the 1938-9 Super XII evolved through at least 4 variations considering just the dial, power supply and control configurations. The 12 tube 1932-34 Allwave Deluxe and Allwave Deluxe with AVC sets exhibit at least 6 notable evolutionary changes considering tube complements, cable revisions, features, speakers and audio circuits ... so, early and late amps are not interchangeable. The model FIFTEEN has even more variations just for the receiver. The current threads on the Philharmonic have been most educational for me as three folks are currently involved in restorations. Some of us may have already assembled considerable information for one or another model.

Perhaps it is time to develop Overview Documents to summarize our collective knowledge of each model Scott. Such a document might begin first with an introductory paragraph of primary features that define and differentiate that model. Next, a statement to describe that model's evolution to help someone identify the variation at hand for restoration. Finally, for each variation, some bullet points unique to each variation, perhaps including the proper diagram date or an illustrative photo, to help guide a restoration.

Each Overview Document could reside in the respective Archive Set Folder of this Scott web site.

Perhaps one or another of us could volunteer to be point man for one model. I envision the point man combining his own information and experience with information appearing on the site threads in order to prepare a draft document. When sufficiently developed, the point man could share the draft with a few select folks (peer review) for comment and clarifications. Then submit the revised draft to this site's moderator(s) for review and approval, for addition to the appropriate Set Folder in Archives. To keep the Overview Document current, the point man is probably best suited to watch for new information coming to light and submit the occasional updated document to the site moderator(s). I would volunteer to develop a prototype document using, say, the Super XII, as I have two variations in my collection and access to a couple more.

Seems to me the site moderators would want to consider if such an effort would be in keeping with the purpose of this site, and what limitations may be warranted. The site moderators already have much to do without trying to spearhead an effort like this. So, I suggest parsing out models as described to willing members.

Comments anyone?

[Scott Seickel]

This is exactly what I want to do with the Philharmonic. Trace and document it's evolution.  Sometimes it is just the littlest things that I feel are worthy- like learning yesterday that the very earliest dial pointers had a different name plate.

I think that each model should maybe have a different thread to discuss the differences and evolution. That data can then be assembled to a document. The document can be updated as new information is discovered. I do wish the Scott News issues were all scanned and online.  They would provide helpful information. I don't own any of the issues that are missing online. 

I plan on seeing what I can do to make this happen in the future, after I am no longer bogged down with my current projects.

[David C. Poland]

Thanks Scott,
The first of the Philly amps also had a different rectifier, too - pair of 83v's briefly instead of 5Z3's.
I too have some projects to do first. Seems like i have less time since retirement.
Meanwhile, I look forward to some other's comments.

[Ken Carr]

Might I suggest that a database ( such as Microsoft Access) would be a starting point for collecting data on individual sets. A group of some 30-40 fields including a free form comment field would be the basic descriptor (record) for each set belonging to a contributor.
As more sets are added (some with minimal data and some well documented) it would become possible to run a series of queries that would reveal patterns which may improve our understanding of how the model line evolved.

[David C. Poland]

Ken - Interesting idea.
I had experience with Access in my previous life. Allows for searches for a model and targeted data of interest.. The challenge would be to define a sufficiently meaningful set of fields that are applicable across the range of models. Consider the likely fields needed before including anything very technical:
- 3 identifiers fields for an example set: 1) chassis serial number (as an account number), 2) Model & 3) model variant.
- Likely 10 more fields just for controls: The FM Philly's 8 controls overlap most models, except BFO, expander & maybe static.
- 2 fields for tube complement - tube count, and the tube list of the receiver ... and amp.
By the time you allow for the complexities of the later models, could be way more than 40 fields.
I have no idea of what environment or platform would be affordable and user accessible for user data input and also searches. Not very intuitive for a novice. And how to secure it against misuse or mischief. Probably require a key control person and a big time commitment.
Someone on Antique Radio Forum is seeking data on Zeniths for a project - wonder how that is progressing.
Somehow, I would prefer to spend my time on restorations, cabinet work and playing them.
Hence, the appeal of preparing model specific document to add to the respective set folder. Something that can guide someone, especially a relative novice, in having a more successful Scott experience.

[Kent King]

My thoughts:

I really think that individual Word documents will be best. While not as searchable as a database, you can include inline diagrams or pictures to describe and enhance the documentation. Maybe we can define a common report format for this effort, that might help us to locate relevant information more easily.

Next item...we can certainly keep these files in the "Set Folders", that makes sense. However, I can't open up "write" capability to everyone for these folders. I am quite willing to receive updates and place them into the folders as needed. I have a bunch of materials that I need to get scanned and put into the set folders too. We've all got more to do, and this is a hobby after all (or is it?).

If anyone does get this started, send your documents to my usual email ([e-mail]). I will get these into the archive folders and we'll see how things go.

Kent

[Angelo]

Zenith projects going great.Big job to do all the Scott changes that were done over the years.I would stop with the Philharmonic, or maybe the 800B. Military sets wonder if they should be done.Getting all the data would mean we all have to look at our sets to see what changes were done, not easy as the Philharmonics a very heavy set to take out ect..This would be a long term project to do but would be so very helpful to so many..