[oscartg]

I've got some minutes to kill so I'm going to make some obvious points about wood finish.

The goal of wood finish is to protect and enhance the appearance of the wood its on. The problem is that goal too often conflicts with production schedules.
The  two most common finishes used throughout the 20th century were lacquer and shellac, neither are very good wood (or even adequate) finishes.
The very thing that made each appealing to production is their problem, they dry too fast.
Lacquer and shellac sit on the wood, they do not absorb into the wood, that's why things like a dent or a ding will blow off finish and why they age so poorly. Just like with paint, the constant expansion and shrinking of wood inevitably leads to the finish merrily separating from the wood it's supposed to protect.

The sad fact is, manufacturers didn't select finishes for their outstanding protection qualities, but rather ease and speed of application and then of course, cost.

When I refinish anything, my goal is that the piece I'm doing will last one or several lifetimes given normal care. That cannot be expected of shellac or lacquer.
Yeah, yeah, some will shout "but it's not original!". Well, if it was junk when originally applied and it's still junk today, why repeat the mistake?

[Ron Ramirez]

It's your radios and you are of course free to use polyurethane, chalk paint, smear mud or cow dung on the cabinets, or whatever. I'll stick (no pun intended) to lacquer finishes. I can only add what Rev. Mason used to say - You may not agree with me. You have every right to be wrong if you want to be.

[oscartg]

Stick. Lacquer.

Good one.

[John Bartley]

I don't think I have ever seen a mass produced tube radio finished with shellac. Given that they have survived in some cases for over eighty years, I would have to say that the lacquer finishes applied to the sets we work on have stood up pretty well. I see no reason to deviate from tradition.

[oscartg]

I have yet to see a lacquer finished cabinet with an intact 80 year old finish.

http://www.antiquewireless.org/uploads/1...radios.pdf

[Ron Ramirez]

I've seen several good original finishes. I have a Philco 38-690 that, while it has some scratches and minor blemishes from being an 80 year old survivor, it has its original finish and none of it is peeling off or otherwise missing.

Now, I agree that there was something wrong with the lacquer used on many 1936 Philco shouldered tombstones - it seems that most of those are missing their dark toner to a greater or less degree after several decades.

[oscartg]

I should qualify what and why I would refinish any piece.
In this business (refinishing) there are only two types of wood; fire, and everything else.

[oscartg]

I've seen several good original finishes. I have a Philco 38-690 that, while it has some scratches and minor blemishes from being an 80 year old survivor, it has its original finish and none of it is peeling off or otherwise missing.

Now, I agree that there was something wrong with the lacquer used on many 1936 Philco shouldered tombstones - it seems that most of those are missing their dark toner to a greater or less degree after several decades.

Can you post a good, close-up picture of this radio?

[Ron Ramirez]

If you mean the 38-690, look here:

http://philcoradio.com/phorum/showthread.php?tid=18450

[oscartg]

That's a cool radio. It literally oozes the late 1930's. That tambor door is neat.

Is the bulk of that cabinet actual wood burl, or photo finish?

[Ron Ramirez]

No photofinish on the 38-690, thankfully! It is good that Philco treated their top of the line radio...like a top of the line radio and did not cheapen it by using photofinish.

[EdHolland]

Interesting discussion Oscar. If you have a preferred finish other than shellac or laquer, could you please share your methods?

I'm in the midst of deciding to do with the cabinet of my '41 RCA console. A previous restorer washed it over with something that is now flaking away, leaving the original finish behind, plus also the newer damage seen before it reached my care.

Some test areas have been rubbed lightly with fine wire wool to explore the possibilites of removing the overcoat, or finding that the original finish needs to go etc. I would like to preserve the original decals if possible. One test area - a nice veneer that wraps from the front mounted dial and over the top was stripped back (except for the decals), and I have experimented with building up a Tung oil finish. This is starting to look nice, and blends the stripped and non stripped areas rather well (as applied). My goal is to make the radio look respectable, but some "patina" is acceptable on an antique object. There is some chipped toning on corner moldings to deal with as well as larger area finish. It also has fake Photofinish cross-banding which is in good shape, and which I will not disturb. Working around this is another area for thought.


/Ed

[Arran]

I don't think that there is inherently anything wrong with either a lacquer, or a shellac finish, depending on the grade of the lacquer or the shellac and how it is applied. My grandfather was a furniture finisher, he took an apprenticeship and the method he learned was French polishing, with shellac, which involved applying the shellac step by step, by hand, with a pad or tampon. I can quite assure you that if you use the French polishing method of applying shellac the shellac does penetrate the wood, the main disadvantage is that it is slow, but it really brings up the grain, is easily repaired, and it has a sort of sheen that's hard to match.
  I would not use polyurethane on any piece of furniture unless it was intended to be kept outdoors, in spite of popular misconceptions it is not an eternal finish, as it ages it tends to turn a sort of disgusting green colour, and ultraviolet will ruin it just like any other finish. It also takes forever to cure, weeks if not up to a month or more, and if you mess it up the only way to get it off is with paint and varnish remover verses acetone or alcohol for lacquer and shellac, no thanks!
Regards
Arran

[tbone]

I have a 1937 Zenith with original finish and grille cloth. The only part refinished is the base that was kicked, and bumped over the years. That just took a quick strip, toner and top coat.
Most of my high end radios had too many blemishes, water rings, or poor attempts at refinishing which were unacceptable to me, so they were refinished.

I will say that today’s lacquers and finishes are made better then 80+ year old finishes, but as stated earlier, they all have their +’s and -‘s.

I have tried French polishing, and it is really time consuming. Not a bad idea for a piece that needs a touch up, but it is the least durable of the finishes.

Polyurethane is a very durable top coat. I like it for table tops and high wear pieces. Waterlox polyurethane is one of the best for leveling. It too can be rubbed out if desired.

When I start a refinish job, I like to use sealers and wash coats between steps. This helps if something goes wrong by allowing you to strip off the top most layer, leaving the rest intact. Wash coats of shellac or Zinsser Seal Coat are great for this.

I found that OZ polish is great to protect a top coat from finger prints UV light etc. if you are looking for a semi gloss mirror smooth finish, you can rub out gloss lacquer with OZ and 0000 wool.

For me lacquer is the way to go on radios. If it does eventually go bad, I will likely be 6 feet under not worrying about my radios.

[John Bartley]

Here's an original finish (below) The only thing on this that is not original is the grille cloth.

I've had quite a few that were original, with (as Ron says) some battle damage from five/six/seven decades of life, but certainly nothing to scoff at.

I have another one here (not pictured), a Columbia superhet from 1931 which I purchased from the original owner in 1974.  It has only ever been worked on by me, and the biggest damage on it are the tooth marks from an enthusiastic Westie puppy some 18 years ago.