beezaboy - Posted - 01/25/2011:  04:46:13

Heads up:
cgi.ebay.com/Ca-1910-DAYTON-Ba...e6129bb60

Curious that seller and banjo are in Sioux City.

Edited by - beezaboy on 01/25/2011 04:48:27

Slingerland - Posted - 01/25/2011:  05:50:13

Thanks, John!

Both Two Trax (Tim Canuelle) and I have conducted extensive Federal Census, city directory, and other research for both Dayton, Ohio and Sioux City, IA, regarding the Dayton String Instrument Co. (DSI). The fruits of this research will be published and made for public consumption at some point.

So far, the research suggests that DSI never moved production from Dayton, Ohio, as previously thought. At this point, the best explanation for the Sioux City connection is that this was a sales department. The cadenza articles from 1923 list Sioux City as a "General Sales Department" for DSI. The closest business found in the Sioux City city directories was Templeman Plectrum Quartette & Mandolin Orchestra (located at 406 4th st, the DSI ad lists the address for the DSI sales department at 404 4th st). This information comes from the 1927 Sioux City city directory.

Chas. B. Rauch, the founder/sole proprietor of DSI was also director of the Dayton Mandolin Orchestra. At the most, it appears that some sales could have went through Sioux City with some possible connection with the Templeman. There is no mention of DSI or Chas. B. Rauch in any city directory in Sioux City. The Dayton city directories show DSI being active as instrument manufacturers until at least 1938. After which time, DSI is listed as a musical instrument dealer. After Rauch died in 1943, his wife is listed with DSI, until at least 1946 as musical instrument dealers.

To recap, there is no evidence to indicate the company moved from Dayton, Ohio and there is significant evidence to show that they did not in fact move.

© 2011 Paul Dolce

Edited by - Slingerland on 01/25/2011 06:39:50

Slingerland - Posted - 01/25/2011:  06:34:22

Here is the updated database:


© 2011 Paul Dolce

Edited by - Slingerland on 01/25/2011 06:35:38

beezaboy - Posted - 01/25/2011:  07:32:48

Paul:
Some very nice work. The Dayton table is especially well done
(except at some point you might consider adding a date column
if you can....you know how banjo people are always interested
in the date something was made).

But, the tenor banjo necks were still skinny.

Edited by - beezaboy on 01/25/2011 07:33:25

Slingerland - Posted - 01/25/2011:  07:54:27

Thanks, John. The table is just a screen shot from the Excel file. You're right about the skinny necks. Tim's plectrum also has a skinny neck and exceptionally small headstock. I like it.

About the dates- there is a lot of discovery that needs to be done. At this point, we can say that serial number 4 was made during 1911 (the patent was pending). Also, serial number 1000 is around 1922 because we see the shift from the Rauch label to the DSI label. The 1922 Dayton city directory contains the first entry for DSI. In the 1910 census, Rauch is listed as a music teacher, not manufacturer like in the 1920 and 1930 censuses. It appears that Rauch started making instruments as a profession in 1911.

During the 30s, there are references to Chas. B. Rauch as a commercial printer at the same address of his workshop. I would be interested to know what he was printing. I would assume at a minimum, materials related to his business (catalogs, instrument labels, flyers, etc). After 1938 DSI is listed as a dealer not a manufacturer.

The meaning of the serial numbers is something we are in the process of understanding. With our limited examples so far, there are large gaps in the numbers and they seem to pool around certain areas. Our best estimate of Rauch's years of production is 1911-1938, roughly 27 years. We have thus far accounted for a range of serial numbers, that if taken to run consecutively, would indicate that Rauch made an average of 1 instrument every 3 days during this time. To me this seems like a lot of instruments for a small operation to be putting out. Rauch is also listed as a music teacher during the years of instrument manufacturing. This would seem to suggest to me that he made less than 1 instrument every 3 days. But this is just speculation.

There is still a lot to learn, but progress is being made.

© 2011 Paul Dolce

Edited by - Slingerland on 01/27/2011 22:46:12