Having recently confirmed that Jack Gentul was in charge of designing the circuitry for Sano's tube amps from about 1953 to about 1963, I began looking more closely at Sano amps dating from the time when Jack would have been transitioning into Hilgen.  So far as I can tell, Hilgen used only one style of knob on every single amplifier it made, for all controls on the amplifier.  Most, but not all, Hilgens had rotary power knobs rather than pole switches, and on the Model 5063 Swing Away the power knob included a standby position between on and off.

I also infer that the screws must have tended to loosen on the Hilgen knobs, because it is very common to see an assortment of different knobs on the same amp or a complete replacement of the original knobs with vintage but non-original types.

In any event, I first noticed that the Sano amps produced during the transition period used the same knobs Hilgen later used.  Then I noticed that the "Sano" brand name was not always included on the black control panel.   Finally, I noticed a Sano for sale on eBay that had Hilgen knobs, a Hilgen-style back-panel, and a control panel that looked almost exactly like the control panel on the smaller Hilgen black-face amps, minus the Hilgen name.  So, I recklessly bought the amp to see what's inside it.  I wonder how similar the circuits and components will be....!

By the way, some Hilgen amps did go through a transition from "black-face" to "silver-face" control panels at about the same time that Fender did.  I know that for a fact with respect to the Troubador model, having personally seen a chrome control panel on a 1967 model and a black control panel on a 1965.   Because I do not own a pair of Hilgen models in both black-face and silver-face versions, I do not know if the cosmetic change was accompanied by any changes of circuitry.  I doubt it.  But it would be hilarious if some day people start arguing over whether the black-face Hilgens are "better than" the silver faces.  Now that would be hype!  (I think.)

It is frustrating when the only persons who have first-hand knowledge of historical events are either advanced in years or dead.  Because few of us expect to be remembered, we do little or nothing to document what we have done in this world.  Thus the researcher is forced to search for scraps of information, never intended to be preserved for posterity, but which by some odd chance have escaped destruction or decay.  We leave little traces of ourselves here and there, most frequently glimpses that other people have had of us, and of which they kept records -- seldom because they wished to celebrate us, but merely because it was part of their job description to keep half an eye on us. 

I am shocked to realize that the events I am attempting to illuminate happened nearly half a century ago.  I was alive then -already ten years old. Yet almost everything I want to know I cannot learn, because those who once knew have passed away, no longer remember, or were never interested in the first place.

All things must pass.  But I don't have to like it.

I am forced to presume that the Heppner speakers in Model 5063 Swing Away Guitarist "1 of 2" are replacements until someone finds an identical installation. The solder joints have all been disturbed; someone skillfully rewired the cabinets with something similar to "Monster Cable" and added a new input jack.  Furthermore, (a) the finish on the left-hand speaker (viewed from the back) has been marred slightly in the vicinity of the speaker mounting screws, perhaps by vice-grip pliers; and (b) there are star washers on all of the left-hand speaker mounting screws but none on the right-hand speaker.  This does not render it impossible that the speakers were original; but it does render it impossible to prove definitively that they were.

It was fascinating to see that the Heppners definitely had dissimilar speaker cones.  The right-hand speaker (viewed from the back) had a relatively flat, ribbed cone, while the left-hand speaker had a smooth cone that was shaped somewhat like  the bell of a trumpet.  The ribbed cone carries model number AO-24346-0, while the other displays model number AO-24347-0. Research indicates that this combination of speakers were used in Model L-100 and other Hammond console-style organs. The ribbed cone handles low frequencies while the horn-shaped cone emphasizes higher frequencies, thus creating an apparent cross-over where there is no cross-over in fact.

The speakers both had a light coating of dirt -- not just dust. I infer that they were not installed recently. It remains odd that someone would have replaced original speakers with relatively unknown Heppner speakers rather than more popular brands of speaker.  If there was a modification, the person may have been aware that Hilgen amplifiers commonly used Heppner speakers -- or the originals may have been Heppners as well, which made the choice of replacement speaker more obvious.

Once again, I do not understand comments I have seen in Internet forums suggesting that the Heppner organ speakers sound "bad," especially for guitar amps, or can handle no more than about 10-15 watts.  These speakers are matched with an amp having a power rating of about 50 watts RMS, sound wonderful, and show no signs of being stressed beyond their power-handling capacity.  I suspect that speakers that do  not sound the way some people expect them to sound tend to be deemed "bad."  However, my hypothesis is that the fault lies with their expectations, and not with the speakers themselves.  One could argue that Paul McCartney's tone on his Hoffner violin bass is "bad" because it does not sound like a Musicman Stingray.  However, that argument is unlikely to be well-received.

If Heppners are as bad as they are reputed to be, it is difficult to explain why Hammond switched to Heppners from the much-ballyhooed Jensen speakers.  It is unlikely that Hammond's marketing gurus aimed to decrease sales of their products by causing them to sound inferior to their earlier models and those of their competitors.

I spoke for about an hour this afternoon with Fred Zonfrilli, elder son of Joe Zonfrilli, one of the founders of Sano Amps.  Fred, at 75 years old, is a prince of a man.  Many thanks to the ever-generous and humblingly-talented Larry John McNally for helping me make this connection. Check out http://www.larryjohnmcnally.com  Additional most sincere thanks to Mike Zonfrilli for trusting me to contact his dad.

I need to correct some of my information about Jack Gentul, but the timeline is starting to make sense. One really significant piece of information for now:  Jack Gentul designed all but the earliest of the Sano tube amp circuits, and ran the manufacturing side of Sano for just over a decade. So Jack is not only the fountainhead of Hilgen amps, but Sano amps as well.

Not a bad track record.

Will revise Jack Gentul page tomorrow with new information.

I thought of something weird.

They usually don't say much on the speaker code sites about  anything besides the 6-digit numerical code that indicates the manufacturer, year, and week when the speaker was built.  However, there are usually other strings of numerical or alpha-numerical codes that are longer than 6 characters.  They don't explain that, perhaps because different manufacturers used them for different purposes.

Yesterday I looked back at the notes I took when I first uncorked my first Model 5063 Swing Away. (I ought to give it a name...maybe " 1 of 2," a fine old Borg moniker.) I noticed that the alpha-numerical codes for the two speakers were different.  After a lot of research, I found a source who asserted that these particular codes are the same combination of codes used on dual-speaker Hammond organs in the 1960's.  The same source indicated that the speakers have disparate frequency responses, with one intended to handle relatively low-frequency tones, and the other designed to handle mid- and high-frequency tones.

This suggests two hypotheses. You may recall that the speakers in "1 of 2" (I'm getting to like that name) are dated to 1963.  This means either that (a) they are organ pulls from a 1963 Hammond organ that someone used to replace the original speakers in a 1966 amp, or (b) they are the original speakers taken from old stock -- meaning that Jack Gentul intended the amp to use two speakers with different frequency responses.  That would be consistent with the concept of the Sano models that had combinations of one 15" plus two 8" speakers.  In any event, the disparate frequency handling could explain why this amp sounds as good as it does: because the speakers are reproducing a wider range of frequencies than would be the case if it had two identical speakers.

I can't wait to open up the back of "1 of 2" to check the solder joints and other evidence of whether the speakers are original.  If they are, then Jack Gentul had a theory of guitar amplification that was quite unorthodox, adventurous, and freaking cool.  Extended tonal range through paired speakers with different frequency responses.  Wow...

As I get deeper and deeper into the research for this site, I am finding that the Hilgen story arises out of a web of relationships among guys who were connected with super high-end hi-fi in the 1950's. These guys weren't a bunch of hacks trying to copy Fenders or more popular brands to make a quick buck. They had a different idea about how electric guitars could or should sound. Several of them held patents for critical advances in the design of amplifiers and loudspeakers.  Maybe geeks, but not shysters.

Judging from the Internet, most modern guitarists sneer at folks like Jack Gentul because they didn't make it big.  The assumption seems to be that if someone has built an excellent product, lots of people will purchase it;  if they don't, the product must be inferior.  That assumption rests on another assumption: that people know about the product, try it, and reject it on its merits.  But what if they don't even know the product exists? 

Jack Gentul did not have control over how his amps were advertised or distributed; that was left in another, more powerful person's hands.   And that person was not interested in making any substantial investment in Hilgen.

I have possession of a distributor's catalog from about 1966.  The distributor, "Music Distributors, Inc.," was from Charlotte, North Carolina.  This company apparently had the account for distributing Hilgen Amps.  The other products in the catalog are execrable.  Unbelievably hideous, low-priced guitars and amps.  If I'd run a music store in the mid 1960's and someone had handed me that catalog, I would probably have thrown it away either (a) without reading it, in which case I would never hear about Hilgen amplifiers, or (b) after reading it, in which case I would assume that Hilgens were junk and nothing I'd want to sell in my store.

And what about Elmore Heppner?

But that's another story...