You're very welcome Scott!!! A big thank you goes to Ralph Lee Smith. He is the expert on dulcimers and has done some extensive research. If you ever get the opportunity take a class with him do it. He has some amazing stories especially on how he acquired his collection of dulcimers. I thoroughly enjoyed his class and wish we had more time to pick his brain. I find it valuable to know the history of these wonderful instruments. It makes me appreciate them even more

Scott, if you look at the upper edge of the strum hollow you'll see that the shadow is very narrow on the left. That's the wear on the strum hollow. Because it had been played a lot that part of the strum hollow edge is just about worn down to the strum hollow.

Thanks Lisa! I think they're both beauties too

We didn't measure them but they appear to be the same. The fret board on the real Prichard is a bit narrower. Ken mentioned that the repro was slightly larger. The peg head on the real Prichard is not original. It was made by Keith Young and it is a bit smaller than the repro. Ralph said when he found the Prichard the peg head was mostly gone. Also he believes the dulcimer was apart and put back together at one time. The evidence points to that as the fiddle edges are not lined up with what should be a overhang on some of the curves of the bouts. You can also see remnants of glue residue on the side. It also had been played a lot as there is wear on the strum hollow upper player's side edge. For an instrument that is about 125 years old and seen some hard times it's in decent shape and is playable. Ken took a good look at both and probably could give some of his thoughts.

The fretboard seems narrower on the old one, the strings closer together, and the peghead more petite.

Are the scale lengths exactly the same or not?

But both are real beauties!

That's neat to see them together!

About the only way to tell them apart is the wear on the real Prichard.