Talmud for Menachot 55:19

תנו רבנן כל הכלים

if made of gold it must be a talent [in weight], if not of gold it need not be a talent. Its cu its knops, and its flowers:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXV, 31. vrubn');">²⁰</span> if made of gold there must then be cups, knops and flowers, if not of gold there need be neither cups nor knops nor flowers. Perhaps I ought also to say, If made of gold there must then be branches, if not of gold there need be no branches! - That would be called a lamp.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not a , a branched candlestick.');">²¹</span> And this was the work of the candlestick, beaten work of gold:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VIII, 4.');">²²</span> if of gold it must be beaten work, if not of gold it need not be beaten work. And what use is made of the [second] expression 'beaten work' in this last [verse]? - It serves to exclude the trumpets.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. ibid. X. 2ff. Thus the two silver trumpets need not be beaten work.');">²³</span> For it was taught: The trumpets had to be made [each] from one mass and of silver; if made from scraps [of silver] they are valid, if from other metals they are invalid. Now why are they invalid if made from other metals? presumably because it is written 'of silver'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">²⁴</span> and also 'shall be';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">²⁴</span> then when made from scraps they should also be invalid, should they not, since it is written 'beaten work'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">²⁴</span> and 'shall be'? Scripture therefore stated in connection with the candlestick, It was beaten work,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VIII, 4.');">²²</span> 'it' [was beaten work] but not the trumpets. Our Rabbis taught: All the vessels

Tractate Tzitzit