The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I am also currently fooling around with an early french gramophone monarch. I received it without the elbow, the soundbox and the turntable felt.
I started its life as a front mount machine and evolved into its current form at some point in its life. As I do not have the resources to rebuild it as a front mount gramophone, which would destroy my records anyway, I am looking for input on how to finish it. I have seen similar machines (original and converted) with a big brass bell horns, but also with spear tip oak horns.

I have the same machine in my collection but complete with its original travelling arm, elbow and large witches hat horn - the French model had a nickel plated zinc horn whereas the UK models were often plain lacquered brass. I prefer the nickel so I'm glad to have the French (continental) version as you have.

If I had the example you have here, I'd be looking for a large witches hat horn, not a MG type (flower).

I'm not too sure that your machine started as a front mount. I think it was made during the transition when both types were available. It looks like it has a factory plug covering the front mount position. When you remove the back bracket do you see any evidence, such as very small nail holes, that would indicate it once had a plate about removing the plate to attach the tapered tone arm? If not I'd say it left the factory in its current configuration..

You have many choices for a horn. Here in the U.S. a medium size to large black and brass horn would be perfect. The original owners upgraded their machines to make them appear like the slightly later Victor machines with the black Victor Flower horns or even the oak horns. Your machine would be spectacular with an oak spearpoint horn. Originals are expensive but reproductions are reasonable. You have an enviable dilemma.

Jerry Blais

This machine would be totally inappropriate for a laminated wooden horn. It is a European badged machine, pre-dating that type of horn and would have only ever had a witches hat type horn in this particular configuration. I also disagree that it probably wasn't ever a front mount. The oval blanking plate clearly covers the place where the rigid arm could be mounted. There are numerous specimens of this and other contemporary models out there that don't have anything "hidden" behind the tapered back-bracket because there wasn't anything mounted there in the travelling arm configuration.

I'm certainly no authority on European versions of Victor products and don't pretend to be. Here in the States original owners occasionally upgraded from the black & brass horn to the Flower or wood horn to make their machine more current. Perhaps that practice was less common elsewhere.

I have seen many Victor cabinets factory drilled for either front or rear mount applications. Those machines were built during the transition when any given model could be sold in either configuration. I was suggesting this machine fell into this time period.

My "rigid arm" MS has the back bracket mounted where a tapered arm back bracket is also mounted. Do European collectors refer to front mount setups as "rigid arm"? When the owner of a front mount Victor purchased the assembly to convert his machine to a rear mount was a plug to cover the front mount holes included? I'd still look for small nail holes. If it has little holes around the tapered arm back bracket area it started as a front mount.

Respectfully submitted,
Jerry Blais

It startet its life as a front mount machine, as there are used holes under the plate. The dealer plaque has been, where the tone-armbracket now is, as there are 4 corresponding small holes. As all the parts are original and the patina of the finish showed, this was done relatively early.

I am roaming Ebay anyways, for an original brass horn, I also thought, maybe, as the parts are not really original to the machine anyways I might go with a oak horn.
I would be happy with a good reproduction brass horn in the meantime, but I have not found any of those yet.

What Jerry is trying to say, is that the set-up you have, with evidence of the cover plate where the back bracket now is, is a legitimate conversion, as the case was made from the start with the option of using either arm. Maybe yours began its life with a front mount arm, but it was always an option to change it over to a rear mount. In other words, nobody butchered it to make this conversion.

Jerry Van and Jerry B: your points are good ones, but Teak has the machine in front of him. He sees wear and tear in the holes where an arm was once mounted (have I got that right?) That being the case, I doubt it started life as a rear-mount machine that someone then converted to a front-mount. The conversion would have only gone one way. From a technical standpoint, a rear mount assembly is far superior to a front mount. Some of the weight is off the record, you can point the horn in the direction you want the sound to go, and the machine takes up less space.

here some pictures to base my assumptions on:


i really love the old motor with the fibre gear!

i have found a catalogue scan, from which could be the right catalogue, but different gramophone. The picture is interesting never the less. There is definitely something there, left next to the bracket.

The top photo in Teak's last post tell the story of this fine machine.

The four tiny nail holes indicate this machine had a "remove this plate..." tag which covered the factory drilled holes for a rear mount setup.

That means it left the factory as a front mount machine.

That also means it left the factory with both sets of holes.

Yes, I believe it was a front mount for only a few years before the owner purchased the rear mound parts, removed the covering tag, and enjoyed the machine for years.

What I find interesting is the cover over the front mount hole. Was that cover included with all of the rear mount parts when a machine was converted? Why cover the hole because it's now in the back of the machine and really not seen?

Jerry Blais