I'd definitely agree with that sentiment - not all antique phonographs at this point are really meant for playing, more for just display in some cases... particularly in certain cases where the machines played a significant, if not just interesting or quirky, role in the history of recorded sound. so if you've got the space and the inclination, I'd clean that machine up and get it back together as it was when you found it...JohnM wrote:I concur on the inflated serial number theory. My Biggs 'Castle Grand' is s/n 1900, and I'm fairly certain that it is the first (and perhaps, only) one that was built. It was designed in 1919, and I think they started the numbering with the last two digits of the year. http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=2369
I vote to leave it as an 'Operaphone', even if it remains in an uncompleted state. It needs to be preserved as a historical artifact rather than as parts for an Actuelle (which are scarce, but certainly not rare). I've never seen an Operaphone phonograph in any condition in 42 years of collecting. Perhaps another-- or even some paper documentation -- will turn up that will give you guidance on what the finished product looked like. If it doesn't happen in your lifetime, then by all means, please just preserve it for the next generation.
The Operaphone horn is Brunny-like.
unless of course further research reveals that this was actually just pieced together in a basement somewhere... but that doesn't yet seem to be the case. nevertheless, that's definitely a Pathé Actuelle cabinet (I have the same one in oak), and the motor looks right as well.