A Blue Royal Purple Amberol?

[casathious]

Hello to my fellow collectors...I am new to this board, so I hope you can help me!

I recently purchased some cylinders from a seller online on Craigslist, and one of the cylinders I bought was "Life's Dream is O'er" by Marie Rappold and Carolina Lazzri, #29051, which is supposedly a Royal Purple Amberol. However, I asked the seller to double-check that the proper Royal Purple box was included with the cylinder, and she informed me that the cylinder was not purple in the first place--she says it was blue, and that it was in a blue box. (I have not yet seen nor received the cylinder, so I cannot say for sure that this is true, but I'm assuming it is).

Not only was I disappointed, but I was perplexed. How is it that this Royal Purple Amberol ended up being blue? I've heard of a few early Royal Purples being also found in blue, but #29051 was not at all early in the series. Anyway, I still bought it, but I am quite frustrated that it's not a Royal Purple!

Does anyone know how this might have happened?

[maroongem]

Hi.

You pose a great question as I have several of the higher numbered Royal Purple series as well in blue celluloid. The first six (29000-29006) were originally issued in 1913 in blue as "Grand Opera" series and when the Royal Purple line debuted in 1918, these 6 were re-released in the new purple celluloid as well as the subsequent ones and the box was changed as well. The price was also higher, $1.50 as opposed to $1.00 for the standard BA. I was told that these blue 29000s were made after the manufacture of the Royal Purple Series ended around 1921 and sold at the regular price in the standard blue BA box.
You at least scored an opera selection, as many of the 77 Royal Purples that were released were of mediocre content. It's too bad that the entire series wasn't devoted to opera!

Bill

[casathious]

I know this is a very late response, but after encountering a rather rude comment made about me I felt I ought to address it. I came across a post on another board from someone who I presume is the same person who responded to me here. It said:

"Don't hold your breath for a reply. This person never responded to his Youtube comments nor did he reply to his post on the Edison board.

Bill"

Well, that was on March 11, which was only four days after I posted my first comment, so I think that was a little early to say that I "never" reply to my comments. However, the main reason I am responding now is to prove that I can respond to things if they warrant my attention, which they evidently do now. I appreciated your information about the Blue Royal Purple cylinders, but I didn't think there was anything left to say, so that's why I didn't reply. I'm sorry if that offended you, as it apparently did, but I don't think it was any reason to be rude.

As for my YouTube videos, I hardly ever post on YouTube, and I seldom sign into my YouTube account to check messages, let alone reply to them. Also, I have other things to do and have had a lot on my mind lately, so checking YouTube, or these forums for that matter, haven't been at the top of that priority list.

Again, I'm sorry for my tardy reply, but in the future I would appreciate it if you wouldn't take my lack of prompt responses personally, and wouldn't go out of your way to paint me as uncaring, when in truth you know little about me. I am an enthusiastic Edison collector, and everything I posted about my treasure trove of cylinders was the truth, but I have a lot of other things on my mind these days, so sometimes I am remiss in my non-essential communications such as these.

~Casey

[maroongem]

Casey,

I'm sorry if you felt my comment was rude. It was made due to the fact that you had signed on here after I answered your question rather promptly and you for what ever reason, didn't reply.
All to often, members here answer questions and never receive the simple courtesy of a reply, which is rather unfair as they took the time to respond to your question(s).

Bill