LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  January 2008

ARSCLIST January 2008

Subject:

Re: Discographical puzzle

From:

Richard Warren <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:48:52 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (160 lines)

Hi Steve,

Here's some more information on Yale's copy, inserted in your comments.

Best, Richard


At 12:03 PM 1/19/2008, you wrote:
>On closer examination:
>
>The label designs appear identical.   However, the copyright notices differ:
>
>The one lacking the takes says, "This Record (made by patented 
>process) must not be sold below price fixed by patentees"
>
>The other says, "Copyright,patented Record.  Not to be publicly 
>performed without license nor sold below price fixed by patentees."


>  ****Yale's copy has this notice.
>
>Both Faery Song sides say (A 3551) at the 9 oclock position on the label.
>
>For The Minstrel, the one without the take says (A 3817) there.  The 
>one with the take has "speed 80" and the matrix number without 
>parentheses is beneath the publisher's logo at the bottom of the label.

****Both sides of Yale's copy have matrix number without parentheses 
at 6 o'clock on the label.


>So much for them appearing to be identical labels at first glance.
>
>I'm not an expert on the sequence of English Columbia labels, but 
>they seem to be from the post WW II era, my guess from having 
>handled many of them over the years.

****Yale's copy seems to me to be post WW 2, as well (relatively thin 
pressing and general "appearance").




>All four sides have the W in a circle in a position different from 
>that where the matrix number appers.
>
>The copy without the takes has th R following the number on the label.
>
>A3551, Faery Song, is preceeded by the W in a circle before the mx 
>no as well.  On the other side, A3817, there is no W in a circle in 
>that position.

****Yale's copy has W in circle before each mx. no. and has no R on 
either label -- to me the "no R" suggests late pressing.


>On the copy with the takes, there is an R following the number on 
>the label on the Faery Song side but not on The Minstrel.
>
>The circled W preceeds each matrix number in the dead wax.
>
>The old single side number in the dead wax is
>
>Faery    23297
>Minstrel    23838
>
>on both.

>**** Yale's copy has the same numbers in the same postions. I very 
>much doubt that these recordings were ever issued single-sided, so 
>we might want to consider these numbers as side numbers.
>
>Physical measuremnts from groove beginning to end is identical on both copies.
>
>So it is with variable reluctance that I ask again, "what's going on 
>here?" Perhaps there are significant discographic clues that may 
>flow from this comparison, but can't figger out what they might be.
>
>Is one a dub?
>
>I recall a similar problem on some post-war English recorded 
>Parlophone Tauber discs but don't remember which ones fit into this 
>pattern anymore.
>
>There may be some underlying factory practice at the root of this.
>
>At worst, this should indicate earler or later  pressings or, 
>perhaps, different factories.  The sequence of labels should come 
>clear once the reason for the change in wording is learned.
>
>Steve Smolian
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Warren" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 10:41 PM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Discographical puzzle
>
>
>>Hi Steve,
>>
>>I've seen that before, too, and would guess that you have copies from two
>>different stampers, only one of which shows the take number. I suspect that
>>what that your copies tell us is that practices at the factory or factories
>>varied about what numbers got onto pressing parts. Perhaps the disc was
>>popular. Are there any differences in the labels of the two copies 
>>? Any other
>>differences between the pressings (graininess of shellac ...) ?
>>
>>Best, Richard
>>
>>Quoting Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>>My point is that of my two copies with thr R suffix, one has take 
>>>numbers and one doesn't.  So how com?
>>>
>>>In the larger sense, does this tell us anything we need to know 
>>>(discographically speaking) about English Columbia's matrix numbering policies?
>>>
>>>Steve Smolian
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Warren" 
>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 4:40 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Discographical puzzle
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi Steve,
>>>>
>>>>3546 [original, no -R] has matrices A 612 and A 1186 for Boughton 
>>>>and Martin, respectively, published April, 1925 (apparently no 
>>>>logs survive to tell rec. date)
>>>>
>>>>3546-R [copy also at Yale] is as you list: matrices are as you 
>>>>and the book about Columbia 10-inch discs agree, Boughton 
>>>>recorded Aug. 26, 1926, Martin rec. Aug. 31, 1926. Columbias this 
>>>>age do not usually show take numbers in the dead wax, so you're 
>>>>lucky this one did on one side. The "R" does normally indicate a 
>>>>remake or replacement.
>>>>
>>>>Best, Richard
>>>>
>>>>At 11:04 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
>>>>>I've two copies of English Columbia 3546 R.  One side is The 
>>>>>Faery Song from Boughton's "Immortal Hour," matrix A 
>>>>>3551-5.  The reverse is Easthope Martin's song, "The Minstrel," 
>>>>>matrix A 3817-1.  The singer is Philip Heseltine.
>>>>>
>>>>>The "R" indicates "remake," as far as I can tell, and replaces 
>>>>>an earlier, idenical coupling.
>>>>>
>>>>>One copy has the take number after the matrix number in the dead 
>>>>>wax, the other the matrix number only.
>>>>>
>>>>>What's going on here?  Is one a dub?  Any idea?
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve Smolian

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager