Print

Print


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Henkle" <[log in to unmask]>
> At 10:23 AM 03-01-2010 +0100, you wrote:
>>In a labelography, I would expect another system of arrangement; in a 
>>general
>>labelography the logical thing would be by graphical element, and the 
>>primary
>>output would then be by label name, subdivided by label variant. And I 
>>mean
>>by that as many label, color, font, dimension variants as possible
>      Thanks for writing.  With no guidelines to follow, I have tried to do 
> this in a way that was logical to me.  The labels are in alphabetical 
> order by record company name.  For any record company that had releases in 
> more than one disc speed, I put them in chronological order: 78, LP and 
> 45.  Almost all 78 releases were before any LP's, and many times, but not 
> all, 45's were released after the LP on which they appeared.  Most two or 
> three songs per side 7" EP's I have seen have a small LP sized hole and 
> play at 33-1/3, so they are listed with the LP's.  Within disc speed, I 
> put similar designs close together as they change font, color, and design 
> features, even when such positioning puts them out of catalog number 
> order.  I hope setting these criteria is not illogical to everybody else.
>
The problem here. of course. is that some VERY popular records may have
stayed "in the catalog" long enough to have been issued in two (or more)
label formats...?! I run across this fairly often in my large collection of
Grey Gull-related 78's...!

Steven C. Barr