Limelight Label Question

[Teasing the Korean]

Does anyone know the approximate years of the label designs? I have some that are dark green and black with white typeface. Others are pink and light green. Are the darker ones earlier?

[Stereojack]

Does anyone know the approximate years of the label designs? I have some that are dark green and black with white typeface. Others are pink and light green. Are the darker ones earlier?

The dark green is the earlier label. The Limelight label, a subsidiary of Mercury, came into existence around 1965. The albums had deluxe foldout jackets with fancy die-cut inserts, designed to compete other high profile packages produced by labels such as Impulse and Verve. Around 1967 the design was streamlined - the jackets were now the standard non-gatefold type. About a year later the label design was changed to pink.

[Teasing the Korean]

Thanks, as I suspected. The quality of the vinyl during the pink label period has the sound and feel of late 60s vinyl.

[slide_advantage_redoux]

Has anyone properly catalogued those Limelight releases? I find them very attractive. Very tastefully designed (imo)

I have Art Blakey's "Buttercorn Lady", and "Clifford Brown Immortal"

[Stereojack]

Has anyone properly catalogued those Limelight releases? I find them very attractive. Very tastefully designed (imo)

http://www.jazzdiscography.com/Labels/limelite.htm

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

There's something wrong with that list. There are two possible entries for Oscar Peterson's "With respect to Nat", which Mike noted needed confirmation.

Also, there are two entries for Les McCann's "Beaux J Pooboo" at 86025 and 86031. I have 86031.

Michel Ruppli's Mercury discography gave 86025 as the number for "Pooboo". I wrote to him to say mine had a different number. His reply was along the lines that he thought I had a copy issued by Columbia Record Club. (You wouldn't know to look at it.)

Lord's discography, astoundingly, says that 82025 is the mono number and 86031 the stereo. But my edition has both mono and stereo numbers on the sleeve and they're 82031 and 86031.

Which leaves two questions.

1 Is there a Limelight 82/86031 which is a real Limelight not a Columbia Record Club and is some other album not "Pooboo"?

2 How many other Limelights (indeed Mercurys) were treated thus and does anyone really know what the true list is?

MG

[Stereojack]

There's something wrong with that list. There are two possible entries for Oscar Peterson's "With respect to Nat", which Mike noted needed confirmation.

Also, there are two entries for Les McCann's "Beaux J Pooboo" at 86025 and 86031. I have 86031.

Michel Ruppli's Mercury discography gave 86025 as the number for "Pooboo". I wrote to him to say mine had a different number. His reply was along the lines that he thought I had a copy issued by Columbia Record Club. (You wouldn't know to look at it.)

Lord's discography, astoundingly, says that 82025 is the mono number and 86031 the stereo. But my edition has both mono and stereo numbers on the sleeve and they're 82031 and 86031.

Which leaves two questions.

1 Is there a Limelight 82/86031 which is a real Limelight not a Columbia Record Club and is some other album not "Pooboo"?

2 How many other Limelights (indeed Mercurys) were treated thus and does anyone really know what the true list is?

MG

I think the list and Lord are wrong. The listing for 86025 is almost certainly incorrect. I've never heard of a Columbia Record Club pressing having a different number. Michael may have meant Capitol Record Club, which did assign different numbers to their pressings, but what are the odds that the numbers would be so similar? Whoever supplied Mike's information gave him a mistaken item. I know it's possible - I was one of Mike's contributors!

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

There's something wrong with that list. There are two possible entries for Oscar Peterson's "With respect to Nat", which Mike noted needed confirmation.

Also, there are two entries for Les McCann's "Beaux J Pooboo" at 86025 and 86031. I have 86031.

Michel Ruppli's Mercury discography gave 86025 as the number for "Pooboo". I wrote to him to say mine had a different number. His reply was along the lines that he thought I had a copy issued by Columbia Record Club. (You wouldn't know to look at it.)

Lord's discography, astoundingly, says that 82025 is the mono number and 86031 the stereo. But my edition has both mono and stereo numbers on the sleeve and they're 82031 and 86031.

Which leaves two questions.

1 Is there a Limelight 82/86031 which is a real Limelight not a Columbia Record Club and is some other album not "Pooboo"?

2 How many other Limelights (indeed Mercurys) were treated thus and does anyone really know what the true list is?

MG

I think the list and Lord are wrong. The listing for 86025 is almost certainly incorrect. I've never heard of a Columbia Record Club pressing having a different number. Michael may have meant Capitol Record Club, which did assign different numbers to their pressings, but what are the odds that the numbers would be so similar? Whoever supplied Mike's information gave him a mistaken item. I know it's possible - I was one of Mike's contributors!

Well, mine certainly looks exactly the same as the other Limelights I've got. I just checked the number in the runoff area and it's 86031. It's surely impossible that it would have been remastered for a record club issue, so 82/86031 must be correct, as you say.

MG