Teasing the Korean Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 Elsewhere, I went on and on about my love for the early 70s green-and-purple Capitol label. However, this love is not unconditional. I love seeing this label spinning on the turntable while I'm listening to David Axelrod. But I would NOT want to see this label spinning around for, say, Art Tatum, Wanda Jackson, The Louvin Brothers, Les Baxter, Keely Smith, or Frank Sinatra. It is simply wrong. I actually had Art Tatum and Wanda Jackson albums on this label and had to unload them, I could not listen to them. Do anachronistic label designs with later issues bother you? It just seems so wrong to me. It also drives me crazy that the CD reissue of Yma Sumac's "Voice of the Xtabay" uses the 70s Capitol album cover, with the severely cropped image and 70s Capitol logo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Beat Steve Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Valid thoughts ... Apart from "first pressing" obsessions (that often are dictated by monetary considerations too, let's face it ), I think any later reissue that comes along with more or less awkwardly modernized label and/or cover designs makes long-time collectors wince. I must admit that "modern" (and therefore "period incorrect") labels do not bother me as much as clumsily "updated" cover artwork. So if the cover artwork of the reissue matches the original one then I usually can live with somewhat modernized label designs (as in the case of many Fresh Sound vinyl reissues). Here is one that OUGHT TO bother me, though: Well, it doesn't really bother me because the record came my way dirt cheap as part of a stack of Basie LPs at a local record fair a long time ago. Yet it's a puzzling combination: Thick laminated U.S. fold-out cover that says "A product of ABC-Paramount Records Inc." in the small print on the back yet the record label gives a copyright date of 1980 and says "Mfd. by MCA Records Inc". etc. Did they ever use up leftover Impulse/ABC Paramount covers for those MCA pressing runs?? To me this looks more like somebody at some point in the past replaced the shot original record with a new, more recent pressing, disregarding any authenticity criteria. OTOH it is amazing that the cover is NM - so is it likely the record would have fared that much worse? Who knows ... maybe somebody stepped on it .... Edited August 13, 2011 by Big Beat Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasing the Korean Posted August 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 In this case, the MCA pressing would bother me more than the label! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Beat Steve Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 True, but what can you do? Even that MCA pressing STILL is quite listenable. Only the vinyl itself which is uncommonly thin compared to a early 60s DG pressing that ought to go in such a laminated cover DOES bother me indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidewinder Posted August 13, 2011 Report Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Yet it's a puzzling combination: Thick laminated U.S. fold-out cover that says "A product of ABC-Paramount Records Inc." in the small print on the back yet the record label gives a copyright date of 1980 and says "Mfd. by MCA Records Inc". etc. Did they ever use up leftover Impulse/ABC Paramount covers for those MCA pressing runs?? At a record fair today I saw a very similar combination - Gil Evans 'Out Of The Blue' with the US thick laminate cover and one of those 'Mr Creosote waffer-thin' ABC pressings inside with the green ABC-Paramount inner. Disappointing ! Edited August 13, 2011 by sidewinder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.