Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Chuck, I hope you could help me here.

I have seen Les Stances A Sophie LP with the label in blue/white and in dark pink/white. Which one is the earliest pressing?

Stereo or Mono?

Thanks for your help,

Daiwai

Posted

All pressings were stereo. The "dark pink/white" labels were used from first issue through 1977.

Thanks Chuck. So the blue/white labels were used from 1977 onward? Which pressing gives better quality of sound?

Thanks again.

Posted (edited)

The "blue/white" labels were only used for a couple of years, then a third (all rose colored) label was used.

With one exception (first pressing of n-2 - pressed at Chess) I made my records at Wakefield Mfg until 1978 when I made a distribution deal with Flying Fish records. They shifted pressing to their preferred plant and printed the teal/white labels. Pressings were ok for a while but they really messed up a new release and I insisted they press my issues at Wakefield. They complied and after the contract expired I continued to press there.

Concerning sound of "Sophie", I think the sound should be the same since the metal masters were the same. Quality of the pressings could be fine or not. Your ears will tell.

Edited by Chuck Nessa
Posted

The "blue/white" labels were only used for a couple of years, then a third (all rose colored) label was used.

With one exception (first pressing of n-2 - pressed at Chess) I made my records at Wakefield Mfg until 1978 when I made a distribution deal with Flying Fish records. They shifted pressing to their preferred plant and printed the teal/white labels. Pressings were ok for a while but they really messed up a new release and I insisted they press my issues at Wakefield. They complied and after the contract expired I continued to press there.

Concerning sound of "Sophie", I think the sound should be the same since the metal masters were the same. Quality of the pressings could be fine or not. Your ears will tell.

For whatever reason, the second and third paragraphs of your response only showed up in the reply box. Anyway, thanks for the information. Do you still have some copies of Sophie?

Posted

I have to admit that this discussion made me curious, and I pulled out the Nessa albums which I purchased in the 1970s to see what colors are on the labels. I had never thought about it before.

My copy of "People In Sorrow" has the blue and white label.

Chuck, if you had done nothing with your life but release "Les Stances a Sophie" and "People in Sorrow", you would have left the world a better place!

  • 9 years later...
Posted
On 5/15/2008 at 2:31 PM, Chuck Nessa said:

With one exception (first pressing of n-2 - pressed at Chess) I made my records at Wakefield Mfg until 1978 when I made a distribution deal with Flying Fish records. They shifted pressing to their preferred plant and printed the teal/white labels. Pressings were ok for a while but they really messed up a new release and I insisted they press my issues at Wakefield. They complied and after the contract expired I continued to press there.

I have a "blue/white" copy of Lester Bowie's Numbers 1 & 2 from that era with an oddity on Side 2. There's a pause following take 6 of "Number 2" followed by a reference or audio tone before the blowout from take 7 begins. I also have an earlier pressing (green top, pink/orange label, Madison address) where the transition runs smoothly.

Posted

What a perfect time for me to plug our August release. The editing error you mention afflicts all of the Flying Fish distributed records with the white cover. The error was mine (teaching me to listen to samples again and again) and it was not corrected during that era.

Our August cd release (50th Anniversary) is a new 24 bit mastering of the original lp program without the error. I thought the correct program of the first issue should be available. YMMV.

 

61OxzOx%2BBtL._SX355_.jpg

 

Posted

Thanks for the info. Glad to see Numbers 1 & 2 coming out in original form, though it is fascinating hearing the evolution of "Number 2" on the box and All the Numbers. Definitely a session worth having in many formats.

  • 5 years later...
Posted
12 minutes ago, Chuck Nessa said:

I'll be interested to see if this is a "needle drop" like all the reissues since the turn of the century.

I assume you mean turn of the millennium.  

Yeah, a needle drop is acceptable on a CD, but with vinyl sourced from vinyl, you are only magnifying the  surface noise.  Seems silly to me.

Posted
1 hour ago, Teasing the Korean said:

I assume you mean turn of the millennium.  

It's still the turn of the century, regardless of your attempted correction.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Aggie87 said:

It's still the turn of the century, regardless of your attempted correction.

It is less precise, as we most recently witnessed the turn of the millennium, and also because the real turn of the century is still relevant in many ways, in terms of the rise of cities and industrialization.  

I try to be more precise with language.  If you say "turn of the century," someone is likely to ask "which." 

Posted
1 hour ago, Teasing the Korean said:

It is less precise, as we most recently witnessed the turn of the millennium, and also because the real turn of the century is still relevant in many ways, in terms of the rise of cities and industrialization.  

I try to be more precise with language.  If you say "turn of the century," someone is likely to ask "which." 

And to which millennium do you refer?

Posted
1 hour ago, Teasing the Korean said:

It is less precise, as we most recently witnessed the turn of the millennium, and also because the real turn of the century is still relevant in many ways, in terms of the rise of cities and industrialization.  

I try to be more precise with language.  If you say "turn of the century," someone is likely to ask "which." 

And yet you likely knew exactly which century-turn that Chuck was referring to, and still chose to be pedantic.

And it wasn't less precise, either.  It was a turn of the century, so it was exactly a correct phrase.

Posted
19 minutes ago, Chuck Nessa said:

And to which millennium do you refer?

Well, if we're talking about the turn, we're talking about two of them.

2 minutes ago, Aggie87 said:

And yet you likely knew exactly which century-turn that Chuck was referring to, and still chose to be pedantic.

And it wasn't less precise, either.  It was a turn of the century, so it was exactly a correct phrase.

We are all welcome to speak and write the way we wish, at our own peril.  😹

Posted
2 hours ago, Teasing the Korean said:

It is less precise, as we most recently witnessed the turn of the millennium, and also because the real turn of the century is still relevant in many ways, in terms of the rise of cities and industrialization.  

I try to be more precise with language.  If you say "turn of the century," someone is likely to ask "which." 

Channeling my inner Chuck, to say…

”Sigh…”

^_^

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...