Riverside labels and pressing determination

[jazzhound]

Anyone know what number did 50's Riverside releases go from white label with blue print to the blue label with silver logo label? Trying to figure if a record I have is a first or second. thanks.

[Peter A]

I don´t know the exact number, but it must be somewhere between 243 and 246. My copy of 241 - The Sound Of Sonny - has white labels and I know 243 - Blues For Tomorrow - has white labels too. As far as I know 246 and 248 should have blue labels.

Peter

[Chuck Nessa]

Sounds about right. Why does it matter which printer made the labels. the real question is - did they change pressing plants at the time, and (if so) is one factory's output better.

Sorry, but I hate this "collector crap" unless you have real quality reasons for making the differentiations. If you don't - it is just money.

[Stefan Wood]

I'm with you there, Chuck. 100%.

[Peter A]

Sorry, but I hate this "collector crap" unless you have real quality reasons for making the differentiations.

Yes, you made your point earlier. Perhaps other people enjoy in trying to determinate the labels and (other) specifics of first pressings.

[Jim R]

FWIW, here's the sequence:

RLP 12 242  Monk's Music / Thelonious Monk

RLP 12 243  Blues for Tomorrow / v.a.

RLP 12 244  Jazz for Lovers / v.a.

RLP 12 245  Great Ideas of Western Mann / Herbie Mann

RLP 12 246  Duke with a Difference / Clark Terry

RLP 12 247  Mulligan Meets Monk / Gerry Mulligan

RLP 12 248  Seven Standards and a Blues / Ernie Henry

I have one book that says blue labels began with 243, and another that suggests (indirectly) that blue began with 246.

[Daniel A]

...unless you have real quality reasons for making the differentiations. If you don't - it is just money.

Couldn't it be something else than money? Perhaps it's similar to questions like 'Was this recorded in Hackensack or not?'. Why would the location matter if the music is good? It doesn't, but people have different interests. And in this case I can't see why one would automatically be less interested in the music just for wanting to know more about the labels.

[Chuck Nessa]

Sorry, but I hate this "collector crap" unless you have real quality reasons for making the differentiations.

Yes, you made your point earlier. Perhaps other people enjoy in trying to determinate the labels and (other) specifics of first pressings.

If "first pressings" are not better pressings, then it is about money. Many of the rules "original pressing" fans follow do not have anything to do with quality and make people who actually have experience manufacturing vinyl cringe.

Understand a bunch of discs being sold as "first pressings" are really fourteenth pressings made from tired metal parts. On the other hand, a NY Blue Note repressing of a Lexington Ave disc may have been recut by RVG on new and improved equipment.

If it ain't money and you can't tell a "better" pressing, you be pissing in the wind.

Some classical collectors are a bit more sophisticated and collect stamper numbers, not label designs.

[jazzhound]

Only once have I heard a later pressing sound better than an earlier one. It was a second pressing of Blue Train which I acquired from a friend who was eager to ditch it when he acquired a first which had a green tint to the cover and a few other differences such as no registration mark.

First pressings usually sound significantly better, so it is important to know how to identify them if you think sound matters as I do.

[Christiern]

I am in total agreement with Chuck here. Record collectors have had a very positive effect on our of jazz history, and we have their zeal to thank for the discovery of much recorded material that might otherwise have been lost. Having said that, I have to admit that they do tend to go overboard when it comes to trivial details, as other collectors also do. Summing it up, however, the pesky aspect of their modi operandi is, IMO, compensated for by their contributions to useful research.

[Peter A]

Some classical collectors are a bit more sophisticated and collect stamper numbers, not label designs.

You may be aware of the fact that 50's and 60's Riverside pressings did not contain any (additional) "stamper numbers" (perhaps you were referring to the "ear" stamp in the dead wax of Blue Note records). So it is simply not possible to be a "sophisticated" Riverside collector.

And we did not even discuss the "small label" and "large label" (blue label with mike and reels) variety yet...

[jazzhound]

You may be aware of the fact that 50's and 60's Riverside pressings did not contain any (additional) "stamper numbers" (perhaps you were referring to the "ear" stamp in the dead wax of Blue Note records). So it is simply not possible to be a "sophisticated" Riverside collector.

And we did not even discuss the "small label" and "large label" (blue label with mike and reels) variety yet...

Riverside blue label pressings (large) did in fact have patent numbers stamped in the dead wax. earlier pressings did not.

[Peter A]

Jazzhound:

Yes, you are right - it slipped my mind. But I have only seen the patent number stamps on some of the repressings (w. large label) of the earlier small-label titles. Never seen them on the later numbers (starting from 340?), which have large labels.

B.T.W.: do you think that the white (large) was directly followed by the small blue label?

[Christiern]

• Blue labels always have a better sound, I think, but silver text tends to rob a performance of presence--what the hell, who listens to the music? Beware of forgeries and stolen stamper numbers--also look out for matrix numbers starting with S7.
  

[Chuck Nessa]

I am in total agreement with Chuck here. Record collectors have had a very positive effect on our of jazz history, and we have their zeal to thank for the discovery of much recorded material that might otherwise have been lost

I agree with Chris about this BUT 98% of these were 78 freaks (now they die daily). The lp guys are (by and large) a different breed.

[jazzhound]

the lp guys are going to be responsible for preserving what are fast becoming the replacements for damaged and deteriorating master tapes. A like new orginal pressing.

[Christiern]

I am in total agreement with Chuck here. Record collectors have had a very positive effect on our of jazz history, and we have their zeal to thank for the discovery of much recorded material that might otherwise have been lost

I agree with Chris about this BUT 98% of these were 78 freaks (now they die daily). The lp guys are (by and large) a different breed.

• I agree again, the 78 collector is indeed a dying breed. There is also a very big difference, as far as preservation value is concerned, between finding a pressing of Paramount 1862-1 in a 1943 attic and coming across a copy of Megafon MFLP9 in a 2003 junk store bin.
  
  Many uncovered 78s either were or came close to being the sole copy extant. Most vinyl pressings of post 40s material (but certainly not all) also exist in tape form. The fragility of 78s also seriously reduced their survivability.
  
  Then, too, there is the mystique that surrounded 78 collecting. Each selection had its own matrix number (which collectors sometimes memorized) and there came a time when the medium itself could be romanticized about; LPs haven't quite reached that stage yet. There being no liner notes (except in rare instances when 78 rpm albums were issued, collectors had to listen more carefully to the actual music--imagine that!--and take on the role of a detective. And let us not forget the surface noise, which sometimes became as much a part of the recording as the performance itself. In 1971, when I produced the complete Bessie Smith set of 10 LPs for Columbia, engineer Larry Hiller and I worked very hard to eliminate the surface noise from some of our source discs. We became so good at it that I received a complaint from Nick Perls (Yazoo Records) and his group of blues collectors (the Blues Mafia)--the recordings, Nick said, sounded too clean!
  
  I don't think LP collecting will ever be anything like 78 collecting was--there are more collectors, more recordings to collect, and far fewer surprises and rarities.
  

[brownie]

Some classical collectors are a bit more sophisticated and collect stamper numbers, not label designs.

Did this for one jazz record: 'Kind of Blue'.

There was an article in 'The Absolute Sound' - a long time ago when the publication was still provocative - that dealt with the stampers identifications. It mentioned the stereo LP issue of KOB and its original first pressing stamper. The album was on their Holy Grail list.

Took me quite a long time but found a copy. So my LP of this Miles Davis classic has XSM47326 1BE on side A and XSM47327 1AJ on side B.

Have yet to hear a better sound of that album!

[desertblues]

Sorry, but I hate this "collector crap" unless you have real quality reasons for making the differentiations. If you don't - it is just money.

It isn't just a question of sound quality to collectors, it's about "rarity". That is what makes them more collectible.