Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Beatles Collecting. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Beatles, 7" Metal Acetate
Topic Started: Dec 8 2013, 10:14 AM (650 Views)
pinio65
Level 4
[ *  *  *  * ]
http://www.ebay.com/itm/BEATLES-7-metal-AC...=item4616e7e955
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
you tell me, I've given up on acetates, i sold a few non beatles ones recently and everybody was questioning their authenticity.....i've no idea !!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Xex606
Level 2
[ *  * ]
I wouldn't trust any acetate which is a shame especially this one. The thing that strikes me is that it's in great condition (I don't know about anyone else ) but the ones that I have aren't in that good shape also the tracks are shorter than the release version very suspicious.i also think the amount of fakes about have really put me off this sort this sort of item. I would be interested in other people's opinion on acetates.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The song times make me suspicious, and EMIDISC acetates from 1966 were usually marked with the initials of the person who ordered the acetate. It is made to appear that the acetate is an early compilation of the Nowhere Man EP. Since the EP (released in July) wound up containing four songs from Rubber Soul, it seems to me that they never considered otherwise. I would not have purchased it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
socorro
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Come on, people! Look at who the seller is! Have we learned nothing?

Ironclad Rule: If it is an acetate being sold by dmilecki, it is counterfeit. Full stop.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Easy-E
Member Avatar
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
What about this one:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/THE-BEATLES-LIKE...id=558309209820
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
well its a well known seller and the version is said to be different to the known versions....it will make a bomb for sure, but is it kosher, possibly, would i risk 3k on it...er nah....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Easy-E
Member Avatar
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
But a 78?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
FAKE
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
thats why i stay away from em hehe !!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
socorro
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
How could this possibly be real? It purports to be from the Decca audition, but is on an Emidisc label. Also, as the listing itself notes, an acetate is made deep into the recording process, to check the editing/mixing. There would be no reason for the record company or the artist to make an acetate of an audition tape, which happens before the recording process even begins.

Not to mention the wholly unverifiable provenance.

Frank,

Obviously I agree with you on this -- can you add any technical mistakes that are a tell for why this is a fake?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Some of the points have been mentioned before, but...
1. Decca made their own acetates; they didn't source out to EMI.
2. Neither Decca nor EMI were ever planning to issue the song.
3. EMI acetates from the period are not on 78 RPM.
4. EMI acetates from the period were not using blanks like that one; it's a 50's blank.
5. That acetate does not have the natural label bleed-through found on genuine acetates.
6. If it is somehow "alternate," it clearly does not represent the product of the genuine audition recordings. These weren't monkeyed with in any way. Decca merely shelved them.
7. "Can't remember where it came from" is just about the worst provenance one could possibly have. The acetate did not magically appear. Had they indicate a source, that source could be tracked down -- and perhaps that's the problem.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
"Can't remember where it came from"


slightly off topic i know but i was going through my bits and bobs couple of years ago looking for a spare BOTR poster and found....and original who sell out poster

I must have had it 35 years or so and I honestly "Can't remember where it came from"

result though.....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
What do you know? THIS acetate appears to be genuine!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BEATLES-Paperback-...=item2339e7698c

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AurelianDE
Level 2
[ *  * ]
My knowledge of Capitol pressing routines is very limited and my knowledge of acetates virtually nil, that's why the following questions may sound very stupid. But maybe you could enlighten me?

1. Why would Capitol cut acetates in the first place (as opposed to test pressings)? Is this really an acetate (lacquer)? The seller mentions vinyl that has been played and has a couple of scuffs. How often can you play an acetate with its soft surface?

2. The seller also mentions that the mix may be different but isn't quite sure. The purpose of an acetate, as I understand it, is to determine how the present master would sound. It's a preliminary stage, and the master remix could be altered after an acetate was cut. Capitol received mixed masters, so the only purpose of an acetate would be to determine if EQ and other parameters of the cutting process (transcription from tape to lacquer) were correct, right? No different remix is possible.

3. If the record in question was cut to check overall quality and sound, why would it be cut with 33 1/3 rpm?


PS. Additional note: The seller's remarks concerning rasterization of the print on the label are very important, IMO. His method of using a magnifying glass instead of relying on computerized high-resolution scans is very sensible. Rasterization is one of the safest criteria for distinguishing original labels from fakes that were reproduced from scans, but you can't see the difference on (computer) screen unless you enlarge the original image by purely optical means. Very clever. (And he wouldn't have pointed it out if the record were not genuine!)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Singles and EPs · Next Topic »
Add Reply