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
Love Me Do; missing bracket
Topic Started: Feb 3 2014, 10:39 AM (3,785 Views)
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
britinvasion64,Feb 25 2014
01:02 PM
Gizmobob,Feb 24 2014
11:34 PM
I'm curious... the one that has 1/G - JR (ZT) without the tax code embossed on the center pushout, which label does it have based on Spizer's code?

PAR 4949.01A(i): Has the MIGB text, with the indented publishing credits (Ardmore & Beechwood LTD) indented to the right, aligned over the XC of the Matrix No. (7XCE 17144 45). All other pressings have the pub credit left aligned with the matrix number.

The only ones I'm concerned with are the earliest red label LMDs with only ZT in the deadwax.

Upon closer inspection, and comparing with the photos from the book, the label is the .01A(i) version...the publishing credit indented to the right.

Are you sure it's the earliest label? The exact same record you are speaking of is listed on that Popsike site LMD (1/G-JR) has the second version label, 01A(ii). Same goes for the 1/G-JR LMD that is offered on eBay by theqjs1. Can you post a picture or email it to me. If you indeed have the earliest label on your 1/G-JR pressing then that must be the transitional press.

XEX-606 and FOTH, can you mates check which label version yours have?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Xex606
Level 2
[ *  * ]
1G/JR has never been the earliest label I thought we knew this that is why I came to the same conclusion as you that it wasn't a very early copy.if 1G/JR did turn up with the early label that would be a real game changer for me.but my personal opinion is that it won't.but if it did it would be of great interest to me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
muffmasterh,Feb 22 2014
08:10 PM
ps..i should add that my ZT LMD ia  a 1A 1O has the " small publishing credits " and has ZT on the centre...

Hello Henry,

Can you tell me what label your "ZT" LMD with 1/A-1/O is sportin?

01A(i): Indented Pub Credits

01A(ii): "45" right aligned with "Recording First Published 1962"

01A(iii): Left aligned Pub Credits, indented "Recording First...", with MIGB text, and "Love Me Do" centered with "(Lennon - McCartney)".

If anyone else with a ZT only LMD, can you verify the Mother/Stamper on each side, as well as the label variation, also note if your copy has a tax code embossed on the pushout centre.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
britinvasion64
Level 1
[ * ]
Quote:
 
Are you sure it's the earliest label? The exact same record you are speaking of is listed on that Popsike site LMD (1/G-JR) has the second version label, 01A(ii). Same goes for the 1/G-JR LMD that is offered on eBay by theqjs1. Can you post a picture or email it to me. If you indeed have the earliest label on your 1/G-JR pressing then that must be the transitional press.

XEX-606 and FOTH, can you mates check which label version yours have?

My apologies for the confusion Gizmobob, you're right, after pulling out the book again, and looking more closely, I see that it is indeed the .O1A(ii) label variation. :(

This prompted me to check through my other UK 45s and EPs to determine from the book what variants I actually have. The countless miniscule differences in label layout have never been much of a priority for me, although I appreciate that others think otherwise.
I found that some of the text shifts were so very subtle, even with my magnifying glass!

But I do have a question to anyone who enjoys collecting all these variations...is it possible that I have determined on a label side that the publishing credits belong to one variation while the side number placement belongs to another, or in some cases, is not even represented in the book?
This has been noted on four occasions between two EPs, Long Tall Sally and A Hard Day's Night Extracts... Am I on to something here, or should I be looking for a new magnifying glass? :blink:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yarvelling
Member Avatar
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
britinvasion64,Feb 27 2014
01:20 PM
Quote:
 
Are you sure it's the earliest label? The exact same record you are speaking of is listed on that Popsike site LMD (1/G-JR) has the second version label, 01A(ii). Same goes for the 1/G-JR LMD that is offered on eBay by theqjs1. Can you post a picture or email it to me. If you indeed have the earliest label on your 1/G-JR pressing then that must be the transitional press.

XEX-606 and FOTH, can you mates check which label version yours have?

My apologies for the confusion Gizmobob, you're right, after pulling out the book again, and looking more closely, I see that it is indeed the .O1A(ii) label variation. :(

This prompted me to check through my other UK 45s and EPs to determine from the book what variants I actually have. The countless miniscule differences in label layout have never been much of a priority for me, although I appreciate that others think otherwise.
I found that some of the text shifts were so very subtle, even with my magnifying glass!

But I do have a question to anyone who enjoys collecting all these variations...is it possible that I have determined on a label side that the publishing credits belong to one variation while the side number placement belongs to another, or in some cases, is not even represented in the book?
This has been noted on four occasions between two EPs, Long Tall Sally and A Hard Day's Night Extracts... Am I on to something here, or should I be looking for a new magnifying glass? :blink:

If you have a scanner, you could scan the various labels to which you refer (all at the same DPI), and then overlay the ones you wish to compare in a decent imaging programme (Paintshop Pro, Photoshop, etc). Reduce the opacity of the top label image when you overlay them - it will be the top layer.. and you should be able to see even minute slide-rule differences in placement of text! :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
That's known as an undocumented pressing or label variation. Most of the time those are known as transitional pressings because those are ones where they would run out of labels for one side and start using the newer variation, even though the other side may still be using the older label variation. This is actually more common that you think. Although not the common pressing, these transitional labels are sought after and can, although not always, demand a slightly higher price.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The first three labels were ALL available from the very beginning in October, 1962.

* indented pub credits
* centered author credits (two slight shifts in the info at the left.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
namralos,Feb 27 2014
07:07 PM
The first three labels were ALL available from the very beginning in October, 1962.

* indented pub credits
* centered author credits (two slight shifts in the info at the left.

Of the five you have documented, why only one of them has ZT, all the rest PT or PZT? If the third label (01A(iii)) was used in Oct-62 or Early Nov-62, then wouldn't it be more common to have a few with the ZT tax code? I actually believe that the label was introduced to the production line late Nov-62 when they started the PT tax code, thru most of Dec-62. I have also noticed most 01B(i), the first labels without the M.I.G.B. text with the ZT tax code... only one of the LMDs that you confirmed actually has something other that just ZT... PZT. Even if you sort them in order of the earliest Stampers, although not 100% accurate, with the ZT tax code being the earliest, the trend shows that the labels appeared in this order.

1st: 01A(i)
2nd: 01A(ii)
3rd: 01B(i)
4th: 01A(iii)
5th: 01B(ii)
6th: 01B(iii)
7th: 01A(iv)
8th: 01A(v)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Except that that's impossible.
What we noticed was that there was some apparent re-using of old stampers when the single started selling.


* indented pub credits
* aligned author credits, first shift
* aligned author credits, second shift
At this point they got the batch of labels in that did not have MIGB.
* aligned author credits
* missing parenthesis and misaligned author credit.
* Corrected; no missing parenthesis. BUT they kept the misaligned the author credit on LMD.
At this point they got another batch of labels in that rightly have MIGB
* misaligned author credit, first shift
* misaligned author credit, second shift.

This is the only ordering that reasonably fits the matrix data, matches what we know about the missing MIGB on non-Beatles records, AND explains the sequence.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
I don't fully understand which labels you are referring to when you just explained all that. I know that indented pubs are 01A(i), and the labels missing the MIGB text (with and without the parenthesis) 01B, but not sure about the others. When I sort the list you sent me, I sorted by the deadwax Tax Code, putting all the ZT at the top, then PZT, PT, MPZT, and there is a trend... aside from a few stragglers, the labels in the order I posted them are consistent.

01A(iii) 1L 1G ZT 8 1
01A(iii) 1O 1G PT 5 1
01A(iii) 1T 1G PT 9 1
01A(iii) 1O 1G PZT 5 1
01A(iii) 1O 1G PZT 5 1

The first one, is the only one you posted that has the third label variation with ZT in the deadwax. Now unless you are saying that they pressed PT and PZT codes on early Oct-62 pressing, which all of the other known third labels appear on, then wouldn't it make more sense that the one "ZT" Stamper was used later in Nov or Dec? It's either they used the earlier stamper on a later pressing with a later label, then taking a leap of faith and claiming that they used later stampers with PT and PZT tax codes on October 5th Pressings. So if they used this third label on their early pressings, which of those above are you suggesting were used on Oct-62 pressings?

01B(i) 1H 1P ZT 7 6
01B(i) 1L 1L ZT 8 8
01B(i) 1T 1O ZT 9 5
01B(i) 1T 1H ZT 9 7
01B(i) 1GA 1GD ZT 13 10
01B(i) 1GR 1T PZT 12 9

Now when you focus your attention on all the 01B(i) label pressings, you spot right away that nearly all of them have ZT with exception to one. If these were released after the 01A(iii), which are nearly all PZT or PT, wouldn't it be logical to assume that the ZT ones came out before the PZT and PT ones? I understand that it's likely that the last two where reused later due to the double-digit stamper.

Then again, maybe I'm missing something here! :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
Here's another interesting tid-bit... there are two different labels with the exact same stampers... which also supports my theory that the 01B(i) label was probably introduced before the 01A(iii) labels.

01A(ii) 1T 1H ZT 9 7
01B(i) 1T 1H ZT 9 7
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
remember my 2 decks of badly shuffled cards theory....that is a perfect example..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmobob
Member Avatar
Level 2
[ *  * ]
muffmasterh,Feb 28 2014
10:37 AM
remember my 2 decks of badly shuffled cards theory....that is a perfect example..

Hi Henry, I agree with you and that makes absolute sense on why the 1/P is the earliest Stamper used and maybe why there isn't a 1/R. But the only verifiable constant is that ZT was the tax code in Oct-62, not PT or PZT. So in order for the 3rd label variation to be prevalent in Oct-62, we would have to believe that the PT and PZT code was already being used in Oct-62... which is what I am having trouble believing. Yet, the first label version without the MIGB text are almost all found with ZT tax code, which pre-dates the PT or PZT code. So it appears that the Stampers were not used in chronological order and the 01B(i) labels were seen on earlier ZT pressings before the 01A(iii) with the PT/PZT stampers.

My brain hurts now :blink:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The "no MIGB" error occurs on labels made in December, 1962, and January, 1963 -- ONLY. Any examination of the non-Beatles releases proves this definitively.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
namralos
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
As I wrote, there is only one sequence that makes sense.

When the labels were reset, at one point they mistakenly shifted the author credits. They did this ONCE and never caught the mistake. All of the labels with the proper centering come before all of the labels with the incorrect centering.

The labels without MIGB all came out in December/January.

My copy of the "missing parenthesis" label has...
"Love Me Do": MPZT 1 GD = 10
"PS I Love You": MPZT 1 GA = 12
centre punch code: none

This copy clearly came out in January, 1963.
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