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 Uk Export; Export issues
Topic Started: Aug 6 2017, 01:26 PM (555 Views)
servi
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
08:47 AM
And if HJ was available in the UK then doesn't that alone shoot down any assertion that CPCS titles were "export only"?

Or did UK sellers have to import copies from the countries that received these "export versions"?

An export-only version of HJ was P-CPCS...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jae
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
What does the first P in PPCS stand for? That would determine to me what the catalogue series should be referred to as. Ie, to me it's more important to know 'why' there was a specific P- catalogue rather than focus on it being an export series. There was a reason it was needed; what was that? Obviously not worldwide export though. Focus on the reason, not the transport.

I can't access that link on my phone so will try when I get on the desktop. But if NZ release by EMI then it would have been offered by EMI UK. The matrices would tell a lot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jae
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
servi,Aug 11 2017
07:08 PM
Jae,Aug 11 2017
08:47 AM
And if HJ was available in the UK then doesn't that alone shoot down any assertion that CPCS titles were "export only"?

Or did UK sellers have to import copies from the countries that received these "export versions"?

An export-only version of HJ was P-CPCS...

So we now need an 'exception' title for P-CPCS releases too!

But if CPCS titles are supposedly export only, why then a P-CPCS series???
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jae
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
servi,Aug 11 2017
06:58 PM
But also for the others (USA titles) I 'd love to see some convincing information other than "everyone says so".

Yes, people seem very quick to make blanket claims but when evidence is presented that "seems" to contradict the long standing beliefs, it's explained away as an anomaly, an exception, black magic, or some other thing to reassert and uphold the long standing beliefs...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
servi
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
09:10 AM
What does the first P in PPCS stand for? That would determine to me what the catalogue series should be referred to as. Ie, to me it's more important to know 'why' there was a specific P- catalogue rather than focus on it being an export series. There was a reason it was needed; what was that? Obviously not worldwide export though. Focus on the reason, not the transport.

Good point ! Bruce and Frank say in their book "...the decision was made to press Apple albums intended for export with Parlophone labels. These export albums have the same catalog number as the domestic LPs, but with "P" added to the front of the catalog number prefix". Although that information could be correct, the P had nothing to do with Apple or Parlophone whatsoever imo.
There are UK pressings of Pink Floyd LPs on Odeon that have the additional P prefix (e.g. PSCX 6346 and PSCX 6157 and PSCX 6258), which were also released on Columbia in the UK. Or PSCX 3525 by Cliff (on Odeon, counterpart to SCX 3525 on Columbia). Or PASD252 (on Odeon), counterpart to ASD 252 on HMV (Bizet Suite no.1). Or PCLP 1802 on Odeon corresponding with CLP1802 on HMV (Swinging Blue Jeans).
I believe the extra P indicated copies solely for export, to countries where the original label's (Apple, Columbia) trademark had not been established. But that is different from the CPCS series. For those I don't see the logic that these were for "export-only".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jae
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
P = Portugal perhaps?

Defo not P = Parlophone though...why have two references to Parlophone in the prefix? And, as you say, it wouldn't make sense for P- titles released through Columbia or Odeon...

Bruce and Frank's claim doesn't make sense to me. Why not do what South Africa, SEA and Australia did... just continue using the existing domestic Parlophone label until Apple was available? Don't need the UK to help with that...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
servi
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Probably these countries did not manufacture themselves (like SEA or SA) and got Parlophone standard copies until 1968. Then the UK switched to Apple and these countries could not import Apple for some reason, so they needed Parlo copies of the Apple LPs.
But that's the story for the PPCS records.
For CPCS there seems to be no logic why these were "export-only"...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jae
Level 3
[ *  *  * ]
"Probably these countries did not manufacture themselves..."

Exactly... so these must be pressings for a *specific* purpose, not just pressings on Parlophone labels for countries that didn't have Apple incorporated. Again, countries that could press, regardless of the status of Apple, would just need to keep using existing label stock.

And it seems specific that Columbia was rebadged Odeon in the series. Again, had to be for a specific territory in mind, and one that needed pressing assistance, not just a generic "for export anywhere".

Henry has already proven to me that CPCS pressings were not export only. No exception needed there - they were clearly available for sale in the UK.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
servi
Member Avatar
Level 5
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
CPCS may have been an indicator of foreign origin of the title (e.g. the USA).
I am not convinced at all that these were for export-only. There is at least 2 (Beatles IV and Something new) with "Sold in the U.K." text and these releases seem to very strictly follow UK label chronology. Early ones have UK tax stamps.
If these were for export, to which countries then ? And why specifically these ones based on USA releases ? And why didn't they have P-CPCS like HJ on Parlophone ?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
10:00 AM
"Probably these countries did not manufacture themselves..."

Exactly... so these must be pressings for a *specific* purpose, not just pressings on Parlophone labels for countries that didn't have Apple incorporated. Again, countries that could press, regardless of the status of Apple, would just need to keep using existing label stock.

And it seems specific that Columbia was rebadged Odeon in the series. Again, had to be for a specific territory in mind, and one that needed pressing assistance, not just a generic "for export anywhere".

Henry has already proven to me that CPCS pressings were not export only. No exception needed there - they were clearly available for sale in the UK.

i should add the caveat that CPCS were primarily pressed for export but not exclusively, as i have said for some reason HJ was a very popular order and was stocked by many - not all by any means though - some UK stores and it is likely the others also appeared in the odd UK store but not to the extent that HJ did.

I always thought that the C stood for capitol but i seem to recall Frank disproved this, but my memory could be faulty on that... but c for capitol would make some sense
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
servi,Aug 11 2017
11:47 AM
CPCS may have been an indicator of foreign origin of the title (e.g. the USA).
I am not convinced at all that these were for export-only. There is at least 2 (Beatles IV and Something new) with "Sold in the U.K." text and these releases seem to very strictly follow UK label chronology. Early ones have UK tax stamps.
If these were for export, to which countries then ? And why specifically these ones based on USA releases ? And why didn't they have P-CPCS like HJ on Parlophone ?

Servi the HJ on parlophone is a bit unique, its a kind of double export, the export apple for those countries that allowed apple and the export export parlophone for the likes of portugal that did not allow apple, that was never required for the other export parlophones, but the arrival of the apple label in 1968 created a new problem and so a new solution.

Frank will know the details but there was method behind all the emi prefix madness, for example why HMV had so many different prefixes.

as for the SIUK text many take this as proof that some exports were deliberately meant for UK release, I do not, i think the Albums and 45's that have the siuk text were simple errors where they just used the wrong label blanks, but thats my belief, i have no proof either way.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
09:44 AM
P = Portugal perhaps?

Defo not P = Parlophone though...why have two references to Parlophone in the prefix? And, as you say, it wouldn't make sense for P- titles released through Columbia or Odeon...

Bruce and Frank's claim doesn't make sense to me. Why not do what South Africa, SEA and Australia did... just continue using the existing domestic Parlophone label until Apple was available? Don't need the UK to help with that...

what is wrong with P = parlophone Jae ? these records were supposed to be using the Apple label, but EMI had to do something where Apple was not yet allowed so went back to the parlophone label. However they couldn't use PCS because they had to differentiate from these on their order systems, otherwise Portugal could have of a load of apple labelled albums by mistake and UK stores got sent out a load of parlophone apple albums by mistake, so they had to differentiate.

The use of the apple label for the beatles created a unique problem for EMI, these records were really still parlophone records and apple in label only, they carried a PCS/PMC parlophone prefix already so the solution emi came up with was an extra P for parlophone on top of the P for parlophone that they were already confusingly using for the Beatles so called Apple releases.

i do wonder why for Ys they used the old odeon label though, emi moved in mysterious ways lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
servi,Aug 11 2017
09:37 AM
Jae,Aug 11 2017
09:10 AM
What does the first P in PPCS stand for? That would determine to me what the catalogue series should be referred to as. Ie, to me it's more important to know 'why' there was a specific P- catalogue rather than focus on it being an export series. There was a reason it was needed; what was that? Obviously not worldwide export though. Focus on the reason, not the transport.

Good point ! Bruce and Frank say in their book "...the decision was made to press Apple albums intended for export with Parlophone labels. These export albums have the same catalog number as the domestic LPs, but with "P" added to the front of the catalog number prefix". Although that information could be correct, the P had nothing to do with Apple or Parlophone whatsoever imo.
There are UK pressings of Pink Floyd LPs on Odeon that have the additional P prefix (e.g. PSCX 6346 and PSCX 6157 and PSCX 6258), which were also released on Columbia in the UK. Or PSCX 3525 by Cliff (on Odeon, counterpart to SCX 3525 on Columbia). Or PASD252 (on Odeon), counterpart to ASD 252 on HMV (Bizet Suite no.1). Or PCLP 1802 on Odeon corresponding with CLP1802 on HMV (Swinging Blue Jeans).
I believe the extra P indicated copies solely for export, to countries where the original label's (Apple, Columbia) trademark had not been established. But that is different from the CPCS series. For those I don't see the logic that these were for "export-only".

AH but P could still equal parlophone, these columbia exports on odean may carry the prefix P because they were on odean and Odeon was originally a parlophone subsidiary ( or vice versa ) odeon and parlophone were linked companies before 1965.

standard export columbia's carry the SCXC prefix.

I'd be interested to hear Franks thoughts on this theory that P = not just parlophone but covers parlophone odeon .... in fact i am more certain that even now that it does.

if the P- was only used on anything other than either parlophone or odeon labelled exports then that could blow my theory however when we get to the 70's emi just get more sloppy and may use the P willy nilly, but i'd be interested to see if they did...


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
08:47 AM
And if HJ was available in the UK then doesn't that alone shoot down any assertion that CPCS titles were "export only"?

Or did UK sellers have to import copies from the countries that received these "export versions"?

thats a good question, i always assumed they ordered them direct from EMI but i do not recall these appearing in standard EMI catalogues so how could they order them ? - but they had to appear somewhere thats for sure.

If somebody can find an EMI catalogue that includes these export issues that would be very interesting, almost as interesting as this thread has become !!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
muffmasterh
Level 7
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jae,Aug 11 2017
08:24 AM
Lol, this place cracks me up! So copies exported from the UK are only export pressings if they carry the prefix CPCS or PPCS? Anything else is not an export pressing but a domestic pressing that just somehow found its way to another country? But not exported to said country, as only CPCS or PPCS pressings can claim that title?

So to differentiate we create a new 'exception' of terms - "export copies" vs "export versions", because that will make it clearer?

So we now have terms for copies pressed for export but not domestic and for those pressed for domestic consumption but also formally exported (presumably, it's not clear from the above) by EMI?

Should we now have terms for domestic pressings that 'emigrated' with their owners? Or those 'liberated' by other countries? What about those exported through the international EMI ordering system, for example ordered independently by music stores abroad? What is the 'exception' term for those?

And why do we call domestic SEA pressings (for example) that were destined for the UK "export" pressings when the reverse is not acceptable?

hmm not quite its more nuanced imho, PPCS was certainly pressed for export only, CPCS was pressed primarily for export ( but many certainly did find their way into UK stores for reasons not totally clear other than maybe demand in the case of HJ ) and PCS/PMC UK issues were pressed primarily for the UK market but many were exported too but were not pressed for any specific export requirement and remain just standard UK pressings sent abroad.

I don't see any contradictions in this, a large number of usa albums were imported for sale in Uk stores MMT being the most popular, however in the 70's at hmv oxford street you could get nearly all of the capitol albums but you would not call them export lps's - or would you, if they still had their shrink they would have export stickers on them but they were just basic usa copies stickered up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Albums · Next Topic »
Add Reply