This Melody Maker advert, from February 1968, shows that even after a period of nine months AYE had had no stereo release on Track Records yet it clearly shows ABAL having been made available on that label in both formats.
Inner record sleeves.
In the glory days of vinyl records in the U.K. [at least Great Britain] sometimes came in inner sleeves, both paper and polythene lined, with a date code. Often “hidden” in with the patent number and so often overlooked, these dates offer an indication as to date of issue of a record. Or more accurately, a general period of issue. Though I strongly caution on relying solely on this as a dating of process for determining any release date of any record.
Far too often with old records they are either bought up second hand and we have little if any knowledge of the records history in that we do not know if the record has been mismatched with an inner sleeve over half a century of use. Even when we did buy at point of release, how sure can we be that we never mismatched inners with our own records?
I will also caution potential buyers of records that sellers may utilise this as some sort of support for selling what are genuinely not what is being sold, i.e. mismatched records / inner sleeves or worse still a pirate record made to look like a genuine 1960s, ‘70s or 80s record.
While it is not even reasonable to consider this inner sleeve as definitive in dating a release it has proven useful in supporting detail that does indicate a fixed issue date. Electric Ladyland was issued by Track Records in the U.K. in 1968. While I determined what constituted a genuine early off the press / from the first used lacquers the inner sleeves of the record in question did show support for those findings. The inner sleeves from this Ladyland set displayed, 098 and 108, see photograph. This clearly indicates September 1968 and October 1968, placing the manufacture of these inners in the correct time frame for this records release date of November 1968.
See image to right.
To further support this date period indicator here’s three copies of Isle Of Wight from Polydor Records [England] which show initial release and a later release dates. With a 4th copy that does show just how difficult it can be to “place” the date of issue when we have no real knowledge of a records history.
The initial pressing, though I’m the 4th owner I do have a detailed understanding of its history as I knew [still do] the 2ndand 3rd owner. While there is enough detail written on the inner sleeve by the shop who sold this to the second owner to show it is the original inner. This record was bought second hand shortly after the initial release so I guess the original purchaser was not overly keen on the record, no accounting for taste! That said, the 2nd owner is not a Jimi fan then or now!! While the third owner was more interested in the cover art than the record itself, he passed this record to me sometime in the late 80’s.
Good news for me as the record, bar a short hairline scratch to one side it is in excellent condition and plays without fault.
The white face test pressing by its very nature is an original pressing and was acquired more recently, interestingly I used this inner sleeve date process in part to ensure I was getting a genuine 1970’s pressing.
The other two pressings are “later” pressings and interesting to see what shows on those inner sleeves. The last issued copy I own I bought new while the other I picked up at some point and is the only one I cannot say what the history of the record was.
This I.O.W. recording shows a release date of November 1971.
Test pressing inner sleeve shows 0871, August 1971.
See image below.
The initial release shows 1071, October 1971.
See image below.
Both of these also show a “MARKETED BY POLYDOR” black band on the rear cover [an indicator of an original outer sleeve], the following later pressings omit this detail.
While the known copy, I bought new, sealed [Virgin Records, Liverpool] and has the correct inner shows that later issue date as 783, July 1983.
See image below.
The last later copy to show clearly presents a possible mismatch inner as it gives us a strange set of date(?) marks of 540.
See image below.
We have rumours surrounding every Hendrix original release one way or another so the one here is simply the comment that this album exists in a mono format. Of course broadly speaking it does but being specific about it, it doesn’t!
A dedicated mono mix was never made of this recording and only The Burning of the Midnight Lamp was given the mono mix attention. That of course was well before the track made it to the album.
There are plenty of rumours that a mono set exists but they have never surfaced even when challenging those who have said they have one / seen one! There is a claim that Reprise mastered this to mono and that some [possibly test] pressings were made up. But I have to stress that these are mastered to mono from the stereo mix, no dedicated mono mix was ever undertaken from the multi-track recordings.
Rumours, sweet rumours!
The easiest way to hear this recording in mono is to simply sum the two sides of the stereo, either that mono button on your amp or by utilising double Y cables.
Otherwise, if you wish to own as much of this material mastered to mono on a vinyl slab then the easiest way to achieve this is to simply pick up one of the single albums that carry the Polydor label that you will find pressed in South America. Be it Brazilian or Uruguayan or some other country from that part of the continent, they have crammed 11 of the 15 tracks onto a single LP, mastered to mono.
Of the remaining five tracks, 1983, A merman I will turn to be and Moon, turn the tides, gently, gently away these has never had an official mastered to mono release as far as I am aware. I don’t think Voodoo Chile has seen an official release mastered to mono either. That leaves Come On pt1 and Rainy Day, Dream Away to be had on vinyl mastered to mono.
A number of the tracks can be found mastered to mono on various singles including the white face DJ copies from Reprise through to the much more recent three track Experience Hendrix / Sony 45 from 2018 that included Gypsy Eyes, Burning of the Midnight Lamp and Crosstown Traffic.
Come On pt1 and Rainy Day, Dream Away can be had on the mono cut Armed Forces Radio & Television Service LP [AFRTS] P-11039 pressing, but again simply mastered from stereo. That latter track is the only place I have yet to see this mono mastered to an official vinyl release.
The DeAgostini series of re-issued material were mastered / cut by SST in house engineers, here is a list of who did what as best as I can make out.
Davi Rodrigues De Lima:
Cry of Love, Are You Experienced, Axis. Bold as Love, BBC Sessions, :Blues, Band of Gypsys, Electric Ladyland, In the West, Miami Pop Festival, People Hell and Angels and South Saturn Delta.
Daniel Krieger:
Both Sides of the Sky, Freedom. Live at the Atlanta Pop Festival, Experience Hendrix: The Best of Jimi Hendrix, Live at Monterey, Rainbow Bridge, Valleys of Neptune, Live at Woodstock, Live at Berkeley, First Rays of the New Rising Sun and Rainbow Bridge.
See below for useful link.
Victor Kahn, he who designed cover art for Band of Gypsys and Cry of Love also has a connection with the 9 to the Universe release too, albeit tenuous!
For me I had simply assumed the cover, the most relatable cover, for the Alan Douglas “9 to the Universe” issued LP from1979 had utilised a still frame from a film. That “Universe “release art cover design has a credit to Tim Richie. That there never was a photographic credit for that front picture maybe lent a lot toward that assumption, that and it looks so much like a film still. That said, I never figured even the show it may have been lifted from. Till now that is [and with a little help from my friends], just when I wasn’t even looking.
The cover picture is simply a crop from what is quite an iconic poster, though maybe not always noticed as the poster saw production in some publications simply as a black and white image as opposed to the full colour photograph poster.
1971 saw the release of the first posthumous Hendrix album, Victor Kahn was tasked with the art design. In doing so he was also given the job of a promotional poster for the “Cry” album, at least for the USA and Canada. Publications such as Rolling Stone and Cash Box carried that B&W image of the poster.
That poster was utilised simply as a promotional piece in the USA, while across the border in Canada things started off a little differently. The first pressings of this “Cry” title which would appear on a black Reprise label [with the Sterling / RL run out detail] also came with the promotional poster bundled in with the album. Of course, this was for the initial issued record, once the label changed to that of the more familiar tan coloured Reprise label the poster was no longer included.
Note the photographic credit of Ronald Merians and that Victor Kahn credit on the poster. The Merians photo’ was taken at the Fillmore East, 01-01-70 2nd show.
Finding a black label 1st pressing with the poster is getting harder as the years go by; finding a copy of the poster in excellent / mint condition is getting darn impossible. If they do turn up then expect to pay for that. Finding a standalone poster is possibly the easiest way to go and marrying it with a 1st Canadian pressing is the best option, cheaper too. Then of course there is the small matter of the sleeve for these 1st press Canadian “Cry of Love” records. They are different in that they are the “Unipack” style gatefold sleeve, that of the inside loader. The album slips into the sleeve from the centre of the inner gatefold.
Marrying poster and album is something that seems to have occurred with the USA Reprise pressings, these never where issued as a pairing but do now show up married together. Nothing wrong in that of course but it can be confusing after all of these years to realise that only the Canadian black label really was issued with that poster. If the marriage of a poster and a US pressing is to take place, maybe it is best to wed the poster with a wfp “Cry of Love” for best effect!
My thanks go to too many to mention here for such a short article, you know who you are but a mention for Luigi Garuti for setting me straight on the posters photograph date / show.
The black and white poster image is shown above, while here we have the poster, credits, the unipack sleeve, front / inner / rear sleeve and various differing labels that have shown up on a number of the CoL pressings down the years. Followed by the familiar 9 To The Universe cover and an alternate cover.
Static electricity with records:
Ever since I started wet washing / vacuum drying my records [a necessity for me it seems as I use a hyperelliptical stylus that reads deeper into the record groove, just where the most dirt is found with older records!], a practise I now conduct across all records new and old, I found that the drying process was introducing a considerable amount of surface static. Not only could it be heard on record playback but seen as I live in a house with pets!
Washing then playing a record resulted in a fur ball of attracted hair and dust during each side. Then there are the audible tics and minor pops that are generated through a magnetised record. Once the nylon pads used on the vacuum arm had been shortened by the manufacturer I did find a noticeable decrease in surface static being introduced from the cleaning regime though not enough to negate having to play a record through completely to enable a discharge of that static from the record.
Yet static across the surface of a record is introduced by a number of other factors, simply the shipping of a record can generate the issue, removing the record from the inner sleeve introduces static [it can also show just how much static there is in the record in the first instance]. Different environments impact this issue too as would the seasonal changes!
Does vinyl weight have an impact on the amount of static generated? I don’t find any scientific study to suggest either way but I get static across all vinyl weights to a varying degree. Does the type of vinyl lead to more or less static, again as there appears to be no scientific study it is difficult to call either way and I’m loath to base thinking solely on that One Step or Clarity record I just bought and pulled from its inner.
Discharging surface static is in real terms an easy process. Zerostat guns, antistatic brushes etc. plus a myriad of of imaginative methods are and can be employed, to help with this issue. I’m not alone in having the experience of hearing the discharge of static as I place a record on a turntable, that clear audible snap as soon as the record touches the metal spindle. The use of antistatic inner sleeves is also a recommended consideration to taming this issue. Simply the action of inserting and removing a record from an anti-static sleeve has cured some issues for me. We should never overlook the point that we ourselves introduce static charge as we often find we carry that charge regardless.
Rather than calling out pressing plants for supplying dirty or static filled records I recommend you explore what works for you in your own environment with your own set up and cleaning regime. It is likely there is little more to be done in producing a cleaner record, after all it is a mechanical process that in itself generates dirt. That would negate the calls for a sterile environment during pressing; this ain’t digital media production by a long way!
Also to consider is the static charge generated within a record, one that cannot be removed and one that is generated by the movement of the record as it rotates on the platter. This has a direct impact in magnetising the cartridge. So the thorny issue of Carbon Black and its impact. There is no getting away from the science that there will be a static force generated the question is to what degree given the small quantity of particles that can be charged per record. Yet regardless of the amount of carbon black contained in a record it has been shown that the removal of the product can and does significantly reduce the “noise floor” of a record. The noise floor should not be confused with how well [or poorly] the physical record was manufactured and therefore how noisy the vinyl itself is or indeed that surface static issue.
I’m not sure just how this procedure [the removal of carbon black] works at least to the degree it achieves as the science does not for me at least quite add up. Removing chargeable particles from a vinyl compound should in theory have minimal impact. Even when we do have instances of records without carbon black added as in the case of QRP’s Clarity vinyl formula my thinking is that we already have a magnetised cartridge which would outweigh any benefit presented with / through natural state vinyl.
Clarity vinyl was introduced to us from Classic Records, Michael Hobson explored this after he listened to a demagnetised record and heard some benefit. I have to say, Classic was the company I first heard Clarity vinyl and was clear in my own mind that whatever was going on did make for quieter record playback, a lower noise floor in the record. Subsequent listening and comparison with Classic Records same titles on standard black vinyl displayed the differences. Just as same titles on differing Clarity formula pressings demonstrated minor differences again! That latter point would suggest that the vinyl formula has just as much of an impact than simply the removal of the carbon black from the product.
QRP, the important to us arm of Analogue Production now own the patent for Clarity Vinyl and utilise this as part of their production of the Ultra High Quality Records line, UHQR Vinyl Record|Acoustic Sounds. They themselves have tweaked the vinyl formula from the outset and further minor changes continue with a view to easier production rather than any claims of a difference in noise floor.
Through a non-scientific process I did test out the impact of magnetism on playback of a record and for that test I utilised the UHQR Axis. Bold As Love, both 001 and 002 the pair as surface static free as is possible and it is noted both play with a noticeable low noise floor. I will add that both of these records are near silent for any noise after both started life with me a little noisy due to that surface static. This is in no way a test of Clarity Vinyl itself, rather the impact of magnetism generated and introduced to the playback component of the cartridge, would it help in my understanding of [basically did I hear any difference and how significant was that difference] magnetism and its possible impact.
Outside of the surface static that may be part of the process of introducing magnetism to a cartridge that end result of generated magnetism is from both the travel of electricity through a cable and from the rotation of the record [regardless of the vinyl compound] below the cartridge. These are the main attributes to magnetise whatever cartridge is in use. It remains unknown to me as to just how long it would take to magnetise a cartridge to the point there is an audibly noticeable change though I would imagine the factors here would be many and varied!
Starting with the 001 stereo and playing the final two tracks from side one, a process repeated for the mono, 002 record as I have a pair of [differing] tone arms on the record deck. Both of which are running through the Luxman E250 phonostage that has an articulator function, the purpose of which is to degauss the cartridge, to demagnetise [to the point of elimination] of any magnetic charge built up over time within the cartridge. That is the claim, would we see if the science works here and if so to what degree?
I doubted I would hear any difference past a maybe, a possible, “could there be a difference”? So it was more of a surprise when I heard significant difference in both trials, each producing more than notable differences between pre and post demagnetising. You of course have different ears and set ups so may conclude differently. Yet for me these differences reinforce the point that any steps to reduce the static charge will have some benefit. It would also suggest that to get the most from any record then steps to degauss a cartridge will play a significant part in that aim.
The removal of carbon black and other “special” vinyl formula is just the beginning; there are a number of actions we can take to make the most of our records and for me at least that includes demagnetising the cartridge.
Pye Records, Tranco is an abbreviation of Transcription Manufacturing & Recording Co Ltd. The Mitcham, Surry. U.K. pressing plant [had a name and location change just prior to closing in 1981] produced this type of vinyl record for a number of labels, including Ember.
Though Ember did utilise different pressing plants so not all Ember records will be Tranco vinyl, not even same titles!
Tranco vinyl appears to have been a set weight and a slightly flexible vinyl with the characteristic of being translucent [in can be seen through]. It came in varying colours with the common one being a dark red, though they all look black unless held up against a light source.
Often touted as being identifiable through having a raised inner circle around the spindle hole [LP’s], there are exceptions as I have at least one LP with a recessed inner circle.
Picture courtesy of http://www.earlyhendrix.com/