A Couple of Nice Ones, A Monk Autograph?????
Sorry for sporadic posting schedule this week. Been crazy with work and now I am in Las Vegas, of all places. I’ll do my best. Here are some nice records that have been sold on eBay in my absence, starting with:
Jackie McLean, Swing, Swang, Swingin’, Blue Note 4024. This was an original pressing in what was described as “fantastic” condition, which we would assume would be M-. It sold for $713.
This one got a nice price, not quite like the one last month: John Lewis and Sacha Distel, Afternoon in Paris, Versailles 12005. This was an original French pressing in VG condition for the record and VG+ for the cover. It sold for $345. Clearly, this record is moving up in desirability among collectors.
This one didn’t sell yet, but it’s quite interesting: Thelonious Monk, Genius of Modern Music, Blue Note 1511. This looks to be an original Lexington Avenue pressing with a very clear autograph of Monk on the cover. Whether the signature is legitimate, we’ll leave that to our readers. Don Lucky — what do you think? Oh, yes. The price is about $2,000.
So am I the only one in the Jazz Collective that thinks Al might have posted this one from a Wayne Newton Show down in Vegas ? (…That where I’d be ! Either that or playing at round at the famed Las Vegas National)
…I took a look at that copy of Thelonius Monk’s, Genius of Modern Music, Blue Not 1511 and here are my thoughts:
Pro’s:
-It looks to be in great condition.
-Having an autograph on the front makes for good display.
Con’s:
-Sadly the album cover itself is not a first pressing.
-The address on the back is not the Lexington address one would hope to find, but the 43W61st pressing variation from the late 50’s early 60’s.
-It doesn’t have a “kakubushi / non-laminated frame cover either.
-The record label photo of side 1 shows a DG and has the correct address etc, but suspiciously there is no description about the side 2 label or the presence of the ear & RVG.
As for the autograph itself:
– No provenance on this one.
– Usually his signature is not this large, although there is another on on-ebay with a large signature on the back of the LP as well so who knows… Most autographs from this era were generally not done on the cover because it would smudge off easily. (“Strike-one”)
-It almost appears that this one was done with a sharpie marker which was not readily available at the time this might have been signed. However “Magic Markers” were available, but have a tendency to turn yellow and fade away drastically on a glossy surfaces over time. (“Strike-two”)
-The style of the autograph is a typical example of an early fifties signature, which predates the pressing of the LP. (“Strike-three”)
-Monk began signing “T Monk” on most examples I have seen starting from around the late 50’s, and this pressing variation may not have been produced yet… (…Inconclusive)
That being said, it is entirely possible this autograph might be real depending on the circumstances. In-person autographs can vary considerably, but since Monk had pretty much disappeared from the scene by the early-seventies and the fact that the sharpie marker was not readily available until 1979-1980, not to mention all the other little “eccentricities” on this one… I would err on the side of caution and wager to say this one is probably fake. It’s just not worth the risk at that price, unless the seller can provide some decent provenance on it.
At the end of the day, it’s always tough to know for sure with these things unless one was actually there in person to get it signed first-hand…
…Did I happen to mention that the Monk autograph on that copy of BN1511 seems to have been signed with a light blue(cough “sharpie” cough cough) marker ? It appears black over the redish/orange background, but when you zoom in on the ebay photo at the point where the signature crosses the white background of the K in the “MONK” text you will see what I mean. Typically blue magic markers were quite dark…
(Note: The streaked appearance of the marker is typical of sharpies on glossy covers. I have one I got in person about 5 years ago that looks like this as well unfortunately…)
Don Lucky pretty much said it all. Back in the 90’s I think it was, Sports Memorabilia even had several scandals where the provenance was actually faked, C.O.A’s in particular. sworn affidavits faked…Ever since then I figured they were all suspect.
How interesting.
So this John Lewis/Sacha Distel sold for $345 ? Well, that’s nothing then. Remember Al’s post from March 21st? There we saw the same album doing $ 2145 !! So demand for the Lewis/Distel may be up, but there’s still a major difference in prices paid. 2145 one week and then 345 the other; you don’t see that happening with Mobley’s 1568…
…Good point Mattyman. I just checked out Al’s post from March 21st on that John Lewis/Sacha Distel that sold for $2145, and the photos are still on ebay. The covers look identical, but I noticed the record labels seem slightly different. They are both DG, but the size and boldness of the fonts seem off, and the symbols below “Versailles” on the right are different. This might be a subtle “tell” that one is more rare thant the other… That being said, I know absolutely nothing about French pressings myself. (Except that I like the covers !) Let me know what you think.
…As for those rare ones (like Hank Mobley’s 1568) not all fluctuating in price like the bottom out of the gold market these days: I think it is still possible to score a deal on ebay once in awhile when the timing is right. I have picked up a few “jems” over the years, mainly because I suspect no one else was watching them or even realized they were there in the first place. I always tack it up to the possibility that the seller mis-categorized them or possibly that the deep pocketed buyers out there were away at their Hampton beach houses that weekend ! 😉
Well, Don-Lucky, if that’s the case then maybe it’d be a splendid idea to share the known holiday dates with all of us, so that we can figure out in time when the high rollers are on their way to the Hamptons, so that we can bid in peace in the meantime, while they’re behind the wheel 😉
And in response to your comments on the John Lewis/Sacha Distel, I have looked a bit closer at the photos of both auctions. Please flip thru the photos that I took out of both auctions and let me know what you think. My idea is that the copy that sold for 2145 houses an original vinyl in a reproduction cover and the copy that sold for 345 houses a repressed vinyl in an original cover.
–
See what I mean, I lined ’em up, view by clicking HERE! (View in slide show mode)
–
You can still see the original listing of the $2145 version here.
–
The $345 copy can still be viewed here.
–
I’m curious about your findings, but one thing is clear: there are major visible differences between the most expensive and the cheaper one. 😉
Mattyman, very intersting question. I’ve compared all the pictures with other copies featured in old auction catalogues. It seems that the original cover has a “dark” John Lewis. For the “moiré effect, it can be from the scan. I’d say that the most expensive was actually an original, and the second is a more recent issue. I may be wrong anyway. I’ll keep doing researches….
Hello Michel, the Moiré effect may be due to a scan, but in this case it’s clear that that has got nothing to do with it: in both cases we’re talking about plain photos of a front cover – the lettering of the names John Lewis etc, is just as sharp on the 2145 dollar version as on the 345 buck pressing.
–
This would basically mean that on the 1st pressing of the Lewis/Distel they used a photo of a photo (hence the Moiré-effect) and on the later pressing, the 345 dollar one, the photo’s actual negative to create the front cover.
–
Since I love that front cover, also because it doesn’t have the horrible blue and red stripes as on the Atlantic pressing, I should focus not on the first pressing, but on a later one then I guess. If they weren’t so freakin’ expensive. Fact is and fact remains that you can’t deny the obvious differences in photo and label quality of both pressings if you flip through the few photos that I uploaded in my comment above 😉
Mattyman: interesting discussion. When looking at the rear of both sleeves, I would say that both sleeves are originals.
There are obvious differences in the two labels.
I had the record some years after its issue, but since my copy was bad, I changed it for a new Atlantic copy. I am at pains to remember details of the label, but would think that my copy was the first (expensive) version, the vague one, not the second one with the clear gold lettering.
Should a second pressing be excluded? Sacha was very popular at the time and maybe the record sold very well, justifying a second pressing.
This is interesting; I believe that the cheaper copy of the Versailles is a second pressing. That label is from the 1960s for sure. To me the cover slick appears laminated versus the matte on the pricier one. It could be a scanner issue but my hunch is that an unlaminated jacket would be from the 1950s, given what I know of European pressings.
Clifford, you are absolutely right, if one cover is laminated and the other is not, then the non-laminated is a fifties pressing/issue. When I had the record, the sleeve was not laminated, I am sure of that. So that would correspond with the less flashy first label.
So slowly but surely we’re getting to the answer, gents 😉
–
At least our little discussion gives enough details to pay attention to the next time this Lewis/Distel copy is up for auction; we’ve now established which one of the two is the true 1st, so buyers know exactly when to fork out big money and when not!
–
For those who came in late, by clicking HERE you go to my original comment 😉
What about the UK release on Criole?
Ng: I have seen the UK release on Oriole in London record shops. They must be pretty rare now. But as with the Zoot Sims on Ducretet Thomson, the English version is less in demand. I guess people wish French liners and no liners translated into English. Quality-wise they should as good, if not better, than the French original.
If you have an Oriole, my advise would be to keep it. If you find one, jump on the occasion. I for one would be very happy to have one. I have the U.S. Atlantic version.