Comments on: A Few More Warhol Covers

By: Bob Brooks

Bob Brooks — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:40:04 +0000

Thanks, just wanted to make sure no one had a deep groove copy out there as michel’s comment had no follow-ups. Mine has no r so I guess it’s an original. I’m just glad there is a site like this because spending a few hundred bucks on a record can be pretty stressful if you have no way of making sure it’s the real thing. I probably won’t go over 100 on a record again, unless it’s a very reputable seller or they play-grade the record. Anyways I don’t have the money. I just have to take a couple gambles to start with because my collection of original presses is so small. But this site is a HUGE help! And thanks for that sonny record, Al, it is much better than my current ojc reissues.

By: Geraint

Geraint — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:42:54 +0000

Popsike have a couple of copies listed that claim to have DGs, though these are probably later presses than the non-DG press. As Michel says, this title was released out of sequence, after 4059 when Plastylite purchased new equipment which did not create the Deep Grooves. Most of the non-DG ones on Popsike have no Inc or R on the (47W63) label and I presume these are the first presses.

By: Bob Brooks

Bob Brooks — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:04:13 +0000

I recently just picked up 1597 with the rvg and earmark. It also has an m9 in deadwax. No deep groove, but with west 63rd on the labels as opposed to the new york usa above. Cover address is west 63rd, new york 23. I believe this is the original, unless someone can tell me otherwise.
I took a little gamble on this one, the seller doesn’t usually sell vinyl, so I couldn’t really trust his “nearly mint” description. Actually vg++/m-, but not bad if it’s the real deal. Any proof this isn’t the first press?

By: Michel

Michel — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:10:32 +0000

BLP 1597 was never issued with a Deep Groove. Cat number does not match with date of release, as for example, 4169.