Bird, Dial, Blue Note And Fillers for the $1,000 Bin
I have a lot of records stacked in my eBay watch list, some from a few weeks ago, so I am going to use this post to clear things out, starting with some 10-inch records: Charlie Parker, Dial 207. This was an original 10-inch pressing. The record was only in VG condition and the cover was VG++. It sold for $1,075. Not sure why. We’ve seen this record in much stronger condition sell for a lot less. The seller took a great picture of the cover, so maybe that helped.
This seller had some nice 10-inch LPs a few weeks ago, including Clifford Brown Quartet, Blue Note 5047. This one looked to be in VG+ condition for both the record and the cover, perhaps a little better for the record. The final price was $565. Also, Lou Donaldson Sextet, Volume 2, Blue Note 5055. This one was graded M-, but the seller’s description made it sound more like VG++. The cover was VG++. The final price was $350.
J.R. Monterose, Blue Note 1536. This was an original Lexington Avenue pressing, listed in VG+ condition for the record and VG++ for the cover. The final price was $1,241.60. This is another one for me wherein the United Artists pressing has been a staple in my collection for more than 40 years, never to have been replaced by an original pressing. . . . yet.
Lou Donaldson, Sunny Side Up, Blue Note 4036. This was an original West 63rdStreet pressing that looked to be in about VG++ condition for both the record and cover, based on the seller’s description. The final price was $1,200.
Horace Parlan, Us Three, Blue Note 4037. This was an original “Review Copy” West 63rdStreet pressing from the Jazz Record Center auction. It was in M- condition for the record and cover. It sold for $1,556.
And, since we seem to be in the Blue Note $1,000 bin, here’s one more for good measure: Lee Morgan, Candy, Blue Note 1590. This was an original West 63rdStreet pressing. The record and cover were graded at VG++. The final price was $1,704.99
hard for me to tell what’s up from the pictures with that Monterose cover being a reissue. Looks glossy enough not to be a UA but a little less bright than the few clean Lex’s I’ve encountered.
Since the seller stated “could be a later issue” in regards to the cover, the only other “framed” version I’m aware of is the Japanese Disc Union reissue from 2013: https://www.discogs.com/JR-Monterose-JR-Monterose/release/4705356
Yeah, hard to say with that Montrose. Definitely a frame cover judging by the second photo and the only other candidate for that is indeed the Disc Union issue, but for such a new issue it looks too worn … who knows though.
It looks like an ear in the runout of the Monterose … which rules out a reissue of any sort.
DJ Pari, the seller states in the description that the record is original but the cover “could be a later issue”.
I wanted to post this here because I have never seen an album like this and wanted to know if anyone else has. This error could make this album very collectible but I just don’t know. Has anyone ever seen a Blue Note with the wrong back cover?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Original-Blue-Note-Error-Sonny-Rollins-1558-w-Art-Blakey-1554-back-cover-RVG/283310411644?hash=item41f69dcf7c:g:cUgAAOSwmdVa2XwR:rk:4:pf:0
With respect to the Parker’s 10″ Dial LPs, I seem to remember from the discussions on the Phonogram discussion list from twenty years ago, that the 207 was considered the rarest. Of course, Ebay was still young back then, and we also have Popsike now to judge.
Scott, have not seen a cover like that but, on the other hand, I strongly believe that records are different from stamps. Errors like that shouldn’t make them more collectible. On the contrary, I would strongly prefer a correct cover so that the integrity of the album is not compromised. For the same reason, I would avoid a mispress, with, for example, Sonny on one side and, say, Mantovani on the other. No matter how rare it could be.
Scott, yes have seen a handful of error jackets. For instance an upside-down back slick on a copy of Anthony Williams Life Time, a Horace Silver Tokyo Blues back slick pasted over Jimmy Smith Plays Fats Waller plus others. If you are the seller unfortunately I have bad news because in the realm of jazz records, misprints typically have a lower value than correct copies.
That is also far from an original press as the seller claims.
Yeah, looks like no ear, even. No way is anyone paying anywhere close to 400 bucks for that. Hard to put a value on it but I’d be surprised if you could move it for more than 100.
Yeah I also noticed it wasn’t an original as advertised. I was looking to add this record to my collection but yeah I would not want my only copy to be a misprint.
Fire back up the “original pressing” vs. “first pressing” debate! Personally, I am OK with this guy calling it “original” because in today’s reissue-flooded market, that is an “original” pressing (that is, being of the original vintage era, as opposed to a current or recent pressing.) Of course it could be argued that a 2018-pressed Blue Note is also an “original” Blue Note – it’s just an original modern-day reissue. So no, it’s not a “first press”, but he doesn’t claim it is. He says it’s an original Blue Note NYC press, which it is. I know it becomes a question of whether an uneducated buyer would be misled, but I don’t think this cat is being intentionally misleading. That’s how I play it in my mind, anyway. Carry on.
Sorry, but all we have is the precision of language to facilitate communication between individuals. When words cease to mean what they are supposed to mean, all kinds of things will break down sooner or later. We see this on the grand stage…..and now within a hobby. The most common definition of “original” is “present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.” Within this narrow definition there exists no support for claiming a latter pressing is an “original” but from a different era. The word original is directly related to the first example, not a subsequent facsimile. For a seller to use the word “original”, with knowledge of its meaning, but then say the item may have been produced later is disingenuous at best, and probably intended to deflect responsibility if a buyer later claims to have been deceived. The inclusion of a disclaimer negates the use of the word “original” in this context. Consider if more sellers acted like this. What do you think will happen to the on line market for LPs (or any other collectible) ? ,
With specific regard to the Montrose LP, I see an “ear” (last photo), and if one compares photos of the labels to photos of the labels in the DU reissue, one would see a clear difference in the placement of the deep groove and placement of musician listings. Seller makes the unambiguous claim that the LP contains a “flat edge” and an “ear”. Are there other indicators that would point to this LP being an original as defined above, or a later pressing ?
The seller states that the cover may be a later version. Are there early DG 47th street LPs with Lexington covers floating around ? The seller is in Germany. Is it possible that the cover was created in Europe in period ?
rl1586, what makes the Monterose jacket notable is the “frame” construction, which to my knowledge, is only found on first 767 Lex pressings and the DiskUnion replica reissues. There is no question about the record being original.
I agree with Aaron, Blue Note, as far as current research holds, the “frame” covers were only produced once. When the “fake” Lex, 63rd St. pressings were produced as Blue Note was sold to Liberty Records they used current card stock at that time and didn’t attempt to reproduce the “frame” covers. Besides not having an Ear/P if you check the cardboard inside the jacket compared to an original it’s different stock.
I apologize for the ramble, filled with Christmas wine and all, Happy Holidays everyone!
I am not very much into Blue Note, Prestige and Vogue being my fields of predilection. Still was wondering about the Jutta Hipp qnt with Zoot. My copy is Lex, sleeve and lbls, ears etc, but the safety knob cover and no kakubushi. I have not yet spotted a Hipp qnt with frame cover.
Btw, many years ago I sold one of the Hickory House Hipp trio albums, which was Lex all the way. But I seem to remember this one was not kakubushi either.
Happy Christmas to all of you.
Rudolf – Merry Christmas to you as well! Jutta Hipp Vol. 2 at Hickory House was originally released later and out of sequence with a non-laminated jacket without front frame construction and a safety notch top middle. This is the same type of jacket construction that you reference in relation to your copy of Jutta Hipp and Zoot Sims 1530. The earliest version of the jacket for 1530 is the kakubushi frame construction with no safety notch. I own a copy with the kakubushi jacket and have seen both types of jacket construction for this release.
JRock, thank you for your comments which leave no doubt as to what actually happened more 60 years ago.
Rudolf – you’re welcome. Even the oldest dog can learn new tricks 😉