(Ref. JC post from Sept.2011)

“I got the following notes from our friend Larry Cohn on the subject of BN 1568 awhile back:

“What happened was that Cuscuna several decades ago told me that 600 copies of 1568 had been pressed in total, including test copies and review / promotion / audition copies. Unfortunately, there is no hard evidence substantiating the claim. What I do know is that it was pressed in a very low quantity, since it was dropped from the catalog rapidly, and not re-pressed. My stamper evidence plus “promotion copy” evidence convinced me that all copies were created equal, the labels be damned, so a copy with both labels 47 WEST 63rd NYC is as good as any other. However, the variation with a side 2 NY23 address on the label commands about 2-1/2 times more $ in the marketplace for whatever mystical reason. I think the going price is $2000 for the version with and $5000 for the other one, mint.”

(Thanks again for that Larry !)

…As far as Fred’s book is concerned, he generally had to take a stance one way or another on how to catalogue and define a first pressing, even if the label variations were all pressed in the same run. It only makes sense to list the one with the earlier address as a first pressing, but in this case both variations are “original first pressings” but the NY23 on side 2 label variation seems a little “more original” and is that much more desired by us collectors as they were still using up the older labels, as in so many other BN favorites.

Yes and no. As I point out several times in my book about Blue Note pressings, the use of the NY23 address was short-lived. In three of the last four records to show a NY23 address – i.e. 1568, 1575, and 1577 – the NY23 address does not appear on both sides. In what order the labels were applied at the pressing plant is a piece of information that we will never know. What we do know is that Blue Note had a history of randomness, where specific label vintages were of no
concern. Their only emphasis was on the labels showing the correct recording information. Admittedly, collectors will always look for the earliest details to determine what is original and what is not. This is not necessarily correct. The example I always give is 4059, which is supposed to be “original” with a deep groove on Side 2. However, I have had a “review copy” of 4059 with no deep groove. Most collectors would agree that a “review copy”, being the earliest issue of an LP, would define the characteristics of an “original”. But they will still pay more for the deep-groove on Side 2.
All this being said, 1568 will probably be considered a second pressing or (for me) a “hybrid” when no NY23 label is present.