[78-L] False master numbers

[Steven C. Barr]

From: "David Palmquist" <davidpalmquist at dccnet.com>
> http://ellingtonweb.ca/Hostedpages/DoojiCollection/nextDoojiCollection-1930-1932.htm
> as well.
> The Banner label 0594-A for  Ten Black Berries'
> recording of St. James Infirmary shows 19319, but
> the etching in the runoff shows 9319-2.    The
> Banner label 0598-B Jungle Blues shows 19322 but
> the runoff appears to show 9322-1 (I can't quite make out the 1).
> According to Benny Aaslund's 1954 Wax Works,
> Banner 0594 was released with take 2 and with take 3.   Banner 0598 was 
> take 1.
> Discographies: Timner shows 4 digits, a hyphen
> and 1 more digit for each of these
> recordings.  So do Volonté and Massagli in their
> New Desor.  Aaslund just shows 4 digits in the
> first line, but adds a bracketed (1), (2), or (3)
> beside the label information to signify the
> take.  MacHare (http://depanorama.net/) follows
> the New Desor style, as does Girvan 
> (http://ellingtonia.com/1924-1930.html)
> Blue Disc (the later label), Cameo, Oriole and
> Perfect appeared to use the leading 1 as well.
> I wonder if it signified the particular studio the recording was made in?
>
It hasn't yet been established why matrix numbers appeared on labels; they
appeared on matrices (and by extension stampers) so they could be identified
for disc-pressing use...! The ARC labels added the leading "1" for their own
(yet unknown) purposes...to further complicate things, they used a series
of control numbers...originally on Oriole and other "cheap" labels, but
later on Banner(?!) which appeared (in lieu of matrix numbers) on records
of that period...?! Recording studios were usually identified by prefixes 
(in
some cases by different matrix sequences, usually including prefixes).

The reasons for all the above remain so far unknown...?!

Steven C. Barr