[78-L] Richard Jose custom labels -- was teejus questions

[Rod Brown]

My thanks to David, Harold, Mike, Matthew, Cary, and Sammy (and maybe a few
others I'm forgetting) for their thoughtful replies.

Harold, I enjoyed the two audio clips quite a lot. They proved your point
decisively. I'll enjoy those clips again.

Mathew, I hope to get a chance to hear a podcast or two soon, so thanks for
the links.

I like the idea, virtually unanimously expressed, that continuing to explore
the possibilities is a better strategy than disqualifying the output of
entire labels. And deciding for myself what I like or don't like, without
much regard to another's undisputed truth--that's a type of life lesson I
need to keep re-learning, it seems.

Mike, I meant to reply sooner to your generously instructive message. I did
check the numbers of these (12 inch) Richard Jose records. Nothing out of
the ordinary to report. "Maggie" is the same version everyone else has.
"Dear Old Girl" is the 31172 version of Dec 10, 1904. I was intrigued to
learn of the practice of ordering matrix numbers between those of known
recordings, just as a sort of speculative mining operation. There's a real
collector mentality, seems to me. However, that tactic apparently wasn't in
play here.

I'm a little surprised by how much I like RIchard Jose, as I don't usually
gravitate toward acoustic recordings. They can be historically interesting,
but not always aesthetically satisfying. Jose was apparently known for nice
uncomplicated songs of great sentimentality, and I suppose I should admit
that such material suits me fine, at least on occasion. Perhaps Richard Jose
will be the one to attract me deeper into the acoustic world.

There were a few other of his recordings available at the same junk shop
whence these came, so I'll go back this weekend and buy up the remainder.
I'll be surprised if they're gone by then, said junk shop being frequented
mostly by ipod-wearing 20-somethings. Charming chilluns, and one or two show
a passing interest in shellac, but most of these kids will make do with
vinyl.

Thanks again to the list membership. I'm thinking up more beginner's
questions to pepper you with, so be warned.

Best,
Rod


> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Michael Biel" <mbiel at mbiel.com>
> To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:24:50 -0700
> Subject: Re: [78-L] more teejus questions from a beginner
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [78-L] more teejus questions from a beginner
> From: Rod Brown <raudiobrown at gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, October 02, 2011 4:24 pm
> To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>
> Hey all,
>
> Here's the latest in my continuing series of basic questions about
> collecting 78s.
>
>
> Nobody answered your first question, so I'll take it.
>
> > I just bought a couple of very nice Richard Jose records, mostly because
> > the labels were unusual, at least to my eye. They are gold ink on a white
> > background, with all the particulars type-written in, and a couple of
> > corrections done long-hand with a fountain pen. Are these test pressings,
> or
> > does this type of label have some other significance?
>
> If the format of the labels are just white versions of standard Victor
> formats such as the Batwing, these are probably special order records,
> not test pressings. Into the early 40s Victor offered a service which
> allowed anyone to order up special pressings of out of print records and
> even unissued masters, as long as the metal parts existed.  Some people
> were able to find the matrix numbers of things like Caruso recording
> sessions and taking a chance they ordered adjacent or missing numbers in
> the middle.  Sometimes unissued recordings showed up.  In addition to
> the title info and the real record number there is usually another
> number which has no discographic significance.  It is the order number
> for that collector's order.  All the records included in that order will
> have that same number on them. You might find that number on yours if
> they were all ordered together.
>
> > I'd have thought this
> > would be a bit early for radio promotional copies, since from what I've
> > read, Jose was near the end of his time in Victor's catalog by the late
> > teens/early twenties (thanks, Tim Gracyk). Oh, yes--the titles are
> > "When You And I Were Young Maggie" and "Dear Old Girl."
>
> The record companies did not want radio stations to play their records,
> and even sued some of them.  DJ copies are a post WW II development, and
> some credit Capitol as being the first major to have special DJ
> pressings.  Jose recorded very early in the century between 1903 and
> 1909.  The earliest ones would have handwritten matrix numbers, and
> these might be early enough.  You didn't say if these were 10 or 12-inch
> discs.  These songs appeared on both sizes. The key to what recording
> you have would be the take number at the 9 0clock position in the
> shellac between the grooves and the label.
>
> "Dear Old Girl" was recorded first on 12-inch, matrix C-616.  Take one
> was recorded Oct 31, 1903 and was issued on 31172.  There were unissued
> takes recorded later.  Take 2 was recorded Jan 12, 1904 and take 3 was
> recorded Jan 14, 1904.  Late in 1904 there was another set of recordings
> of this song.  A new matrix number of C-2041 was assigned for the
> 12-inch version, and takes one and two were recorded Dec 9 and were
> unissued, and take three was recorded on Dec 10, 1904 and also issued on
> 31172.  The ten inch version was on matrix number B-2041, with unissued
> take one recorded on Dec 9, with take two recorded on Dec 10, 1904 and
> issued on 4226.
>
> There was only one take recorded of "When You and I Were Young, Maggie".
>  12-inch matrix C-2964, take one was recorded Dec 20, 1905 and issued on
> 31485.
>
> If you have an unissued take of Dear Old Girl, I know a collector who
> will want it.  As I said, there is no report of an unissued take of
> Maggie, but if yours is not take one, it will be an interesting find.
>
>
> > From the same batch of records, I bought a 12" Columbia, made in England,
> > of WIll Fyfe's "I'm 94 To-Day" / "I Belong To Glasgow." I already have a
> > 10" version on Regal Zonophone. Can anyone tell me whether one of these
> > is considered more collectible than the other, for whatever reason?
>
> The 12-inch version has a longer spoken section than the 10-inchers, but
> I prefer the versions he recorded in the U.S. on American Columbia,
> probably because those are the versions I grew up with.  I don't think
> any of these are especially rare.  I presume both versions you have are
> electrical.
>
>
> > And a more generalized question: I gather there are labels one would
> always
> > try to buy, e.g. Black Patti. Is there a list of labels one might as well
> > routinely avoid? I believe I've recently read here that Cameo and Lincoln
> > were thought of as copy labels. I never buy Tops, for more or less the
> same
> > reason.
>
> By "copy label" I suppose you mean labels which record songs recorded by
> the major labels.  Tops is from a vastly different era, of course, and
> was basically a grocery store rack label that covered hits with no-name
> artists (Scatman Cruthers being one of the exceptions).  But Cameo was
> just one of the many smaller independent labels in the 20s and did a
> pretty good job of being a 2nd-line label.  I certainly don't "avoid"
> Cameo, and actually the first Cameo I ever had was a GREAT record by
> Lucille Hegeman that was in my father's collection for some reason I
> could never figure out!
>
> > Are there others to judiciously neglect?  As always, many thanks, Rod
>
> Some might include the Grey Gull labels, but there are sometimes great
> records on them.  My good friend, the late George Blacker, always said
> "Never overlook a Grey Gull B side".  To cut costs there would be a
> known song on the A side and some unknown song with no royalties on the
> B side, sometimes recorded very hot even if the A side was not hot.
>
> You need to make your own choices and not be led away from something you
> might like by what someone else says.  Just keep listening to things and
> buy what YOU like, the devil with what others say.
>
> Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com
>
>
>
>
>
>