Geeky A&M Inner Label Query

[amidar]

As stated does any knowledgeable person know when A&M switched from their yellow inner labels to this style. I've read on google that it was around 1973 but I'm not so sure. :



Only reason I ask is I bought what should have been a first press of a record from 1970 (not the strawbs) and received a reissue which when I tracked it down on discogs does not state the year of release so out of interest really as I've always thought that label seems very late 70's in style.

[Milesago]

The earliest occurance of the silvery A&M label is 1973.
The brown or mustard label that preceded it disappeared by 1974.

There may be ways to date the silver label more accurately based on layout and arc text and so on but I don't have the information to hand right now.

[amidar]

Cheers Miles seems to backup what I read on a website which showed slight changes too varying through the 70's and from country to country. I'd send it back but for all the hassle and what I paid it's not worth it so filler copy for now.

For clarity I ordered what was listed as a US first press but got this version:

https://www.discogs.com/Shawn-Philli...elease/7535736

To be fair discogs does not state the updated catalog number for the reissue so I can see how the mix up occurred but then I'm not an expert and I knew as soon as I saw it. Oh well you win some, you lose some.

The earliest occurance of the silvery A&M label is 1973.
The brown or mustard label that preceded it disappeared by 1974.

There may be ways to date the silver label more accurately based on layout and arc text and so on but I don't have the information to hand right now.

[bongolia]

you may have seen these in your searching:

http://www.onamrecords.com/Labels_Sleeves.html

http://vinylbeat.com/cgi-bin/labelfo..._section=A,B,C

the first one says the silver label was "From SP 4389 through SP 5115"

could be variations between countries, but would have thought if the catalogue number is below 4389 it's a reissue

[Milesago]

For what it's worth, more-or-less the same thing happened to me on discogs once. I ordered a brown label A&M original and was sent a silver label later pressing. I contacted the seller explaining the error and that I needed to return the LP (in this case the repress disc was really light and flimsy). Rather than pay for return postage, the seller offered to refund the cost price of the LP which I could then keep -- so I'd be getting it for shipping cost only.

I've also been the seller in this scenario on two occasions, i.e. found a great record dirt cheap, made a stupid error in the discogs listing, and then made this partial refund offer to the buyer rather than waste any more money on it.

So it's always worth contacting the seller.

[amidar]

Yep quite right mate that's what I looked at. The copy of 'Contribution' I have is number 'SP-4382' and now comparing that to his album 'Bright White' which came out in the US in 73 (came out in 74 in the UK) and is 'SP-4402' 21 releases between they probably reissued the back catalogue around that time.

It's not the end of the world but it's cheap enough to get a UK or US OG so slightly peeved it's a reissue and the cover has sellotape (other brands available) on it which only adds insult to injury.

[amidar]

Yep I've done that earlier and was quite friendly about it as he seems an honest seller from his past feedback and I could see by how it's listed on discogs that you could easily make the mistake, although not so sure about the tape he neglected to mention. He was very apologetic but hasn't offered any kind of refund just the offer to return it if I want to. I'm not one for leaving angry feedback over something like this especially given the money involved, swings and roundabouts and all that.

The vinyl isn't the thickest but not the worst and it's hardly been played so good filler copy for now.

For what it's worth, more-or-less the same thing happened to me on discogs once. I ordered a brown label A&M original and was sent a silver label later pressing. I contacted the seller explaining the error and that I needed to return the LP (in this case the repress disc was really light and flimsy). Rather than pay for return postage, the seller offered to refund the cost price of the LP which I could then keep -- so I'd be getting it for shipping cost only.

I've also been the seller in this scenario on two occasions, i.e. found a great record dirt cheap, made a stupid error in the discogs listing, and then made this partial refund offer to the buyer rather than waste any more money on it.

So it's always worth contacting the seller.

[amidar]

What do you know the first UK press of 'Second Contribution' I've bought off discogs which is the follow on album is a UK repress with the grey labels but was listed as the first UK press. Twice in one week that must be some sort of 'Shawn Phillips' world record. Knowing when these records were released might help and I can do my bit to update the info on discogs as well as inner pics in this case. I do believe the cover is different too.