Mather
Unknown Member
Yeah seems quite a few of us north of the border are having the same issues as me so hopefully it's just a customs backlog...
Vinyl Me Please Classics
- Thread starter TCell
- Start date
Mather
Unknown Member
Yeah I dunno about that, Noname Telefone is on there too but when you try to buy it says sold out. I would say most of those OMG IT'S BACK titles are not actually back, just glitches.
zerbrechen
New Member
Blossom let you go to checkout. Noname said sold out at the same point. Both seem gone now, though.
scotthilk
Well-Known Member
I asked this in the chat. They said if it lets you successfully check all the way out, you're good. We will see how accurate this actually is!
thebrianjackson
New Member
I was able to purchase Tical, but Paulie said on Reddit that Tical was a mistake. I'm going to let it ride and see what happens next month when it should ship.
scotthilk
Well-Known Member
Where does all of this EXTRA INVENTORY come from, though?! I imagine them just like tripping over a box, opening it and being like, "Oh, look! More Queen, Blossom Dearie and De La Soul in the same box!"
oldschoolkirby
Well-Known Member
Seems that it was fairly common for records around that time? I know I have others like that, anyway. My guess is they were letting shoppers know that both versions are available?
Joe Mac
Well-Known Member
I’ve seen catalogue numbers for both around the logo on the back and on the spine. I’ve never quite seen it like this one. It looks like someone had taken an older mono cover and superimposed the stereo information onto it.
oldschoolkirby
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I see what you mean. It does replicate the original release, at least, so who knows...
Now I'm scouring my discogs to try to remember where else I've seen it like this, haha.
oldschoolkirby
Well-Known Member
Found some - stereo releases, as noted on front cover, but both mono and stereo catalog numbers on the back:
Paul Desmond - Take Ten
View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1963 Vinyl release of "Take Ten" on Discogs.
www.discogs.com
Dave Brubeck Quartet - My Favorite Things
View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1966 Vinyl release of "My Favorite Things" on Discogs.
www.discogs.com
The Miles Davis Quintet - Miles Smiles (this one is mono, but still has both numbers on the back)
Joe Mac
Well-Known Member
Found some - stereo releases, as noted on front cover, but both mono and stereo catalog numbers on the back:
Paul Desmond - Take Ten
View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1963 Vinyl release of "Take Ten" on Discogs.Miles Davis - Quiet Nights (this one even has the mono number on front)Dave Brubeck Quartet - My Favorite Things
View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1966 Vinyl release of "My Favorite Things" on Discogs.
The Miles Davis Quintet - Miles Smiles (this one is mono, but still has both numbers on the back)
randomly it looks like we’re both right actually.
look at the original mono pressing from 1964
And then the stereo issue from the same year.
how lazy was that from Columbia back in 1964, just layering the stereo info onto an unedited mono sleeve! Here was me thinking it was just typical VMP lack of attention to detail!
oldschoolkirby
Well-Known Member
Yep - probably just a way for them to save $$ on printing. Use the same basic cover, then print the little "Stereo 365" logo on the top.
EDIT: What's really interesting, though, is how they shift the front cover photo up to add the Stereo logos/numbers, but on the Mono cover you can see more of the dude's legs!
Joe Mac
Well-Known Member
But it more than just that, they’ve moved the whole front cover image down to accommodate the stereo info and they’ve shrunk the back info to fit the stereo logo and the line underneath it. So they’ve edited it a bit but not properly. Strikes me as a lazy half arsed piece of work haha!
Last edited:
oldschoolkirby
Well-Known Member
Jinx, re: my edit above
dhodo
Well-Known Member
At least they didn't include scanned in ringwear on the original.
Selaws
Well-Known Member
The reason they used to do this is to save cost. It meant they didnt have to get 2 jackets printed and could just slot the mono or stereo into the same jacket. I have quite a few older jazz records like this and it always used to throw me off as I would see Mono then a while later see the Stereo. Always best to check labels and matrix!