So we know that the Dwight Franklin 45 turned up from the artist himself early this year, and that they all seem to have some mild water damage on the labels. But there have been some really clean copies turning up lately on ebay and I wonder if these are indeed true originals? Mr. Franklin recently RE-PRESSED the 45 to (almost) identical specs as the original. The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue. I can't accuse anyone of passing off the reissues as originals since I can only go by pictures in the auctions. But I don't know how many people are aware of the reissue, so wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

Edited June 20, 201311 yr by 45cellar
Artist Tag

So we know that the Dwight Franklin 45 turned up from the artist himself early this year, and that they all seem to have some mild water damage on the labels. But there have been some really clean copies turning up lately on ebay and I wonder if these are indeed true originals? Mr. Franklin recently RE-PRESSED the 45 to (almost) identical specs as the original. The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue. I can't accuse anyone of passing off the reissues as originals since I can only go by pictures in the auctions. But I don't know how many people are aware of the reissue, so wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

There's a few on PopSike.com

Here's a couple

Top two mentions Water Stained, Bottom Scan mentions Unplayed & slight stain.

Click on Label for PopSike/ebay Description.

www.PopSike.com

www.PopSike.com

Edited July 14, 200915 yr by 45cellar

So we know that the Dwight Franklin 45 turned up from the artist himself early this year, and that they all seem to have some mild water damage on the labels. But there have been some really clean copies turning up lately on ebay and I wonder if these are indeed true originals? Mr. Franklin recently RE-PRESSED the 45 to (almost) identical specs as the original. The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue. I can't accuse anyone of passing off the reissues as originals since I can only go by pictures in the auctions. But I don't know how many people are aware of the reissue, so wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

I don`t think this is the case,i got a perfect copy (no brown water stains) off Dwight when he first

started selling them on here,also later i got another one off him and that one did have the water mark,

also the seller is from the same area as Dwight,i looked on Ebay and i could only find one in

completed listings,also i`ve not heard of any rumours about a repress?,unless anybody else as heard otherwise?.

Dave f............

I don`t think this is the case,i got a perfect copy (no brown water stains) off Dwight when he first

started selling them on here,also later i got another one off him and that one did have the water mark,

also the seller is from the same area as Dwight,i looked on Ebay and i could only find one in

completed listings,also i`ve not heard of any rumours about a repress?,unless anybody else as heard otherwise?.

Dave f............

Thanks for the input, Dave. I don't want to create confusion, but I am interested in knowing what's out there. Clearly there are originals without water stains as you've pointed out, Dave. However, the reissue is not rumor but fact. I was sent two copies of the reissue by Dwight himself, and was able to compare the dead wax etchings against my original. He told me on the phone that he had repressed the 45 and asked my opinion.

So really, I guess what really needs to be put out to the public is the NEWS that there is a repress, and how to distinguish it from the original pressing based on the feedback to my initial post to start this thread.

Thanks for the input, Dave. I don't want to create confusion, but I am interested in knowing what's out there. Clearly there are originals without water stains as you've pointed out, Dave. However, the reissue is not rumor but fact. I was sent two copies of the reissue by Dwight himself, and was able to compare the dead wax etchings against my original. He told me on the phone that he had repressed the 45 and asked my opinion.

So really, I guess what really needs to be put out to the public is the NEWS that there is a repress, and how to distinguish it from the original pressing based on the feedback to my initial post to start this thread.

Okay Mate no problem,i thought you was asking if there were repress`s,just read the orig post back again and noticed

that you did say Dwight did repress them,which some how i missed ,

i wonder if he is using the orig plates to reprees them?,anyway sorry about the mix up,must learn to read

threads properly before posting a reply

Dave f........

So we know that the Dwight Franklin 45 turned up from the artist himself early this year, and that they all seem to have some mild water damage on the labels. But there have been some really clean copies turning up lately on ebay and I wonder if these are indeed true originals? Mr. Franklin recently RE-PRESSED the 45 to (almost) identical specs as the original. The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue. I can't accuse anyone of passing off the reissues as originals since I can only go by pictures in the auctions. But I don't know how many people are aware of the reissue, so wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

Just thought i'd add my penorth as it was i who originally put this in "wants" over two yrs back.

I actually got my copy two yrs ago and payed a good sum for it ,i have spoken to a few people and have now found out two previous owners of my copy which goes back at least 5yrs.

When CATHY JONES(Catjo ) came on here and replied to my want she said she had 4 copies,which was a very shrewd move on her part,because i did some homework and discovered about 15-20 copies .

All bought by people on here ,who might i add ,contacted her for copies ,even though she was replying to MY WANT

This backs up my theory ,if you put up a want on here be prepared for unsrupulous people jumping on your band wagon

Suufice to say ..all is fair in love and record collecting

Anyway ..back on track ...CATHY was working on behalf of Dwight ,who just happened to find a box of records in his shed ,that had been sat there for the last 30 yrs .Most probably in a damp place,hence the copies with the water marks. I asked how many copies he had, but she dodged that one so who knows the true amount??

He has since informed me that his nephew is re-issuing them ,i've not seen the copies but i do know there are people on here who have ordered originals and been given re-issues to compare

So be warned ...if you are offered one now ,it could well be a re-issue!

I would definitely like to see the two together to compare ,but as i said mine is at least 5yrs old and i believe the re-issues are 2009

So we know that the Dwight Franklin 45 turned up from the artist himself early this year, and that they all seem to have some mild water damage on the labels. But there have been some really clean copies turning up lately on ebay and I wonder if these are indeed true originals? Mr. Franklin recently RE-PRESSED the 45 to (almost) identical specs as the original. The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue. I can't accuse anyone of passing off the reissues as originals since I can only go by pictures in the auctions. But I don't know how many people are aware of the reissue, so wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

Many Thanks for ALL Info Regarding this Record.

I don't have either the Original or the Re-Issue so can't provide Deadwax Detail.

However, the following is Extremely Helpful If able to Inspect the record before purchase, or ask Question, etc.

"The difference is that the dead wax etchings are scratched out on the reissue"

Thanks for this Information.

Funny this a chap I know called me the other day with a couple of wants then he mentioned that he had two clean copies of this one he's keeping and one for sale/trade, not really my bag but be careful guy's.

Regards - Mark Bicknell.

This backs up my theory ,if you put up a want on here be prepared for unsrupulous people jumping on your band wagon

With all due respect, you weren't the only person who was looking for this record, so...thanks for adding the smiley face at the end there, Nev. That said, it certainly is good that you posted that want here for Cathy to have found.

I would definitely like to see the two together to compare ,but as i said mine is at least 5yrs old and i believe the re-issues are 2009

Let me see if I can get a decent enough picture to share. Getting good pictures of dead wax etchings is tricky for me as I'm not so talented with a camera.

With all due respect, you weren't the only person who was looking for this record, so...thanks for adding the smiley face at the end there, Nev. That said, it certainly is good that you posted that want here for Cathy to have found.

Let me see if I can get a decent enough picture to share. Getting good pictures of dead wax etchings is tricky for me as I'm not so talented with a camera.

Just a thought but have you tried setting your camera to macro mode ??

And with all due respect ,ok i may not have been the only person in the world looking for a copy but as i said it was me who put up the want, so i think Cathy's reply was aimed at me

I have noticed in want's when someone asks for a particular record ,if someone else also wants a copy ....he/she normally puts" i too would like one but only after the original poster gets sorted"

Not the same as someone replying to a want saying they have a copy and you jump in and say can i have his/her want please .

call it eitiquette but nicking other peoples wants is a bit naughty in my book

OK. Let's see how these iPhone pictures work. Those of you who have originals will not have the scratch marks in the dead wax that you see below.

The full label of the reissue is identical, as seen here:

Just a thought but have you tried setting your camera to macro mode ??

And with all due respect ,ok i may not have been the only person in the world looking for a copy but as i said it was me who put up the want, so i think Cathy's reply was aimed at me

I have noticed in want's when someone asks for a particular record ,if someone else also wants a copy ....he/she normally puts" i too would like one but only after the original poster gets sorted"

Not the same as someone replying to a want saying they have a copy and you jump in and say can i have his/her want please .

call it eitiquette but nicking other peoples wants is a bit naughty in my book

Hi nev i was one of the ones who jumped on your want sorry but i did pm you and tell you so i am not that bad ( i too had been looking for a couple of years) i was offered several copies but only took one as i thought that you should have the lions share as you say you did put up the want, still a great record though, but i wonder how often it will get played out now.

mark

can we have a scan of a copy without the matrix scratched out just to confirm things. i know a few people that have had copies from the franklin family some guys have bought multiples to sell on all believing they have original copies. do we have another elija cole/ zz and company scenario developing here. lots of questions to be asked

dave

sunday chill out 16th aug 1st anniversary and promoters birthdays with twins, joe lakin, mick wad & howard + guests bob beasley and chris dalton

friendship soul sessions at kingstone club, sat 29th aug with geordie and mark + guests pinches twins

can we have a scan of a copy without the matrix scratched out just to confirm things. i know a few people that have had copies from the franklin family some guys have bought multiples to sell on all believing they have original copies. do we have another elija cole/ zz and company scenario developing here. lots of questions to be asked

dave

sunday chill out 16th aug 1st anniversary and promoters birthdays with twins, joe lakin, mick wad & howard + guests bob beasley and chris dalton

friendship soul sessions at kingstone club, sat 29th aug with geordie and mark + guests pinches twins

Got mine a few months ago complete with authentic water stains!

Here are some pics taken from the mobile, not very clear but hope you can make out the etched numbers DF-29215-A and DF-29215-B also there is what looks like initials opposite etched in, very small though and not able to focus in on my camera.

thanks for that albert. So whats an original worth and whats the reissue worth?

dave

Edited July 29, 200915 yr by dave pinch

I had 3 copies of this all originals, no deadwax scratches, my copy has a clean Foxie Lila label, but slight water damge to "Come back home "side. Interesting all this who was first etc, i was actually told about this by Rachel over 3 years ago, she also has an original of the 45', i believe Paul capon had one for sale but withdrew after hearing it for the first time and kept it for his own collection (think the Paul capon part is mainly accurate), Still believe it's a hard record to find, like Nev says (hi Nev by the way good to chat at the gstone the other week) i think that initial box has gone now, must be the reason for the repress. Think after years of buying records you can just tell when something is brand new compared to a 45' thats 30 years old.don't ask me how but you can.....Know what i mean.

Bri i sold one of mine some time back but thats between me and the buyer, next time i see you i'll let you know.

Edited July 31, 200915 yr by Brett F

Just thought i'd add my penorth as it was i who originally put this in "wants" over two yrs back.

I actually got my copy two yrs ago and payed a good sum for it ,i have spoken to a few people and have now found out two previous owners of my copy which goes back at least 5yrs.

When CATHY JONES(Catjo ) came on here and replied to my want she said she had 4 copies,which was a very shrewd move on her part,because i did some homework and discovered about 15-20 copies .

All bought by people on here ,who might i add ,contacted her for copies ,even though she was replying to MY WANT

This backs up my theory ,if you put up a want on here be prepared for unsrupulous people jumping on your band wagon

Suufice to say ..all is fair in love and record collecting

Anyway ..back on track ...CATHY was working on behalf of Dwight ,who just happened to find a box of records in his shed ,that had been sat there for the last 30 yrs .Most probably in a damp place,hence the copies with the water marks. I asked how many copies he had, but she dodged that one so who knows the true amount??

He has since informed me that his nephew is re-issuing them ,i've not seen the copies but i do know there are people on here who have ordered originals and been given re-issues to compare

So be warned ...if you are offered one now ,it could well be a re-issue!

I would definitely like to see the two together to compare ,but as i said mine is at least 5yrs old and i believe the re-issues are 2009

Hi Nev,

like you I picked up mine over 18 months ago and paid a tidy sum for it (well it was quite hard then). Only upside is its a great original with no label damage.

ATB Steve

I had 3 copies of this all originals, no deadwax scratches, my copy has a clean Foxie Lila label, but slight water damge to "Come back home "side. Interesting all this who was first etc, i was actually told about this by Rachel over 3 years ago, she also has an original of the 45', i believe Paul capon had one for sale but withdrew after hearing it for the first time and kept it for his own collection (think the Paul capon part is mainly accurate), Still believe it's a hard record to find, like Nev says (hi Nev by the way good to chat at the gstone the other week) i think that initial box has gone now, must be the reason for the repress. Think after years of buying records you can just tell when something is brand new compared to a 45' thats 30 years old.don't ask me how but you can.....Know what i mean.

Bri i sold one of mine some time back but thats between me and the buyer, next time i see you i'll let you know.

i know what you mean brett. but and its a big but . when was this 45 discovered. weve determined that 1st issues have a matrix and 2nd issues have the matrix scratched out but whats the vinyl like. is it exactly the same on both copies or is it different. who says the record was pressed up 30 years ago ( the label stains mean nothing. 45s can get that after a year or 2 )is this 45 the latest in a list of scam records. id really like to know. everybody i know seemed to have 3 original copies so there must have been a lot at one time. how much are the scratched out copies to buy. do they ` feel` any different to original copies. so many questions????

dave

i know what you mean brett. but and its a big but . when was this 45 discovered. weve determined that 1st issues have a matrix and 2nd issues have the matrix scratched out but whats the vinyl like. is it exactly the same on both copies or is it different. who says the record was pressed up 30 years ago ( the label stains mean nothing. 45s can get that after a year or 2 )is this 45 the latest in a list of scam records. id really like to know. everybody i know seemed to have 3 original copies so there must have been a lot at one time. how much are the scratched out copies to buy. do they ` feel` any different to original copies. so many questions????

dave

Dave

Most of the buyer's who got in b4 the cat got out,had Dwight's phone number ,so could speak to the guy direct.

He made no bones about telling everyone it was being re-issued and even offered to send one of each so people could tell em apart.

Never asked for one because my original came from someone on here who bought it from someone else on here a long time back.

I first became aware of it when Thorsten from Germany put it on a cd asa freebie to those who bought from his website (xmas time) ,probably 4-5 yrs back.

He told me when i enquired ,his mate had a box of em and wanted $5 each ,he bought 3 ,sold 2 for $20 and kept one.Paul Capon then offered one up on here,saying he'd been offered it in a trade but was willing to take offers.

Strangely at this point he'd not even recieved it ,let alone played it what's that all about??

Then when he got it ,he loved it so much ,no money would he part with it for believe me ..i tried

Some how and if your reading this Paul,i reckon he was cunningly trying to put a value on it .

HI NEV

THANKS FOR THAT THERES LOTS OF GUYS OUT THERE WHO HAVE SCRATCHED OUT MATRIX COPIES WHO THINK THEY HAVE BOUGHT ORIGINALS. BLOODY MINEFIELD. ID LOVE TO GET BOTH COPIES SIDE BY SIDE AND SCRUTINISE THEM. IM SURE IT WILL ALL COME OUT IN THE WASH

DAVE

Dave.. Ive had them side by side and belive mem there is a difference but if you dont have both in hand the only way to tell is the scratched out matrix.

if they had put the same matrix as the original on the re-issue it would be almost impossible to tell

the vinyl looks almost identical apart from the high gloss and the label is a shade darker in yellow and red..not a fading.

gasher

HI NEV

THANKS FOR THAT THERES LOTS OF GUYS OUT THERE WHO HAVE SCRATCHED OUT MATRIX COPIES WHO THINK THEY HAVE BOUGHT ORIGINALS. BLOODY MINEFIELD. ID LOVE TO GET BOTH COPIES SIDE BY SIDE AND SCRUTINISE THEM. IM SURE IT WILL ALL COME OUT IN THE WASH

DAVE

Dave

Most of the buyer's who got in b4 the cat got out,had Dwight's phone number ,so could speak to the guy direct.

He made no bones about telling everyone it was being re-issued and even offered to send one of each so people could tell em apart.

Never asked for one because my original came from someone on here who bought it from someone else on here a long time back.

I first became aware of it when Thorsten from Germany put it on a cd asa freebie to those who bought from his website (xmas time) ,probably 4-5 yrs back.

He told me when i enquired ,his mate had a box of em and wanted $5 each ,he bought 3 ,sold 2 for $20 and kept one.Paul Capon then offered one up on here,saying he'd been offered it in a trade but was willing to take offers.

Strangely at this point he'd not even recieved it ,let alone played it what's that all about??

Then when he got it ,he loved it so much ,no money would he part with it for believe me ..i tried

Some how and if your reading this Paul,i reckon he was cunningly trying to put a value on it .

I wish I was that 'cunning' mate. I'm afraid I'm not that clever. I got offered a small pile of things to list and that was one of them. After seeing it listed a mate said just buy it - you'll like it. I did and I do and thats why I kept it.

where are all these re issues then?. is dwight selling them . ive not seen any crop up............................... then again im not looking that hard

dave

Hi,

I received the 45 as gift.

A side has DF - 29215 - A in the deadwax

B SIDE has DF - 29215 - B in the deadwax

Both sides have in the deadwax something like a small signature (initials ?)

Label is clean and no water stains.

I would like to know if it's original.

Thanks

Edited November 26, 201212 yr by Leo

so would price should the scratched out copy now be then? £10?

Just thought i'd add my penorth as it was i who originally put this in "wants" over two yrs back.

I actually got my copy two yrs ago and payed a good sum for it ,i have spoken to a few people and have now found out two previous owners of my copy which goes back at least 5yrs.

When CATHY JONES(Catjo ) came on here and replied to my want she said she had 4 copies,which was a very shrewd move on her part,because i did some homework and discovered about 15-20 copies .

All bought by people on here ,who might i add ,contacted her for copies ,even though she was replying to MY WANT

This backs up my theory ,if you put up a want on here be prepared for unsrupulous people jumping on your band wagon

Suufice to say ..all is fair in love and record collecting

Anyway ..back on track ...CATHY was working on behalf of Dwight ,who just happened to find a box of records in his shed ,that had been sat there for the last 30 yrs .Most probably in a damp place,hence the copies with the water marks. I asked how many copies he had, but she dodged that one so who knows the true amount??

He has since informed me that his nephew is re-issuing them ,i've not seen the copies but i do know there are people on here who have ordered originals and been given re-issues to compare

So be warned ...if you are offered one now ,it could well be a re-issue!

I would definitely like to see the two together to compare ,but as i said mine is at least 5yrs old and i believe the re-issues are 2009

the lettering nev is smaller on the original and a slightly fader red hope this will help.