A friend has 'Stop her on sight' b/w I have faith in you on a red Ric Tic 109.

Apparently it plays very quiet is it a bad pressing or bootleg?

A friend has 'Stop her on sight' b/w I have faith in you on a red Ric Tic 109.

Apparently it plays very quiet is it a bad pressing or bootleg?

If it's Kev's I had a good look at it on Saturday night and I'm convinced it's dodgy.

Because:

1) It is vinyl with moulded on label not styrene.

2) The ZTSC number is scratched on.

3) It looks and feels too new and fresh (subjective I know).

4) The sound quality is appalling.

Compating it to mine, the label is a fuller red colour, it's styrene with ZTSC number stamped and it plays clear as a bell.

I reckon it's either a boot or a counterfeit. In the case of a boot I can't understand why anyone would want to, it's not rare and copies are easily available. If counterfeit well, there are a myriad of reasons why artist, staff, musicians would want to do this but I'm not convinced due to the "newness" of it. I concluded it was an ill advised boot from the 80's and dubbed from an original record.

If I'm wrong well at least I bumped your post so we can get some other views.

Best,

John.

If it's Kev's I had a good look at it on Saturday night and I'm convinced it's dodgy.

Because:

1) It is vinyl with moulded on label not styrene.

2) The ZTSC number is scratched on.

3) It looks and feels too new and fresh (subjective I know).

4) The sound quality is appalling.

Compating it to mine, the label is a fuller red colour, it's styrene with ZTSC number stamped and it plays clear as a bell.

I reckon it's either a boot or a counterfeit. In the case of a boot I can't understand why anyone would want to, it's not rare and copies are easily available. If counterfeit well, there are a myriad of reasons why artist, staff, musicians would want to do this but I'm not convinced due to the "newness" of it. I concluded it was an ill advised boot from the 80's and dubbed from an original record.

The vinyl copy is a boot, all your points above are good.

Don't know if they were done at the same time, but other vinyl with moulded label Ric Tics are boots:- J.J.Barnes - Please Let Me In, Laura Lee - To Win Your Heart, Rose Battiste - Holding Hands.

The vinyl copy is a boot, all your points above are good.

Unless it looks like this.

Cheers

Richard

Unless it looks like this.

Cheers

Richard

Is this the vinyl L.A press?

I've got one like he one Richard has posted. When I raised the subject on here,

several experts concluded that it was probably a US counterfeit made at the time of release.

It's in my 'dodgy' box...

I've got one like the one Richard has posted. When I raised the subject on here,

several experts concluded that it was probably a US counterfeit made at the time of release.

It's in my 'dodgy' box...

Thought this was the west coast press.

Is there a link to a previous thread please?

Cheers

Richard

I bought the exact same boot for £3 from Rob's Records in about '94, without the 100% conviction that it was as kosher as a salami.

Unless it looks like this.

Cheers

Richard

this is a boot from the pitsburgh area done at the time the record was released, dodgy distributers of records used to press up there own copys to distribute to shops, thus keeping all the profit for themselves

Thought this was the west coast press.

Is there a link to a previous thread please?

Cheers

Richard

In J.M's there is a (rarer?) L.A vinyl press.

So am I right in thinking not all vinyl copies are counterfeit?

In J.M's there is a (rarer?) L.A vinyl press.

So am I right in thinking not all vinyl copies are counterfeit?

Rarer!!!??? It was a zillion seller and certainly a big hit for Ric Tic.

I think it likely that all the vinyl ones are boots - but the one I saw on Saturday definately was.

John.

Thought this was the west coast press.

Is there a link to a previous thread please?

Cheers

Richard

https://www.soul-source.co.uk/forums/topic/28652-is-this-a-bootleg/page__p__293725__hl__edwin%20starr%20bootleg__fromsearch__1entry293725

Unless it looks like this.

Cheers

Richard

This different than the one in the old thread.

I bought the exact same boot for £3 from Rob's Records in about '94, without the 100% conviction that it was as kosher as a salami.

So after typing that, I thought it best to try and buy a legit issue....ordered a red ric tic from Manship; it arrived today and is identical to the 'boot'(?) I bought 15 years ago. The pressing is really strong untilt he end when the vocals distort. Scratched matrix etc.

Now I'm confused.

I'm not sure were I got this bit of information from - that Edwin was a little unsure of calling it S.O.S when actually it is S.H.O.S.

However Ed Wingate the lable owner said "no one will ever notice that"!

I guess that he was right!

So after typing that, I thought it best to try and buy a legit issue....ordered a red ric tic from Manship; it arrived today and is identical to the 'boot'(?) I bought 15 years ago. The pressing is really strong untilt he end when the vocals distort. Scratched matrix etc.

Now I'm confused.

hmm considering Manship said "so my thoughts are it was a 60s boot.." in the other thread, someone needs to clarify this once & for all. My instinct is that it could go either way, a licensed "other region" pressing or a vintage counterfeit. It doesn't look convincing to me considering the look of other Ric-Tics, but that doesn't really mean much as different pressing plants may have been messing around with different type fonts on a certain day & none of us would ever really know for sure unless we were the actual person in charge of the letraset that day. It's a weird one, but really if it's that upsetting, just go buy a styrene copy & file both