Is anyone aware of any boots/reissues of this play? I assumed Mirwood wasn't a heavily booted label.

Just bought myself a copy, didn't pay a lot, but the price I paid was a little bit suspect.

The matrix number reads: ∆59636, it also has 'vocal' and 'instrumental' etched into respective sides.

Any information would be greatly received.

Many thanks, Jrsoul.

Was booted. Manship guide 5th edition states that the originals are on styrene ( styrene is brittle and if you try to bend it it will snap ) If made from vinyl ( the bootleg is apparently made of very flexible vinyl ) it is a counterfeit. Guide price is £150 for original demo and plum coloured label issue - £100 for original blue label issue.

Edited December 20, 201311 yr by autumnstoned

Any information would be greatly received.

 

 

 

The one you've got is a counterfeit/repro (it's pressed on vinyl, not styrene).

The first import I ever bought. Fantastic oldie.

Can't believe there are no vinyl originals, there are of every other Mirwood record.  The one in the picture has the correct delta number.  Also it was booted as a white demo.  Don't believe all you read in books 

p.s. who on God's earth would pay £150 for a copy of this?

Can't believe there are no vinyl originals, there are of every other Mirwood record.  The one in the picture has the correct delta number. 

 

Has got poor sound quality (mastered at very low volume) compared to the original styrene press though.

Has got poor sound quality (mastered at very low volume) compared to the original styrene press though.

 

Again, makes no sense, Mirwood's quality control was very good, and they'd have used the same master to press both styrene and vinyl.  Can understand the bootleg being lesser quality, not the original.

Again, makes no sense, Mirwood's quality control was very good, and they'd have used the same master to press both styrene and vinyl.  Can understand the bootleg being lesser quality, not the original.

 

I've never seen an original vinyl release of this 45 and highly doubt that one exist.

 

The vinyl bootleg which is pictured above is however very convincing as far as the matrix details goes.

 

If anyone has got this on an original vinyl 45, please A/B it with an original styrene press. As Pete hinted at, they should play at the exact same volume.

Edited December 20, 201311 yr by Sebastian

Just had a look at my plum copy and to be honest I'm not

sure if its vinyl or very high quality styrene.

When flicked with a finger it does not click like styrene but hums like vinyl.

 

Kegsy

Just had a look at my plum copy and to be honest I'm not

sure if its vinyl or very high quality styrene.

When flicked with a finger it does not click like styrene but hums like vinyl.

 

Kegsy

 

Easiest way of telling - can you peel the label off?

Easiest way of telling - can you peel the label off?

 

 

anybody want a copy with no label on one side ?  

Can't believe there are no vinyl originals, there are of every other Mirwood record.  

I have never seen a vinyl original of The Belles "Don't Pretend".

  All the copies I have seen are styrene, or have I been looking in the wrong places?

p.s. who on God's earth would pay £150 for a copy of this?

Surely a record is always worth what someone is willing to pay? The first bit of advice my Dad ever gave me when I started collecting! Remember that Manship doesn't take into account the desirability or demand of a record.

 

anybody want a copy with no label on one side ?  

Agreed! I Don't dare try, just incase I've got a genuine copy here.

 

Has got poor sound quality (mastered at very low volume) compared to the original styrene press though.

The sound quality of this is actually very good.

 

I'm still fairly novice, as far as telling apart originals and convincing boots go, however if this is a boot, and is convincing as Sebastian says, maybe I can get away with spinning it anyway!   As it's a fabulous record.

 

Thanks for the feedback guys

Surely a record is always worth what someone is willing to pay? The first bit of advice my Dad ever gave me when I started collecting! Remember that Manship doesn't take into account the desirability or demand of a record.

 

 

Yes he does, those are the main reasons he prices them as he does, the most desirable records are always going to be the most expensive!  What do you think he basis his prices on, the label design? 

Just had a look at my plum copy and to be honest I'm not

sure if its vinyl or very high quality styrene.

 

Post a picture of it and someone on here will let you know.

Edited December 20, 201311 yr by Sebastian

 

Agreed! I Don't dare try, just incase I've got a genuine copy here.

 

The sound quality of this is actually very good.

 

You have got a vinyl copy on your hands, it is not pressed on styrene and you can't easily peel off the label.

 

The bootleg has got pretty decent clarity to the sound, but it plays at roughly 50% of the volume of what an original plays like.

Yes he does, those are the main reasons he prices them as he does, the most desirable records are always going to be the most expensive!  What do you think he basis his prices on, the label design? 

So why did I see a Major Lance - You Don't Want Me No More  Okeh White demo, go for well over Manships valuation? Because it's in demand. 

The main reason they're valued as they are is because they're rare. If he valued them on desirability or demand. There'd be a new copy of Manship every month.

So why did I see a Major Lance - You Don't Want Me No More  Okeh White demo, go for well over Manships valuation? Because it's in demand. 

The main reason they're valued as they are is because they're rare. If he valued them on desirability or demand. There'd be a new copy of Manship every month.

 

Sorry I haven't got a clue what you're on about.

You say it's not because of demand, and then you quote a record that is in demand and say thats why it got the price.

Shame people have to rely on price guides and the musings of one person these days instead of knowledge and experience.

Edited December 22, 201311 yr by Pete S

You have got a vinyl copy on your hands, it is not pressed on styrene and you can't easily peel off the label.

 

The bootleg has got pretty decent clarity to the sound, but it plays at roughly 50% of the volume of what an original plays like.

 

 

Is this vinyl Jackie Lee a boot ?

This also has very low volume.

Edited December 22, 201311 yr by sunnysoul

Sorry I haven't got a clue what you're on about.

You say it's not because of demand, and then you quote a record that is in demand and say thats why it got the price.

Shame people have to rely on price guides and the musings of one person these days instead of knowledge and experience.

Manship's value for a Major Lance - You Don't Want Me No More is £350 according to Manship's USA 6th Edition.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/251374792122?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

 

Here's a copy that sold just over a month ago for close to £360. 

How can Manship predict the demand of a record? Record demand is always changing. Like I said, if he was to value records on demand, there would be a new edition of Manship much more regular. 

 

I'm not going to apologise for not having the 'knowledge and experience'. I wasn't there, I'm 21. Surely, it's the likes of you Wheel, Torch, Wigan veterans that should be educating the likes of me, rather than giving me grief. That is, if you want the scene to move on.

anybody want a copy with no label on one side ?  

pmsl   

Sorry I haven't got a clue what you're on about.

You say it's not because of demand, and then you quote a record that is in demand and say thats why it got the price.

Shame people have to rely on price guides and the musings of one person these days instead of knowledge and experience.

The fact is, people who are new to this (such as myself) have to rely on the likes of Popsike and Manship guides, as we simply don't have the knowledge/experience. 

plenty on popsike spot the boot,lol...  https://www.popsike.com/php/quicksearch.php?searchtext=bobby+garrett&x=22&y=12

Manship's value for a Major Lance - You Don't Want Me No More is £350 according to Manship's USA 6th Edition.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/251374792122?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

 

Here's a copy that sold just over a month ago for close to £360. 

How can Manship predict the demand of a record? Record demand is always changing. Like I said, if he was to value records on demand, there would be a new edition of Manship much more regular. 

 

I'm not going to apologise for not having the 'knowledge and experience'. I wasn't there, I'm 21. Surely, it's the likes of you Wheel, Torch, Wigan veterans that should be educating the likes of me, rather than giving me grief. That is, if you want the scene to move on.

 

Sorry I'm not trying to give you grief, I'm just not getting your point.

He only does a price guide when he feels like it or needs the money or whatever other motiviation.

The price guide(s) ruined buying and selling for an awful lot of people so I'm not a fan I'm afraid.

If you look at the price of something like Billy Davis in issue one it would be £5, in issue 5 it would be £50.

That's why I say it's all down to demand, if the record hadn't been in demand it wouldn't have gone up in price.

Is anyone aware of any boots/reissues of this play? I assumed Mirwood wasn't a heavily booted label.

Just bought myself a copy, didn't pay a lot, but the price I paid was a little bit suspect.

The matrix number reads: ∆59636, it also has 'vocal' and 'instrumental' etched into respective sides.

Any information would be greatly received.

Many thanks, Jrsoul.

IMG_0899.jpg

IMG_0898.jpg

 

I have loads of Mirwood on vinyl, look for a tiny "h" symbol.

Just had a look at my plum copy and to be honest I'm not

sure if its vinyl or very high quality styrene.

When flicked with a finger it does not click like styrene but hums like vinyl.

 

Kegsy

 

Try bending it, that'll tell you

I have loads of Mirwood on vinyl, look for a tiny "h" symbol.

There is a small 'H' type symbol etched into both sides, next to 'vocal' and 'instrumental' respectively. 

There is a small 'H' type symbol etched into both sides, next to 'vocal' and 'instrumental' respectively.

Etched or stamped?

looks snide to me - poor definition to the print.

Hello Jrsoul

It may be a bootleg or a legitimate repress but nothing is certain and the "experts" often make incorrect assumptions so don't worry about it or keep an eye out for a different copy.

Another alternative is to buy the UK issue on Jay Boy from 1972, credited to Bob & Earl rather than Bobby Garrett.

 

The important thing is that you like the track.

 

 

 

Hello Jrsoul

It may be a bootleg or a legitimate repress but nothing is certain and the "experts" often make incorrect assumptions so don't worry about it or keep an eye out for a different copy.

Another alternative is to buy the UK issue on Jay Boy from 1972, credited to Bob & Earl rather than Bobby Garrett.

 

The important thing is that you like the track. - Quite right.

 

 

 

Etched or stamped?

I would say stamped. Both symbols are very similar.

This is a genuine copy. Independently adjudicated by two of the country's top collectors.

I doubt it's genuine. For the fact that the printing for the credits is 'shakey' while the rest is for some reason clear and sharp. Secondly all the demos and issues that are defo originals of 'ICGA' are styrene. All the light blues (Jimmy Thomas…) Mirwoods are all boots and some deeper blues are also (Performers…) both have wrong typos. The sandy white label with a cheap photocopy type label (Bobby G 'ICGA') is low-fi even to the groove. Finally, all the vinyl copies that look like this one sold on evil-bay (according to a quick check on Popsike) were sold from sellers base in the UK.

 

Not all Mirwood apparently had both vinyl and styrene release. For instance I have not heard of a styrene for the Sheppards nor a vinyl of the the Belles 'DP' like Solidsoul said here. But it is indeed relevant in my belief to raise to questions from time to time since as a collector, those rare pressings do exists and sometimes wrong assertions can be proved wrong. Then according of what and how you want it, begin a maybe unfortunate but still appropriate quest for the desired format.

Just to finish my point; I went and dug out my copy and it's the same as above. Totally forgot about that since I only dig out 'my little girl' which I much prefer to play home and out. I've played it again then and it's not low-fi like the white label boot but the volume is indeed too low. I've bought this very copy in London some 20+ years ago. Last and least, one copy like those on evil-bay was from Canada but read final line on the screen capture...

 

The fact is, people who are new to this (such as myself) have to rely on the likes of Popsike and Manship guides, as we simply don't have the knowledge/experience. 

I.M.O. you are already on the the right path regarding gaining knowledge as your on this site..Im sure if you ask a reasonable question regarding the soul scene here on S/S the likes of Pete S.and others  will give you a honest informative answer, I read most forums every day and im amazed at the information which is shared by the members on this site,

by all means read all the books that are available..but remember the are NOT bibles only guides, combined with the wealth of info available on here...make your own mind up..and as I said earlier..if in doubt....ASK.

I doubt it's genuine. For the fact that the printing for the credits is 'shakey' while the rest is for some reason clear and sharp. Secondly all the demos and issues that are defo originals of 'ICGA' are styrene. All the light blues (Jimmy Thomas…) Mirwoods are all boots and some deeper blues are also (Performers…) both have wrong typos. The sandy white label with a cheap photocopy type label (Bobby G 'ICGA') is low-fi even to the groove. Finally, all the vinyl copies that look like this one sold on evil-bay (according to a quick check on Popsike) were sold from sellers base in the UK.

 

Not all Mirwood apparently had both vinyl and styrene release. For instance I have not heard of a styrene for the Sheppards nor a vinyl of the the Belles 'DP' like Solidsoul said here. But it is indeed relevant in my belief to raise to questions from time to time since as a collector, those rare pressings do exists and sometimes wrong assertions can be proved wrong. Then according of what and how you want it, begin a maybe unfortunate but still appropriate quest for the desired format.

I hear what you're saying, however; The gentleman who looked at my copy last night, matched all the matrix information with his (also) genuine copy.

Both copies were like for like. Stamped 'M R' on both sides.

MR is on anything pressed at Monarch, throughout the 60's and 70's, all it does it tells you where the record was made.  If it's accompanied by a 5 or 6 figure number after a triangle, that tells you the year it was made also.

I'm gonna put it in my sales box and advertise it as a bootleg (the better one) still worth a buy. I can't feel comfortable enough to say nothing or to lie. Here I am.

Edited February 17, 201411 yr by tlscapital

MR is on anything pressed at Monarch, throughout the 60's and 70's, all it does it tells you where the record was made. If it's accompanied by a 5 or 6 figure number after a triangle, that tells you the year it was made also.

Yeah. The guy who looked at it said it was pressed in the 1960's by Monarch Records. Has the delta number following a triangle. Thanks for all the feedback guys, but I think I'll take the opinion of a top collector who has seen it in the flesh.

who was the top collector who gave the opinion?

So,basically all of this thread is irrelevant,given the statement above.

 

You discount the answers that you don`t seem to like?

 

Just speaking plainly,like.

So,basically all of this thread is irrelevant,given the statement above.

 

You discount the answers that you don`t seem to like?

 

Just speaking plainly,like.

Thread was created 2 months before I had shown my copy to said collector. So no, the thread is not irrelevent.

who was the top collector who gave the opinion?

Paul Ackley.

Not 100% sure but didn't Soussan press a bunch of Mirwood tracks?

Paul Ackley.

And OZZ from Prestatyn/Stoke also reeled off the delta and gave the date it was pressed. he was 100% certain it was legit.

And OZZ from Prestatyn/Stoke also reeled off the delta and gave the date it was pressed. he was 100% certain it was legit.

And Paul Shoulder.

Are we really still going over this?

 

The delta number and run-out groove markings were deliberately forged and copied when they made the counterfeit pressed on vinyl (which is pictured at the top of this thread, it is NOT an original, I don't care what any "top collectors" said, since they are obviously wrong and either themselves own and compare it to the counterfeit OR don't know how to accurately scrutinize the differences between different presses, vinyl vs. styrene etc.).

 

For example: take a look at the MR "stamp" on the vinyl counterfeit of this 45 and compare it to the ORIGINAL styrene press. It does not look the same. It should look the same if it was pressed at monarch (which the counterfeit wasn't). The bootleggers made a mistake when they forged the stamp on the vinyl counterfeit.

Edited February 18, 201411 yr by Sebastian

I had a look , and have to say it's not the usual thick vinyl copy I have seen in the past , delta numbers looked good, if this is a boot it fooled me but it didn't look like the one I had years ago, mr stamp is there but faint, I'm on the fence on this one as it really could be a rare press possibly later than the styrene copies

Don't worry, it's fooled plenty over the years, including me, I finally worked out that mine isn't kosher....Sebastian's info is correct, the bootleggers copied the runout markings as best they could from an original BUT made several mistakes...