I know that this has been discussed before several times but I can't find a thread with the info i'm looking for. I know there is more than one original '70s press of the Mixed Emotions Rock-Way 45. But are they different mixes or different in any way?

 

If they are different mixes, how do you identify each of the original '70s Rock-Way presses and how are they different? I have manship guide 5 which identifies 2 different '70s presses with identification info but doesn't mention anything about mixes and from previous discussions there might even be 3 different presses?

 

I already know about the totally separate cole release from the '70s, don't need info on that. Thanks for any help.

anyone know if there are multiple mixes of the rock-way 45 from the '70s or can anyone point me to a previous thread that talks about it? I just have manship 5 and 6 which talk about differentiating presses, but not about mixes. Thanks again.

this one...

 

 

or this none......

 

anyone know if there are multiple mixes of the rock-way 45 from the '70s or can anyone point me to a previous thread that talks about it? I just have manship 5 and 6 which talk about differentiating presses, but not about mixes. Thanks again.

 

Bob, there are definitely 2 different mixes both on the same original 70's label without the Elijah Cole engineer details. I can't remember what the one version sounded like to describe to you but it was far inferior to the version that is commonly known. A mate of mine had it so I have seen it and heard it.

hasnt one version got violins in or something......have a listen to this lot...you might be able to to decipher something

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mixed+emotions+gold+of+my+life

Edited May 3, 201411 yr by dave pinch

hasnt one version got violins in or something......have a listen to this lot...you might be able to to decipher something

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mixed+emotions+gold+of+my+life

 

It does have strings/violins in the mix

Edited May 3, 201411 yr by chalky

This one on Cole sold for nearly $300 couple of years ago, matte labels unlike the glossy labels on the reissue according to the blurb and it had the violins and the deadwax read EC-1233 GOT 11-9-77 / EC-1234 GOT 11-9-77

 

Edited May 3, 201411 yr by chalky

This one on Cole sold for nearly $300 couple of years ago, matte labels unlike the glossy labels on the reissue according to the blurb and it had the violins and the deadwax read EC-1233 GOT 11-9-77 / EC-1234 GOT 11-9-77

 

251063240333-2.jpg

that mix was appalling if i remember correctly

Edited May 3, 201411 yr by dave pinch

that mix was appalling if i remember correctly

 

 

it is.

Again, I have the original Cole label '70s 45 they added an out of tune violin over the original track. It's the b-side of the record so they just did it to get a throwaway b-side. I'm only trying to find out about the original ROCK-WAY pressings. I read the threads Chalky linked and could only find the family's ramblings about bootlegs and some matrix details but (unless I missed it) could not find any info about two different '70s pressings on the Rock-Way label with different mixes.

 

Jordi says there are two '70s rock-way presses with different mixes. Can anyone shed any light as to how the mixes are different and which mix has which matrix? Thank you.

Hi Bob
Off the top of me head, I thought the first two proper original Rock-Way releases from the 70's had the same mix?

I also thought all the other lookalike releases from the 90's were the same mix?

I thought the wierd violins mix was on a brown Rock-Way label from the 90's?
I only have one of the two orig presses so can't check for sure but i did think they were the same?
Cheers
Steve

Edited May 3, 201411 yr by Steve Plumb

Thanks a lot Steve.

 

There was a rock-a-way repress with a different flip that people originally didn't know was released in 1977 on the Cole label, as the Cole 45 is rarer than any of the original Rock-Way presses. The Cole 45 has the out of tune violins added on top of it.

 

I own the Cole 45 but none of the original Rock-Way 45s. Thanks again.

Twisted logic but i kept the second Rock-Way 70's press over the first press cos it looks different to the first press and they also used the first press as the design for all the 90's and beyond presses, so the second press is unique 

Thanks everyone for contributing so far. If anyone can confirm / unconfirm that there are two (or more) different Rock-Way label mixes from the '70s (again, not the Cole label 45), how they are different, and which press has which mix and how to identify them, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks again.

Thanks everyone for contributing so far. If anyone can confirm / unconfirm that there are two (or more) different Rock-Way label mixes from the '70s (again, not the Cole label 45), how they are different, and which press has which mix and how to identify them, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks again.

Well i can send you an mp3 of the 2nd orig Bob (no 'arranger' under the title)

And if someone who has the first one can do the same, we should be able to sort it once and for all?

If it's not trouble for you that would be cool. If I could get the other one (or even if someone points to a youtube video saying which version it is), I will post the results here, which should solve some confusion.

 

I think there might be 3 different Rock-Way presses from the '70s though which is confusing. Like one came up on ebay, one that everyone had down as a '90s press, but it was clearly an old '70s record. I could also be confused and adding to the confusion though.

Well i can send you an mp3 of the 2nd orig Bob (no 'arranger' under the title)

And if someone who has the first one can do the same, we should be able to sort it once and for all?

 

 

That's the first without the arranger Steve.   These were the one's that were said by Cole done for family and friends and not for distribution.   The arranger copies are the ones Cole diid and are the only legitimately distributed copies and are therefore the original, the original are boots, Cole's words  As far as I am aware these two are the same mix/take.

I've probably missed it on the thread and someone's already mentioned it, but there's also the EMI picture cover which was released in Europe in the 70's supposedly with Mr Coles permission. I used to have a copy and it sounded not too bad when played out..

That's the first without the arranger Steve.   These were the one's that were said by Cole done for family and friends and not for distribution.   The arranger copies are the ones Cole diid and are the only legitimately distributed copies and are therefore the original, the original are boots, Cole's words  As far as I am aware these two are the same mix/take.

Looks like i need to read the Cole interview Chalky, never actually read it?

I was only going from what was in me head last night and it was a bit late 

I've probably missed it on the thread and someone's already mentioned it, but there's also the EMI picture cover which was released in Europe in the 70's supposedly with Mr Coles permission. I used to have a copy and it sounded not too bad when played out..

 

Pretty sure Elijah said that was done without permission, the only legit ones being the ones he controls or controlled, will have to read through his rants again.  

Could someone please clearly and precisely condense all the information available on this and previous threads and simply identify - via matrix numbers and label markings  - which ones were issued only in the 70's  ....  irrespective of Elijah Cole's or anyone else's subjective views on what was, or wasn't, legitimate?

Could someone please clearly and precisely condense all the information available on this and previous threads and simply identify - via matrix numbers and label markings  - which ones were issued only in the 70's  ....  irrespective of Elijah Cole's or anyone else's subjective views on what was, or wasn't, legitimate?

 

The two 70's ones are from same plates aren't they, only immediate visual difference being the arranger credit or lack of it.  Aren't the matrix the same? 

Details from Elijah Cole Jr credited issue:

 

EC 5709 A (at six o'clock in run out)

 

BA inside a circle (at twelve o'clock in run out)

Details from Elijah Cole Jr credited issue:

 

EC 5709 A (at six o'clock in run out)

 

BA inside a circle (at twelve o'clock in run out)

Do you mean the first press without arranger credit?

 

this one....

 

 

and this is the one with credit for the arranger....

Top one Chalky.

Top one Chalky.

 

Hopefully someone will confirm the matrix for the one with the arranger credit but sure they are the same.

Details from Elijah Cole Jr credited issue:

 

EC 5709 A (at six o'clock in run out)

 

BA inside a circle (at twelve o'clock in run out)

 

Is the E more like a backward 3?

Yes it is.

 

And just to clarify, the BA in a circle is upside down when held at 12 o'clock.

Yes it is.

 

And just to clarify, the BA in a circle is upside down when held at 12 o'clock.

 

I've just read on Discogs that the arranger one is a definite E and not a backward 3 like the one without the arranger.

Manship 5 and 6 has two different descriptions for the two '70s presses. From 6:

 

"Very rare 1975 1st. press 2 turn deadwax EC 5709 A @ 6 O'Clock, upside down circled BA @ 12 O'Clock position. bottom of the label text credits arranger: Fred Cagaanan note: The E in the matrix resembles a back-to-front 3"

 

"original 1976 press. This press has a 2 turn 16.41mm wide deadwax. Scratched matrix reads EC 5709 A @ 6 o'clock,upside down circled BA @ 12 o'clock position. Note: label does NOT credit arranger: Fred Cagaanan."

 

although it's not clear, reading the two descriptions, they sound like the same plates as Chalky says -- nothing contradicts at least. If they are the same plates they are the same mix and only the label credit differentiates the presses.

I've just read on Discogs that the arranger one is a definite E and not a backward 3 like the one without the arranger.

 

ok sorry, i posted before seeing this. so the deadwax is different? If so, they might be different mixes. They sound similar though so it would be cool to settle this once and for all.

Doesn't John have the info for arranger/no arranger the opposite way round to what we have here?

Doesn't John have the info for arranger/no arranger the opposite way round to what we have here?

 

well if the deadwax actually is identical it's not possible to have it opposite (unless you're talking about which one was released first, since he has one as '75 and one as '76).

Edited May 4, 201411 yr by boba

well if the deadwax actually is identical it's not possible to have it opposite (unless you're talking about which one was released first, since he has one as '75 and one as '76).

 

It would appear the deadwax is different with a different font style for the "E" at the beginning of the run out details. One looking more like a backward 3 and the other being an actual "E".  

 

The difference we have or rather Joe is his has no arranger details yet the "E" looks like a backward 3.

Edited May 4, 201411 yr by chalky

Thanks a lot Steve.

 

There was a rock-a-way repress with a different flip that people originally didn't know was released in 1977 on the Cole label, as the Cole 45 is rarer than any of the original Rock-Way presses. The Cole 45 has the out of tune violins added on top of it.

 

I own the Cole 45 but none of the original Rock-Way 45s. Thanks again.

I have the gold repress the other side 'down and out' is a nice collectors piece and not on the original release. Im keeping it for that reason.

I also have a rockway repress I think pressed in the 90's with those awful violins, which spoil the song.

 

Daz

*sorry meant to say without permission*

It would appear the deadwax is different with a different font style for the "E" at the beginning of the run out details. One looking more like a backward 3 and the other being an actual "E".  

 

The difference we have or rather Joe is his has no arranger details yet the "E" looks like a backward 3.

 

have you seen the difference or are you just going by the discogs comment?

I have the gold repress the other side 'down and out' is a nice collectors piece and not on the original release. Im keeping it for that reason.

I also have a rockway repress I think pressed in the 90's with those awful violins, which spoil the song.

 

Daz

 

It actually was an original release, it was the Cole release in 1977. That is a repress of the cole record with the out of tune violin dubbed on the "gold" side.

Struggling to get a better picture....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Label added for clarity.....

 

 

 

 

 

basically it looks like a cursive e in that photo. which label is that so someone can compare it to the opposite label? thanks for your help.

have you seen the difference or are you just going by the discogs comment?

 

I'm waiting for someone to confirm the one with the arrangers credit whether it is an standard "E" or the E that looks like a backward three as in Joe's photo.

 

basically it looks like a cursive e in that photo. which label is that so someone can compare it to the opposite label? thanks for your help.

 

Looks like the one without the arrangers credit.

no way would EMI have put this out without permission from someone....you would expect elija cole to say that though seeing as he`s only in it for the money and cant see where we are coming from

So, would it be accurate to say that the record was issued 4 times during the 70's ?

 

1975 first issue on Rock Way , no arranger, by Elijah Cole for family and friends

1975 Belgian issue on EMI

1976 issue on Rock Way, with arranger, by Elijah Cole for general distribution 

1977 issue on Cole, by Elijah Cole

So, would it be accurate to say that the record was issued 4 times during the 70's ?

 

1975 first issue on Rock Way , no arranger, by Elijah Cole for family and friends

1975 Belgian issue on EMI

1976 issue on Rock Way, with arranger, by Elijah Cole for general distribution 

1977 issue on Cole, by Elijah Cole

 

 

The first one in your list appears to be the same as Joe's copy, no arranger credit, deadwax info EC 5709 A @ 6 O'Clock, upside down circled BA @ 12 O'Clock position.

 

"‹Now if we can get the info for the other three to confirm............

Edited May 5, 201411 yr by chalky

My copy credits arranger Fred Cagaanan, with the back to front 3, i always was led to believe this was a first original copy, i also believe the one that does not credit the arranger to also be a legitimate first series copy, ( its a case of which came first the egg or the chicken!)  i never held much water with the EMI copy ( obviously the Independent would precede the National ) That's my two penneth....

My copy credits arranger Fred Cagaanan, with the back to front 3, i always was led to believe this was a first original copy, i also believe the one that does not credit the arranger to also be a legitimate first series copy, ( its a case of which came first the egg or the chicken!)  i never held much water with the EMI copy ( obviously the Independent would precede the National ) That's my two penneth....

 

 

So both copies, with and without arranger have the backward 3?   It woulds appear both came from the original plates then???

 

If that is the case then there is a third press with the standard "E" going by what is written in guides and discos???

 

As for what came first it will always be disputed but in the links you will read that Cole said he added the arranger to differentiate from the original 300 that were meant for friends and family only.  But as Dave said what Elijah says can be taken with a pinch of salt at times.

Edited May 5, 201411 yr by chalky

not sure about why you wouldnt rate the belgian emi copy brett......thats a bit like saying gonzales on rak....the only way to own that is on uk rak and the european copies are not valid

The discogs comment may have just been (incorrectly?) extrapolating info based on the Manship guide omitting the detail of the "backwards 3" for one of the descriptions. Manship probably had each copy in his hand at a different time, noted the info, but never had both in his hands at once to compare. He may have just left off the "e" info one of the times he was taking notes. Or they might be different, I don't know, but I think it's unlikely that whoever wrote the discogs comment had both copies to compare. He doesn't explicitly say that the other one *doesn't* look like a backwards three and they sound identical in all other ways.

 

I'm going with the same plates theory for now, although I'd love to see a pic of the other press to confirm / deny.

I'm going with the same plates theory for now, although I'd love to see a pic of the other press to confirm / deny.

Well that would be Brett's copy he mentioned above? (arranger, EC 5709, upside down BA etc)

Mine is the same as above (no arranger, EC 5709, upside down BA etc)

So they are the same plates, thus same mix

I got to say, i always assumed JM's Book 5 was correct and always thought my 'no arranger' was the second issue. Happy to be proved wrong though 

Manship's book wasn't wrong about the deadwax details of either, just more explicit about one.

 

I'm not sure how anyone would know whether the arranger credit or no arranger credit is first unless Mr. Cole specifically says which one was first, especially since the identical matrix gives no clues.

 

Thanks everyone for helping to answer my question!

Manship's book wasn't wrong about the deadwax details of either, just more explicit about one.

 

I'm not sure how anyone would know whether the arranger credit or no arranger credit is first unless Mr. Cole specifically says which one was first, especially since the identical matrix gives no clues.

 

Thanks everyone for helping to answer my question!

 

Doesn't Cole say in one of the links above in one of his replies that he added the arranger details to differentiate the two releases.

 

This one 

 

I agree same plates, both originals and which came first is like the chicken and egg argument.

Edited May 6, 201411 yr by chalky