Hi  can any one help with with this, Gwen McCrae keep the fire burning.

Atlantic ‎– 789951-7, Atlantic ‎– FLAM 1

Matrix / Runout (Runout A): 789951-7 A1 1/1 7-M [STRAWBERRY]

 has seen it on others site for what looks like a lot  from £30.00 up ,  WHY

thanks for any help with this David,

 

moved to box forum

though not sure if ya are after a value or a copy?

if after a copy let me know and will move it to wants

thumbs up

thanks Mike , just value

 

no probs, will leave as is

'box' being the best place for record values/info/talk  etc  

Have seen the US 12 at 50 quid as well which I thought was a lot

Cheers Paul

11 hours ago, davidc said:

Hi  can any one help with with this, Gwen McCrae keep the fire burning. Atlantic ‎– 789951-7, Atlantic ‎– FLAM 1

Matrix / Runout (Runout A): 789951-7 A1 1/1 7-M [STRAWBERRY] has seen it on others site for what looks like a lot  from £30.00 up,  WHY

thanks for any help with this David,

You haven't stated the format for this, is it a 7" or 12"? 

Release # goes to a 45. The 12" has a different # - 

8 minutes ago, the yank said:

Release # goes to a 45. The 12" has a different # - 

12" has the same catalogue number as that quoted by the member asking the question.

 

Edited March 3, 20196 yr by Guest

You're right - I stand corrected. 

I gave up adding info to Discogs and selling on there, in early 2012 when they failed to reward sellers who had contributed to over a thousand submissions with lower commission rates. I was no longer giving my valuable knowledge and time for free, adding releases that anyone sitting at home could sell at will, but only because of my work entering the data for it. Even just glancing at these Gwen tracks on Discogs, straight away I've spotted the wrong fking catalogue number on one submission and photos that don't even match the actual release listed. Yet this Gwen release is one the most important soul/funk records from that era and commands a decent price. Anyone listing the item for sale has a remarkably high chance of listing it as the wrong version as it currently stands. There are no accurate details of the versions for the two different UK releases from 1982, by that I mean variations in the mix and the timings. If you see countless entries on Discogs by MartinSafeSounds that's me. 

Let me clarify the two different versions of Keep The Fire Burning on the UK 12"s

The Remix has significantly different keyboards and in my opinion is the better version.

In my own collection I have the Remix version on the US 12" 0-89905, I can confirm that it is 6.54 as stated on the label.

The UK 12" pressing of that same Remix is 789951-7 (yes the 12" ends in -7) but importantly it has FLAM 1 above it as shown in pic I uploaded in my earlier posting.

The UK 12" Original version of the track has the same main catalogue number as the above but without FLAM 1. As I have a copy of the original in my hand right now I can tell you should you fancy mixing it, that the BPM on the intro is 127.7, which increases from the words "Mr DJ." Time is confirmed as 5.36.

Both versions of the UK 12" have Funky Sensation on the flip, produced by Crown Heights Affair this is the same version as appears on Gwen's 1981 LP. The BPM for Funky Sensation on both the LP and the UK 12s" are intro 97.0 increasing to 98.0, and ends/fades out 99.7 and below. BPM's are accurate from own timings and mixed on many occasions.

As to the question of value, when I was selling between 1991 and 2012, both of those UK 12" rarely showed up in collections and secondhand record shops. In combined total for the two versions I don't recall ever finding many more than 10 copies. Neither are as common as some people might expect and I believe more buyers may have obtained the import LP from which Keep The Fire Burning comes from as a new release, rather than the UK 12". 

I'm a little out of touch with prices these days but I would still think in today's market the 1982 UK 12"s of these two back to back classics should be around a minimum of £20 in excellent condition. Anything over £30 seems a bit excessive. I used to sell them at £15 to £20 back in the 90's but demand is far higher now. Most buyers are likely to be more interested in Funky Sensation.

Martin

Edited March 4, 20196 yr by Guest

Hi thanks to all who have help me with this, sorry Martin is right I did forget to say 7 " will post picture later as in work now thanks all.

On 03/03/2019 at 10:56, davidc said:

Hi  can any one help with with this, Gwen McCrae keep the fire burning.

Atlantic ‎– 789951-7, Atlantic ‎– FLAM 1

Matrix / Runout (Runout A): 789951-7 A1 1/1 7-M [STRAWBERRY]

 has seen it on others site for what looks like a lot  from £30.00 up ,  WHY

 

Because a lot of disco collectors are now chasing 45s, when previously it was only really 12"s they wanted? What was probably considered too modern to play on the northern soul scene back in the day is now a 36 year old record which fits in with other similar spins? The US copies seem to go for £30+ so British collectors are happy to pay that for a UK copy, plus you get a picture sleeve? The UK copy has "Funky Sensation" on the flip, which the US one doesn't - so you get two tunes for the price of one? 

There are probably 100s more reasons, but there's a few to be going on with... 🤓

12 hours ago, cover-up said:

Because a lot of disco collectors are now chasing 45s, when previously it was only really 12"s they wanted? What was probably considered too modern to play on the northern soul scene back in the day is now a 36 year old record which fits in with other similar spins? The US copies seem to go for £30+ so British collectors are happy to pay that for a UK copy, plus you get a picture sleeve? The UK copy has "Funky Sensation" on the flip, which the US one doesn't - so you get two tunes for the price of one? 

Disco collectors chasing 45's that exist on 12"s that have long intros and instrumental breaks? That's news to me. I know of no collectors of this genre who would indulge in such a counter productive policy. Most copies of the UK 7 or 12 were issued in Warner company sleeves in my experience. Rarely did the pic sleeve turn up for me, which is the same basic artwork as the LP from which Keep The Fire Burning came from.

Edited March 4, 20196 yr by Guest

9 hours ago, Martin S said:

Disco collectors chasing 45's that exist on 12"s that have long intros and instrumental breaks? That's news to me. I know of no collectors of this genre who would indulge in such a counter productive policy. 

 

Maybe not "lots" of them, and maybe not exclusively disco collectors, but there are growing numbers of DJs who only play 45s. Personally, I've got no time for long intros and instrumental breaks - why play one long record when you could play three short ones instead? 😂

 

11 hours ago, cover-up said:

Maybe not "lots" of them, and maybe not exclusively disco collectors, but there are growing numbers of DJs who only play 45s. Personally, I've got no time for long intros and instrumental breaks - why play one long record when you could play three short ones instead? 😂

Let me put this into perspective.

Firstly we have a posting by a username that refers to the activity of withholding the artist and title of a record being played, there's nothing admirable about such. Then we have a retraction of the original random unquantified statement reference the number of collectors that may or may not be interested in buying short versions of long tracks. Following that yet another statement for which no evidence is offered. I still sell to a lot of DJs as I have done for close to 30 years now, a number of which are very high profile names and not one of them has ever requested a short version of a long track, thus the probability of your statement being valid seems highly optimistic. 

You also state you have no time for long intros and instrumental breaks, and whilst I respect you may have a hectic schedule that may not permit the time for such listening, I would suggest it is more likely that you don't actually have a genuine love, understanding, and respect for music/musicians, in the same way the majority of enthusiasts do.

Quote: "Why play one long record when you could play three short ones instead?" As you've asked I shall give you specific reasons speaking as a collector, DJ, and a musician. A good track of for example 6 minutes, requires a considerably higher level of skill in its arrangement, musicianship, and overall creativity than a track half it's length, in order to first obtain, and then maintain listener interest. A piece of music with an outstanding intro can attract attention or fill a dance floor long before any other content has been arrived at. Long intros and instrumental sections offer the opportunity for skilled DJs to beat mix thus maintaining fluency in what's delivered rather playing an endless stream of short tracks that require close to zero presentation skills that are over and done with in the time it takes to post two random sentences on Soul Source. If one genuinely liked a track, common sense suggests one would want to hear as much of it as possible in one spin. 

On a lighter note, with pun intended, perhaps if certain Northern/Modern soul DJs started carrying boxes of 12s and LPs around instead of 45s, they might shed a bit of weight.  🙂

 

 

Edited March 5, 20196 yr by Guest

3 hours ago, Martin S said:

 

Let me put this into perspective.

Firstly we have a posting by a username that refers to the activity of withholding the artist and title of a record being played, there's nothing admirable about such. Then we have a retraction of the original random unquantified statement reference the number of collectors that may or may not be interested in buying short versions of long tracks. Following that yet another statement for which no evidence is offered. I still sell to a lot of DJs as I have done for close to 30 years now, a number of which are very high profile names and not one of them has ever requested a short version of a long track, thus the probability of your statement being valid seems highly optimistic. 

You also state you have no time for long intros and instrumental breaks, and whilst I respect you may have a hectic schedule that may not permit the time for such listening, I would suggest it is more likely that you don't actually have a genuine love, understanding, and respect for music/musicians, in the same way the majority of enthusiasts do.

Quote: "Why play one long record when you could play three short ones instead?" As you've asked I shall give you specific reasons speaking as a collector, DJ, and a musician. A good track of for example 6 minutes, requires a considerably higher level of skill in its arrangement, musicianship, and overall creativity than a track half it's length, in order to first obtain, and then maintain listener interest. A piece of music with an outstanding intro can attract attention or fill a dance floor long before any other content has been arrived at. Long intros and instrumental sections offer the opportunity for skilled DJs to beat mix thus maintaining fluency in what's delivered rather playing an endless stream of short tracks that require close to zero presentation skills that are over and done with in the time it takes to post two random sentences on Soul Source. If one genuinely liked a track, common sense suggests one would want to hear as much of it as possible in one spin. 

On a lighter note, with pun intended, perhaps if certain Northern/Modern soul DJs started carrying boxes of 12s and LPs around instead of 45s, they might shed a bit of weight.  🙂

 

 

I have to say I find this post rather dictatorial and insulting to many who buy soul records. It's up to them what format they choose to buy their music on. I happen to be one of those people you dont think exist, who are buying 7''s of certain records they purchased as 12''s, the reason I say certain records is because not all 12''s have an instrumental break that adds any musical listening pleasure to that which exists on the 7''. There are shed loads of indie logo 12''s which had a decent song and vocalist, but because of the low budget and drum programing the instrumental break was shite! So why would you not want the 7'', folks dont just buy records in order to do some amazing mix in a club, they play them at home very often alongside something that does not have the same bpm. There are of coarse many fantasticaly produced twelves on both major and indie logo's which I could do with going on even longer if i'm honest. I love the recent joey negro mix of Patti labelles ' it's allright with me', it could go on for 12 minutes and I would still be happy.Please dont tar every record with the same brush, assuming it has to be better on a 12''. Not forgeting there are several on seven which are in fact the same duration as the 12''!. I have over the years listened to some great dj's mixing in clubs, however they often managed to do it with records where the most soulfull vocal part was in fact at the end, but because they were hell bent on a seemless mix we got to hear half the record (might as well played a 7'') and missed the best bit out. Before you ask, the reason I never got the 7'' in the first place is lots of tracks never came over here on that format, or if they did in very small quantity. Many seem to only show up in small quantity often just as demos.

4 hours ago, still diggin said:

I have to say I find this post rather dictatorial and insulting to many who buy soul records. It's up to them what format they choose to buy their music on. I happen to be one of those people you dont think exist, who are buying 7''s of certain records they purchased as 12''s, the reason I say certain records is because not all 12''s have an instrumental break that adds any musical listening pleasure to that which exists on the 7''. There are shed loads of indie logo 12''s which had a decent song and vocalist, but because of the low budget and drum programing the instrumental break was shite! So why would you not want the 7'', folks dont just buy records in order to do some amazing mix in a club, they play them at home very often alongside something that does not have the same bpm. There are of coarse many fantasticaly produced twelves on both major and indie logo's which I could do with going on even longer if i'm honest. I love the recent joey negro mix of Patti labelles ' it's allright with me', it could go on for 12 minutes and I would still be happy.Please dont tar every record with the same brush, assuming it has to be better on a 12''. Not forgeting there are several on seven which are in fact the same duration as the 12''!. I have over the years listened to some great dj's mixing in clubs, however they often managed to do it with records where the most soulfull vocal part was in fact at the end, but because they were hell bent on a seemless mix we got to hear half the record (might as well played a 7'') and missed the best bit out. Before you ask, the reason I never got the 7'' in the first place is lots of tracks never came over here on that format, or if they did in very small quantity. Many seem to only show up in small quantity often just as demos.

 

Thanks for the reply, much of the content of which I agree with which might surprise you. However you completely overlooked the most important part of the debate. The posting I made was not in relation "to many who buy soul records" of which I am one anyhow, but directly to the member, and concerning the specific genre to which he referred to when stating "because a lot of disco collectors are now chasing 45s." 

My reply was based purely on the purchasing of disco 7s that also exist on 12. Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.   

At no point have I stated I don't think buyers of 7s of certain records"exist." I have merely disputed the quantity of those that was suggested. At no point have I stated folks just buy records to do some amazing mix in a club. At no point were any records tarred, with or without the same brush.

Most importantly, at no point in the relevant postings do I refer to the collecting of "soul music" on 45s.

Thanks, Martin 

Edited March 6, 20196 yr by Guest

22 hours ago, Martin S said:

Firstly we have a posting by a username that refers to the activity of withholding the artist and title of a record being played, there's nothing admirable about such. Then we have a retraction of the original random unquantified statement reference the number of collectors that may or may not be interested in buying short versions of long tracks.

Err, okay, getting back to the original post - "why is this record selling for £30+?" Well, there must be SOME people chasing it and buying it - recent sales on Discogs attached, showing it's not just an optimistic blip. 38 members have it, 329 people want it. I've actually got the 12" and the 7" - not a huge fan of the slap bass solo on the twelve to be honest... 😅

Thanks cover up , I was get a bit worried things were getting bit heated , would like to say thanks to all for feed back, I just though that it was a boot . Thanks all.

1 hour ago, davidc said:

Thanks cover up , I was get a bit worried things were getting bit heated , would like to say thanks to all for feed back, I just though that it was a boot . Thanks all.

So you open a thread asking for info on a release that you don't even state the format of, people spend time replying with precise information and now you tell us you just thought it was a boot. If that's all you wanted to know then why TF didn't you ask that at the start?

3 hours ago, cover-up said:

Err, okay, getting back to the original post - "why is this record selling for £30+?" Well, there must be SOME people chasing it and buying it - recent sales on Discogs attached, showing it's not just an optimistic blip. 38 members have it, 329 people want it. I've actually got the 12" and the 7" - not a huge fan of the slap bass solo on the twelve to be honest... 😅

I'm not prepared to believe the entry for £123.45 actually sold, especially as it's for an amount 6 times that of the previous NM sale only a few months earlier and for a random number of 12345? Haves and wants figures on Discogs are bullshit. People mark items as wanted very often for ease of locating the page for data and have no intention whatsoever of making a purchase, even I do it occasionally. The number of people actually prepared to buy the release in this example, unless it was grossly under priced and allowed a decent mark up for a trader, would most probably reach a double figure but hardly with ease. I would expect of the 329 allegedly wanting it, the majority would be made up of opportunist traders hoping to make a subsequent profit from the item, many of whom will be Soul Source members. A total of just 9 copies allegedly sold in 2 years is hardly convincing is it?

Edited March 6, 20196 yr by Guest

3 hours ago, cover-up said:

not a huge fan of the slap bass solo on the twelve to be honest... 😅

I totally agree with you 100%, it's a mess. Of all the thousands of tracks I possess with slap bass, I think this could rank as the worst example in terms of the sound of the bass itself. It appears to me that the strings on the bass used in this recording were absolutely hammered. I can't ever recall having strings on my bass that sounded as worn as those. Either that or for some reason it was the desired sound for the recording. Nathan Watts is the credited bassist on the LP. I just checked his Discogs intsrumentation credits, there's only 5 LP's he played on from 1979 to 1983 that I don't have from that list, and on not one of those that I do have does his bass sound anything like that which is on Keep The Fire Burning. I wonder whether he genuinely is the bassist on that recording.

Edited March 6, 20196 yr by Guest

1 hour ago, Martin S said:

I'm not prepared to believe the entry for £123.45 actually sold, especially as it's for an amount 6 times that of the previous NM sale only a few months earlier and for a random number of 12345?

A sale is only listed on Discogs when the respective sales fees were paid. So if the entry says it sold for 123.45 it did. No matter what you're prepared to believe.

11 hours ago, Benji said:

A sale is only listed on Discogs when the respective sales fees were paid. So if the entry says it sold for 123.45 it did. No matter what you're prepared to believe.

I am staggered by the number of people on this site that make postings containing statements that they provide no evidence for. I am even more staggered by the lack of insight some people have in relation to marketing and how business often works.

The fact that an entry in the sales history appears and that fees may have been paid for such, is not evidence that a financial transaction for the sale of such, and at the stated amount, was ever conducted.

You have offered no evidence to prove that a financial transaction for it was actually conducted yet appear convinced one did despite the alleged price being insane. Let me explain the following scenarios which might lead you to question your opinion. 

Going back in time, both myself and a number of other well respected sellers known to many on here, shared information on a habit conducted by several individuals in England back in the early 90's, who advertised items on paper mailing lists, some of which were at high value that they did not physically possess. If they did manage to generate a sale for an item advertised at well above market price, they then sought the record elsewhere at a far lower price, but having taken payment beforehand. I was one of the people they were contacting for those titles but refused to trade with any of them despite having some of the items they needed. I had enough loyal customers to be able to sell the items to and at a fair price.

Upon them not being able to provide the item, if their buyer was outside the UK he was placed in a potential nightmare situation of trying to obtain a refund. Most foreign buyers would send cash in pre Paypal days. 

Upon the arrival of the internet, these same individuals and many new opportunists, surfaced on sites that included Ebay, Gemm, and Discogs. Focusing on the opportunities available to a seller on Discogs using a scenario similar to the above, the seller risks a negative feedback if the sale doesn't complete but it's relatively easy to get it removed on Discogs. On the balance of probability, a genuine financial transaction for a record of £123, that was 6 times the price of the previous same condition copy that sold only a few months earlier, to me seems about as remote as me ending this posting now. There are a number of sellers on Discogs who list items way in excess of the average market price as NM, then should a sale be generated they buy much cheaper copies advertised at VG+ from other sellers in the hope that they have under graded the items that may then satisfy the buyer.  

So what else would motivate someone to advertise an item for a price that was way in excess of market value?

A bogus sale is created which is designed to shape the market value and is conducted with the use of multiple accounts. The seller could genuinely have several copies of an item but wants to increase the obtainable price by trying to fool idiots who actually deserve to mug themselves off, as to the value of the item. A copy is advertised at let's use the same figure mentioned earlier, £123.45 which is a rather random number in business terms especially for what is likely to be a used item. A bogus purchase of it is then made from another of the sellers multiple accounts. The seller pays the Discogs fee of £9.85. No financial transaction by way of a sale actually takes place, but the seller has now created a situation whereby even a second listing of the same item at £80 appears to be a bargain to a complete idiot who has already spotted the bogus transaction of £123 in the historic sales data and believes that to have been genuine. He or she thus purchases the item at £80 which has made the £9.85 fee paid on the bogus transaction worth the expense if the seller has multiple copies to conduct repeat sales of £80 with. I'm out of touch with Discogs fee refunds policy but a situation may even exist whereby both parties in the bogus transaction could agree not to complete the sale and whilst the selling fee is refunded, the actual £123 transaction may still remain in the historical sales data.

The fact that an entry in the sales history appears and that fees may have been paid for such, is not evidence that a financial transaction for the sale of such, and at the stated amount, was ever conducted.

Edited March 7, 20196 yr by Guest

If the original poster is looking for a price the 7" would sell for,  I would put an issue copy at £40 and a promo at around £50 to £60 (that's for NM US releases)

I'm not saying that it 's worth that, just what I think it would easily sell for in today's market. It's a record I get asked for regularly so I guess there are plenty of people chasing a copy. Not sure on the value of the UK 7" as I tend to stick to US releases. 

I recently put my collection back together of soul, jazz-funk and disco from the mid 70s to mid 80s - I didn't buy any on 12" or LPs, it was just my choice to opt for 7" only and I guess there are other people out there who would prefer the same. I also appreciate that other people wouldn't touch 7" releases and would chase everything on 12". Everyone is different and has their own reason for doing things in a certain way. I even went for every option apart from UK releases where possible, if I couldn't get what I wanted on a US 7" I looked at European releases simply because I prefer records with big holes in the middle rather than small ones. 

Thanks Kjw.

Sorry Martin s , you are right I should have asked if it was a boot or not my fault.

As said it think I time we left this.

Thanks all.

2 hours ago, guest said:

Certain boogie / soul tunes have turned out to be very rare on 7" . Most would have gone for the 12" if available back in the day so the 7's sold zilch . I started buying the 7" version's of 12's I had sold / was selling  over 10 years ago and then they were at give away prices [some in soul packs] . Some I have seen offered for sale on only 1 or 2 occasions and are big ticket items now . It makes sense really when you think that the 12" was king for this genre .

Exactly the reason I submited the post on this subject on tuesday. Nice clarification.

On 05/03/2019 at 20:16, Martin S said:

 

Let me put this into perspective.

Firstly we have a posting by a username that refers to the activity of withholding the artist and title of a record being played, there's nothing admirable about such. Then we have a retraction of the original random unquantified statement reference the number of collectors that may or may not be interested in buying short versions of long tracks. Following that yet another statement for which no evidence is offered. I still sell to a lot of DJs as I have done for close to 30 years now, a number of which are very high profile names and not one of them has ever requested a short version of a long track, thus the probability of your statement being valid seems highly optimistic. 

You also state you have no time for long intros and instrumental breaks, and whilst I respect you may have a hectic schedule that may not permit the time for such listening, I would suggest it is more likely that you don't actually have a genuine love, understanding, and respect for music/musicians, in the same way the majority of enthusiasts do.

Quote: "Why play one long record when you could play three short ones instead?" As you've asked I shall give you specific reasons speaking as a collector, DJ, and a musician. A good track of for example 6 minutes, requires a considerably higher level of skill in its arrangement, musicianship, and overall creativity than a track half it's length, in order to first obtain, and then maintain listener interest. A piece of music with an outstanding intro can attract attention or fill a dance floor long before any other content has been arrived at. Long intros and instrumental sections offer the opportunity for skilled DJs to beat mix thus maintaining fluency in what's delivered rather playing an endless stream of short tracks that require close to zero presentation skills that are over and done with in the time it takes to post two random sentences on Soul Source. If one genuinely liked a track, common sense suggests one would want to hear as much of it as possible in one spin. 

On a lighter note, with pun intended, perhaps if certain Northern/Modern soul DJs started carrying boxes of 12s and LPs around instead of 45s, they might shed a bit of weight.  🙂

 

 

i only buy 7`s.. the 12s well sometimes they go on a bit...but i guess i could lose some weight as i do carry a box of LPs about... 

Edited March 13, 20196 yr by dave pinch

Have a massive collection of 7", 12" singles, LP's, some 78's, CD's, etc … have loads of 12"ers but most are banished to the loft / garage as they weigh too much & take up too much space. OF COURSE, some contain remix versions of cuts that are only available on a 12" single (either US or UK) and so they can remain in my record room. Along with the likes of John Benson, used to make trips south to London to go junking in places like Record & Tape Exchange in the 80's / 90's, so picked up copies of many of the UK 7" versions of JF tracks at minimal cost.  

You could pick up copies of many UK Atlantic 7" / 12" singles in places like R & T Exch back in the day for  10p / 25p / 50p, so I did. For instance, had a couple of cheap unplayed copies of a similar Atlantic 12"; Bettye LaVette's "Doin The Best That I Can". Took a copy along to a Cleggy Weekender to get Bettye to sign it. She had never seen a copy of the 12" on Atlantic (it was on West End in the States), so of course, it went back Stateside with her.

Edited March 14, 20196 yr by Roburt

That 12" remix has an awful, weedy drum sound!

Edited March 18, 20196 yr by garethx