Blackpoolsoul profile photo

Eddie Parker - 2 different versions or the same ?

Posted (edited)

I noticed recently that the MAM / Miko copy sells for a fortune

Is there a difference? my ears are not as good as they used to be and it sort of follows from this thread about the label when Mr Ashford moved to LA in 1970. (ACE notes) and all the confusion with The Magnificents (normally Northern Soul DJ's covered up records !!!)

 

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)

There is a test press of the mam 45 without the -RE-2 in the trail off that has a very different mix.

I have one going to Utretcht in April.

Edited by Mikevague

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

These 2 recordings sound to me like two different takes.  They are very similar, but seem to have differences in the vocals, length of the trails, and different mixes, as well.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
8 hours ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

I noticed recently that the MAM / Miko copy sells for a fortune

Is there a difference? my ears are not as good as they used to be and it sort of follows from this thread about the label when Mr Ashford moved to LA in 1970. (ACE notes) and all the confusion with The Magnificents (normally Northern Soul DJ's covered up records !!!)

 

The MAMs release is a 'fortune' because it's got his deep soul killer 'But If You Must Go' on the flip!  The only way to own it on vinyl until Kent released it on Deep Soul in 2016 (also came out on Jack Ashford's Just Production CD the same year)

 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Robbk said:

These 2 recordings sound to me like two different takes.  They are very similar, but seem to have differences in the vocals, length of the trails, and different mixes, as well.

Yes, different takes.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Robbk said:

These 2 recordings sound to me like two different takes.  They are very similar, but seem to have differences in the vocals, length of the trails, and different mixes, as well.

 

6 minutes ago, Tlscapital said:

Yes, different takes.

Thanks for that, so I guess Jack took the masters with him to LA and released it correctly as Eddie Parker, as opposed to The Smith Brothers / Perfections which he called then called The Magnificents as covered in the other thread

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
3 minutes ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

 

Thanks for that, so I guess Jack took the masters with him to LA and released it correctly as Eddie Parker, as opposed to The Smith Brothers / Perfections which he called then called The Magnificents as covered in the other thread

Well I've read that the Smith Brothers and the Magnificents have slight musical variations as well. Begging the question if it's a mastering job doing that or are they other/alternative takes. The same for the Perfections actually that I never could compare... 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Soulstrutter said:

The MAMs release is a 'fortune' because it's got his deep soul killer 'But If You Must Go' on the flip!  The only way to own it on vinyl until Kent released it on Deep Soul in 2016 (also came out on Jack Ashford's Just Production CD the same year)

The MAM release is also very rare

There are a few different takes a out on acetate and the couple of releases. 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Chalky said:

The MAM release is also very rare

There are a few different takes a out on acetate and the couple of releases. 

That is a fantastic point as it seems very strange on such a major label that it appears very few were pressed

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
52 minutes ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

That is a fantastic point as it seems very strange on such a major label that it appears very few were pressed

That happened a lot when major labels (who didn't have much knowledge about how to market a run-of-the-mill recording Soul music by a group unknown to the general public, and also who didn't have the sales force with the distribution and sales connections to the main Soul Distributors and record shops (i.e. RCA, Capitol, Columbia, WB, MGM).  MAM fit that group.  They sold almost no Soul music.  This recording was NOT appealing enough to the ears general Pop fans to sell itself, needed because the artist's name was unknown.  So, I'm guessing that MAM didn't get many orders for it, so the initial pressing was very low, and they couldn't even sell those.  So no more press runs were made. 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

But is that MAM/Magnificent/Miko records Jack Ashford's own (one out of others) really linked to that infamous MAM (London Distributed) British label founded by a certain Gordon Mills and sponsored by Tom Jones and Engelpert Humperdinck ?

If going by the Discogs discography of the label, MAM USA was then, by 1976, DEAD ! Or non producing/releasing in the USA anymore. UK and non USA pressings still going on. And the following productions in the USA was merely badged 'MAM' on Epic.

Assuming MAM made a deal with small act like Eddie Parker "surfing" on the UK Northern Soul front trying to jump in the wagon or something that desperate, nothing on this (fantastic pop-cartoon logo IMO) small run label links this MAM to the major MAM.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

But is that MAM/Magnificent/Miko records Jack Ashford's own (one out of others) really linked to that infamous MAM (London Distributed) British label founded by a certain Gordon Mills and sponsored by Tom Jones and Engelpert Humperdinck ?

If going by the Discogs discography of the label, MAM USA was then, by 1976, DEAD ! Or non producing/releasing in the USA anymore. UK and non USA pressings still going on. And the following productions in the USA was merely badged 'MAM' on Epic.

Assuming MAM made a deal with small act like Eddie Parker "surfing" on the UK Northern Soul front trying to jump in the wagon or something that desperate, nothing on this (fantastic pop-cartoon logo IMO) small run label links this MAM to the major MAM.

Well, this shows my ignorance of The 1970s.  My interest in music lies mainly between 1936 and 1970.  I own many thousands of 45s from 1947-1969.  I own something like maybe 100 between 1970 and 1972, and, perhaps 3 or 4 after that (other than the Airwave records I kept as keepsakes).  To be honest, If someone put a gun to my head, and said: "Name an artist who recorded for MAM Records, I would exist no more.  I only know the label from flipping through bins of 45s during the 1970s and early '80s.  I just saw the label above and the typed description above, which reads: "Miko (MAM)"  So, I assumed the record was on The Miko label, which was a subsidiary of '70s MAM, as it looks like a '70s label design.  So, sorry about the confusion.  Please just disregard my comment, as it is clear the situation with this record is far outside my experience.

Edited by Robbk

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
9 minutes ago, Robbk said:

Well, this shows my ignorance of The 1970s.  My interest in music lies mainly between 1936 and 1970.  I own many thousands of 45s from 1947-1969.  I own something like maybe 100 between 1970 and 1972, and, perhaps 3 or 4 after that (other than the Airwave records I kept as keepsakes).  To be honest, If someone put a gun to my head, and said: "Name an artist who recorded for MAM Records, I would exist no more.  I only know the label from flipping through bins of 45s during the 1970s and early '80s.  I just saw the label above and the typed description above, which reads: "Mico (MAM)"  So, I assumed the record was on The Mico label, which was a subsidiary of '70s MAM, as it looks like a '70s label design.  So, sorry about the confusion.  Please just disregard my comment, as it is clear the situation with this record is far outside my experience.

No, not you solely Mister Robbk. If indeed you 'responded' reusing that idea, which I only believe to be not correct, don't know for a fact though, is a wrong assumption I believe. So I was trying to bring another light on the OP of these records that I love and don't own BTW. So if ever you come ro stumble across them I'll be willing to unload them from you 😶

And we all know your aversion of post 1969 record production by now 🤢 Now 1969 is it ? I remember you saying 1967 some years ago 😛 or even something like by March 1966 since that day the face of the world change 🤯 and the plot against good music made for Robbk proved to be unstoppable. David against Goliath but David with no fight in him 😉

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
8 minutes ago, Tlscapital said:

No, not you solely Mister Robbk. If indeed you 'responded' reusing that idea, which I only believe to be not correct, don't know for a fact though, is a wrong assumption I believe. So I was trying to bring another light on the OP of these records that I love and don't own BTW. So if ever you come ro stumble across them I'll be willing to unload them from you 😶

And we all know your aversion of post 1969 record production by now 🤢 Now 1969 is it ? I remember you saying 1967 some years ago 😛 or even something like by March 1966 since that day the face of the world change 🤯 and the plot against good music made for Robbk proved to be unstoppable. David against Goliath but David with no fight in him 😉

Yes, almost all of what I like is 1967 or back.  But I still have knowledge of a reasonable amount of what was being released in 1968-70.  I was still buying many of the Motown records at that time, and of those almost 100 1970-71 records I own, probably 95 of them are Motown labels with '60s-sounding cuts on them  (I didn't buy The Temptations' "psychadelic songs" (unless they had a reasonably sweet  cut on the flip, but bought The Miracles, later Martha & Vandellas, Four Tops, "new" Supremes, Jimmy Ruffin, Jr. Walker, Stevie Wonder, etc., plus a couple '60s sounding Chicago Sound records.  That Spring '66 date was when I stopped listening to WVON and KGFJ, as there were too many songs I didn't like (James Brown Funk etc.) to wade through before I'd get to hear something I'd like, and also a lot of the DJs  were talking through the songs.  I hated when Magnificent Montague would keep replaying the ending of a song and keep shouting "Five and a half more bars!!!" 😡  Ah.......The GOOD old days!  I didn't know how bad the music would get!  😁

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
2 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

But is that MAM/Magnificent/Miko records Jack Ashford's own (one out of others) really linked to that infamous MAM (London Distributed) British label founded by a certain Gordon Mills and sponsored by Tom Jones and Engelpert Humperdinck ?

If going by the Discogs discography of the label, MAM USA was then, by 1976, DEAD ! Or non producing/releasing in the USA anymore. UK and non USA pressings still going on. And the following productions in the USA was merely badged 'MAM' on Epic.

Assuming MAM made a deal with small act like Eddie Parker "surfing" on the UK Northern Soul front trying to jump in the wagon or something that desperate, nothing on this (fantastic pop-cartoon logo IMO) small run label links this MAM to the major MAM.

I see now that this was more directed by Blackpool Soul's comment that MAM was a MAJOR label, which is one of the reasons I thought it was the London MAM.  But, I see now that The MAM/Magnificent/Miko record lists "Baku", and "Bon-Jose Music" as the publisher, instead of Jack Ashford's original "Daedalian Music".  So, it looks like this MAM/Magnificent/Miko label in Beverly Hills, California was NOT Ashford's, but that he leased the pressing, and label rights to the owner of that label and distribution rights to that new label's parent company?; and perhaps "Baku Music" represents the partnership of Ashford and Magnificent/Miko's owner, and maybe "Bon-Jose Music" represents MAM Records or the distributor?  In any case, I'd guess that Ashford didn't own that CA label. 

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Robbk said:

I see now that this was more directed by Blackpool Soul's comment that MAM was a MAJOR label, which is one of the reasons I thought it was the London MAM.  But, I see now that The MAM/Magnificent/Miko record lists "Baku", and "Bon-Jose Music" as the publisher, instead of Jack Ashford's original "Daedalian Music".  So, it looks like this MAM/Magnificent/Miko label in Beverly Hills, California was NOT Ashford's, but that he leased the pressing, and label rights to the owner of that label and distribution rights to that new label's parent company?; and perhaps "Baku Music" represents the partnership of Ashford and Magnificent/Miko's owner, and maybe "Bon-Jose Music" represents MAM Records or the distributor?  In any case, I'd guess that Ashford didn't own that CA label. 

OK, back on track 😉; let's not forget that late Lorraine Chandler was not aware of those releases on MAM until recently (few years back) and was naturally a bit upset on that matter having to recall those years made of share and a split up with Jack Ashford topped with such low "betrayal". Was Jack Ashford intentionally trying to cash in solo and doing so tried to do so behind some smoke screen ?

So these are very troubled waters we're diving into since the materials use to be part of the ex-couple partnership in music. The 3 singles on MAM/Miko/Magnificent, the only ones with that design, not mentioning the same publisher's nor London records or even Epic as the major MAM did, are all alternate takes/recordings of previously released sides but for one never released before 'but if you must go'... 

Edited by Tlscapital
  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

According to the liner notes of the  "Jack Ashford Just Productions" CD on Kent, the London based 

MAM label did strike a deal with Jack Ashford to lease product on the MAM/ Magnificent/ Miko labels.

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
6 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

OK, back on track 😉; let's not forget that late Lorraine Chandler was not aware of those releases on MAM until recently (few years back) and was naturally a bit upset on that matter having to recall those years made of share and a split up with Jack Ashford topped with such low "betrayal". Was Jack Ashford intentionally trying to cash in solo and doing so tried to do so behind some smoke screen ?

So these are very troubled waters we're diving into since the materials use to be part of the ex-couple partnership in music. The 3 singles on MAM/Miko/Magnificent, the only ones with that design, not mentioning the same publisher's nor London records or even Epic as the major MAM did, are all alternate takes/recordings of previously released sides but for one never released before 'but if you must go'... 

That is, indeed, what this action implies.......that Jack had possession of the tapes of the outtake versions and unreleased cuts.  He could release those without Lorraine's knowledge.  Just because he moved to L.A. didn't mean he couldn't continue operations of or "revive" his Detroit label.  He could have released all these cuts on Triple B, with Lorraine handling the day-today operations in Detroit, and him commuting back and forth; OR he could have moved Triple B's operations to L.A. (as Robert West did in moving LuPine from Detroit to Las Vegas), with Lorraine commuting to L.A., or just having her sign legal papers and send them in the post. 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Robbk said:

That is, indeed, what this action implies.......that Jack had possession of the tapes of the outtake versions and unreleased cuts.  He could release those without Lorraine's knowledge.  Just because he moved to L.A. didn't mean he couldn't continue operations of or "revive" his Detroit label.  He could have released all these cuts on Triple B, with Lorraine handling the day-today operations in Detroit, and him commuting back and forth; OR he could have moved Triple B's operations to L.A. (as Robert West did in moving LuPine from Detroit to Las Vegas), with Lorraine commuting to L.A., or just having her sign legal papers and send them in the post. 

I am still confused as to why Jack would use 2 tracks by 2 different artists on one release and name them The Maginficents without Lorraine being aware, just seems so odd ?

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Why those two Smith Brothers track ? Likely because they where the most recently recorded from 1974. Why the Perfections and Eddie Parker ? Maybe because they where amongst their best sellers from their back catalogue.

And as I said as a guess maybe as an attempt to see if that could open a breach for the British sixties northern soul market... Which it did not evidently. But little did the American boy know the British phenomenon. How could he ?

Why the change of names and publishers ? My guess is in order to pass by unnoticed and cash on in alone. But none of that change the fate into success. And I am still weary of the involvement of the major MAM here... It's odd. 

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Tlscapital said:

Why those two Smith Brothers track ? Likely because they where the most recently recorded from 1974. Why the Perfections and Eddie Parker ? Maybe because they where amongst their best sellers from their back catalogue.

And as I said as a guess maybe as an attempt to see if that could open a breach for the British sixties northern soul market... Which it did not evidently. But little did the American boy know the British phenomenon. How could he ?

Why the change of names and publishers ? My guess is in order to pass by unnoticed and cash on in alone. But none of that change the fate into success. And I am still weary of the involvement of the major MAM here... It's odd. 

Maybe because Ashford, now living in L.A., knew they were a British label, but they had an office in L.A. with whom he could deal conveniently; and as they were mainly, or by then, only dealing in Britain, he figured they could distribute easily to the Northern Soul-oriented sellers.  Why they were pressed on US 45 format might be because his NS advisors (connections who suggested he press up any previously unreleased masters he had) told him The Northern collectors value US pressings more than British, if they are repressings (not original releases at the time of recording).

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Robbk said:

Maybe because Ashford, now living in L.A., knew they were a British label, but they had an office in L.A. with whom he could deal conveniently; and as they were mainly, or by then, only dealing in Britain, he figured they could distribute easily to the Northern Soul-oriented sellers.  Why they were pressed on US 45 format might be because his NS advisors (connections who suggested he press up any previously unreleased masters he had) told him The Northern collectors value US pressings more than British, if they are repressings (not original releases at the time of recording).

Perhaps the next thing is to ask if anyone would be kind enough to provide dead wax details, to see if there are any clues

There is an Eddie for sale in this link, but I can't make out any stamped or etched details

 

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

Why those two Smith Brothers track ? Likely because they where the most recently recorded from 1974. Why the Perfections and Eddie Parker ? Maybe because they where amongst their best sellers from their back catalogue.

And as I said as a guess maybe as an attempt to see if that could open a breach for the British sixties northern soul market... Which it did not evidently. But little did the American boy know the British phenomenon. How could he ?

Why the change of names and publishers ? My guess is in order to pass by unnoticed and cash on in alone. But none of that change the fate into success. And I am still weary of the involvement of the major MAM here... It's odd. 

Following your point about MAM, I thought it would be interesting to add a scan of The Pure Soul Band (B side) and the video ( on MAM's label (A side), It is so odd that the MAM has exactly the same catalogue number as Gilbert O'Sullivan ? 

When I asked Ady Croasdell about the Magnificents in January (a sensitive time as Lorraine had just died 😭) he very kindly messaged me quoting

"He'll probably have done it so that it looked like a new recording for the MAM people; Jack has no memory of it."

 

soul Pure Soul Band

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
16 minutes ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

Following your point about MAM, I thought it would be interesting to add a scan of The Pure Soul Band (B side) and the video ( on MAM's label (A side), It is so odd that the MAM has exactly the same catalogue number as Gilbert O'Sullivan

When I asked Ady Croasdell about the Magnificents in January (a sensitive time as Lorraine had just died 😭) he very kindly messaged me quoting

"He'll probably have done it so that it looked like a new recording for the MAM people; Jack has no memory of it."

That dark blue common design of the MAM (while still running only outside of the USA by then though) is a made up picture done by the guy who posted that YT video. Cheap trick using that Gilbert O'Sullivan single, blanking out the credits and date of release using the most unconvincing fonts the put the band name and title credits... 

None of those 3 MAMs being the Magnificent & Miko have released dates on them... Unlike the major MAM London distributed label. I still don't see any match between those two labels. Not even their pressing plant. I wouldn't be surprised if Jack was just "playing" around some with all of that. And indeed present them as "new" releases.

548276107_Capturedcran2020-03-1006_55_06.png.f8eb0dda54ec23b264552e208a4740dd.png

  • Up vote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
2 hours ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

Perhaps the next thing is to ask if anyone would be kind enough to provide dead wax details, to see if there are any clues

There is an Eddie for sale in this link, but I can't make out any stamped or etched details

 

Eddie Parker, etched markings in deadwax as follows:

803-A    Az    MR    - (triangle)9989(scratched-out number)4

Magnificents deadwax markings as follows:

802-A-RE-2    Az  (etched)  MR (stamped)    (triangle)99892 (etched)

Hope this helps.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Soulgalore said:

Eddie Parker, etched markings in deadwax as follows:

803-A    Az    MR    - (triangle)9989(scratched-out number)4

Magnificents deadwax markings as follows:

802-A-RE-2    Az  (etched)  MR (stamped)    (triangle)99892 (etched)

Hope this helps.

Thanks so much, that's kind of you and will help this thread 😀, hopefully with them being Monarch Pressings making them both 1976 (I think) that's what they are on Discogs) and Blondie ‎– X Offender Acetate (Monarch 99895 is listed as same date)

If I can just throw a spanner in the works, based on Ady's comment about Jack having no memory of it and let's suppose he wasn't involved, could it be that a well known person to all soul collectors, who managed to get hold of masters reguarly (by hook or crook), had them done ?

Edited by Blackpoolsoul
  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

I find it interesting that MAM's Magnificent Records has The Magnificents as a group, and has R. Montague as a co-writer with Jack Ashford on an instrumental song.  This leads me to believe that it was a co-production (or some kind of production deal) between ex-DJ Magnificent Montague and Ashford.  Although his first name was Nathaniel, so why the "R" first initial?

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
On 09/03/2020 at 07:28, Robbk said:

...But, I see now that The MAM/Magnificent/Miko record lists "Baku", and "Bon-Jose Music" as the publisher, instead of Jack Ashford's original "Daedalian Music".  So, it looks like this MAM/Magnificent/Miko label in Beverly Hills, California was NOT Ashford's, but that he leased the pressing, and label rights to the owner of that label and distribution rights to that new label's parent company?; and perhaps "Baku Music" represents the partnership of Ashford and Magnificent/Miko's owner, and maybe "Bon-Jose Music" represents MAM Records or the distributor?  In any case, I'd guess that Ashford didn't own that CA label. 

Another Smith Brothers 45 on Shield from 1976 (so no need to change the name to the Magnificents unless one wants to hide) has the most complete publisher's of any;

Companies, etc.

Distributed By – T.K. Productions, Inc.

Produced For – Just Productions, Inc.

Phonographic Copyright (p) – Shield Records

Published By – Bon Jose Music

Published By – Tippy Music

Published By – Sherlyn Pub.

Published By – Daedalian Music

Published By – Baku Music

Credits

Arranged By – Jack Ashford

Producer – Jack Ashford

Edited by Tlscapital

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Trailoff markings triangle 9989 4-X  803-B Az monarch stamp

triangle 9989 4 803-A Az MR (no monarch logo)

This is the test press I mentioned earlier.

 

soul 0F1AAF69 C68C 453A A6C3 1F2F45938ECC

soul 012B03DD A173 430F 9AF5 0155CE239688

soul 512CA656 5242 4794 A6DC C2D0CEC25FA5

soul B2962EE3 F267 4789 B217 3175FD8599C8

soul E5076607 1739 4A13 AAB3 299ECD6D1CB5

soul 0A96B900 5285 4470 8A4C AAAE0B6BBC52

soul AC054900 13ED 42E9 AABD C012207A49C4

  • Up vote 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Baku was Lorraine’s publishing company so it actually hints at her involvement, both she and Jack couldn’t remember much. It would be good to find a Smith Brother. Minefield!

  • Up vote 3

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
5 hours ago, Ady Croasdell said:

Baku was Lorraine’s publishing company so it actually hints at her involvement, both she and Jack couldn’t remember much. It would be good to find a Smith Brother. Minefield!

Thanks Ady.  That makes the situation quite different.  I assume 1976 was after they had split up, businesswise, so she established Baku Music for her new solo projects.  And so, she was involved in Miko/Magnificent, at least to the extent of Ashford arranging for her to be paid her royalties.  So Ashford's covering up the old credits on the demos was apparently just done to make the recordings appear to be newer recordings than they actually were, so that MAM would take on the project.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Robbk said:

Thanks Ady.  That makes the situation quite different.  I assume 1976 was after they had split up, businesswise, so she established Baku Music for her new solo projects.  And so, she was involved in Miko/Magnificent, at least to the extent of Ashford arranging for her to be paid her royalties.  So Ashford's covering up the old credits on the demos was apparently just done to make the recordings appear to be newer recordings than they actually were, so that MAM would take on the project.

I am pretty sure that Lorraine stated in 2012 on the other thread, that she did NOT know of the Miko/Magnificent at all, in fact she was investigating what had gone on and noted that Miko was named after Jack's daughter, I guess sadly she never found out

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
39 minutes ago, Robbk said:

Thanks Ady.  That makes the situation quite different.  I assume 1976 was after they had split up, businesswise, so she established Baku Music for her new solo projects.  And so, she was involved in Miko/Magnificent, at least to the extent of Ashford arranging for her to be paid her royalties.  So Ashford's covering up the old credits on the demos was apparently just done to make the recordings appear to be newer recordings than they actually were, so that MAM would take on the project.

That's how I see it Robb

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
12 minutes ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

I am pretty sure that Lorraine stated in 2012 on the other thread, that she did NOT know of the Miko/Magnificent at all, in fact she was investigating what had gone on and noted that Miko was named after Jack's daughter, I guess sadly she never found out

"at least to the extent of Ashford arranging for her to be paid her royalties." What Robb says is the minimum of her involvement, it is so hard to say definitively about this part of the story. Baku was Lorraine's dog

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
On 10/03/2020 at 00:36, Blackpoolsoul said:

Thanks so much, that's kind of you and will help this thread 😀, hopefully with them being Monarch Pressings making them both 1976 (I think) that's what they are on Discogs) and Blondie ‎– X Offender Acetate (Monarch 99895 is listed as same date)

If I can just throw a spanner in the works, based on Ady's comment about Jack having no memory of it and let's suppose he wasn't involved, could it be that a well known person to all soul collectors, who managed to get hold of masters regularly (by hook or crook), had them done ?

You think all 3 45s were Simon Soussan bootlegs?!  Why would he place them on a made-up label named after Ashford's daughter?  Wouldn't that have been more likely to get to Ashford's attention, by being noticed, either by him or his friends or relatives?  That wasn't Soussan's style.  He would have just released them on his own Soul Galore label, with fake or minimal credits, and the claim that the rights were leased to Soul Galore.  Why would he put Magnificent Montague's name on the credits, and change the name of The Smith Brothers to Montague's group (The Magnificents)?  That could just catch the eye of Montague, or his friends in L.A. - make him realise that he had had nothing to do with their production, and, so, he'd likely contact Ashford about this, to warn him that someone might be booting the latter's recordings.

On the other hand, it is really difficult to understand how Ashford could name a label after his daughter, lease it to a label in The UK, and then forget he ever did that (even if the question was asked 30 or 40 years later.  Those are not things one does every day.  To my knowledge Ashford had never before leased recordings of his to a British label.  I myself, am starting to get senile, and losing long-term memory now.  But I can't imagine forgetting starting up and naming a new label after my own daughter.  Soussan would have had to know that Ashford's daughter was named Miko, and that Ashford had had some dealing(s) with Magnificent Montague.  But it makes no sense at all for him to put information on bootlegs that might alert producers and label owners that someone is booting their recordings.

This is all very puzzling to say the least. 😕

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Robbk said:

You think all 3 45s were Simon Soussan bootlegs?!  Why would he place them on a made-up label named after Ashford's daughter?  Wouldn't that have been more likely to get to Ashford's attention, by being noticed, either by him or his friends or relatives?  That wasn't Soussan's style.  He would have just released them on his own Soul Galore label, with fake or minimal credits, and the claim that the rights were leased to Soul Galore.  Why would he put Magnificent Montague's name on the credits, and change the name of The Smith Brothers to Montague's group (The Magnificents)?  That could just catch the eye of Montague, or his friends in L.A. - make him realise that he had had nothing to do with their production, and, so, he'd likely contact Ashford about this, to warn him that someone might be booting the latter's recordings.

On the other hand, it is really difficult to understand how Ashford could name a label after his daughter, lease it to a label in The UK, and then forget he ever did that (even if the question was asked 30 or 40 years later.  Those are not things one does every day.  To my knowledge Ashford had never before leased recordings of his to a British label.  I myself, am starting to get senile, and losing long-term memory now.  But I can't imagine forgetting starting up and naming a new label after my own daughter.  Soussan would have had to know that Ashford's daughter was named Miko, and that Ashford had had some dealing(s) with Magnificent Montague.  But it makes no sense at all for him to put information on bootlegs that might alert producers and label owners that someone is booting their recordings.

This is all very puzzling to say the least. 😕

I just wondered, as the whole thing was so confusing. However I have explained that my theories are sometimes wrong before, but occasionally throwing a curve ball creates more info IMHO, as we can see from this thread and how informative it is. I have however looked back at a comments made by Neil Rushton in another thread about Jack and the pressings at Monarch (he said that not all the stock was released by Monarch as Jack had not paid them), so my theory, which came from someone saying years ago that they were "bootlegs" at a soul event, appears totally incorrect. I learn everyday Robb from experts like you and am very grateful for all this knowledge

As regards bootleggers using stampers, Simon actually did just that in LA with the Mel Britt and when it was pointed out to him in his apartment that the stamp was "not quite right" he started throwing them in disgust , but that's not for this thread  😀

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Another strange thing about the Magnificent/ Mam/ Miko label is I can't find anything about them in any of the trade papers.

    Usually when a new company is formed a small article or even a paragraph will appear in Billboard/ Cashbox/ Record World.

    None of the company releases gets a review or even a mention anywhere. You would think that a setup  between MAM 

 and Jack Ashford would be worth even a brief mention.

ps- If anyone finds anything - please post it. 

 

 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)

As Soulstrutter mentioned with regard to the opening question, the price discrepancy between the Miko-MAM 45 and the Triple B one is the fact that But If You Must Go is only on the former and was always the side which sold this 45, particularly to the fabled Japanese deep soul scene. 

Obviously the Miko 45 is scarce and always has been, while the Triple B record was in some ways an odd one, comping the two lesser in-demand sides of two Eddie Parker rarities. Crying Crown and I Need A True Love are both tremendous in their own right but one wonders if a coupling of I'm Gone and But If You Must Go wouldn't have shifted a few more units over the years.  

Edited by Garethx
  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)

I thought would add these scan connections in the mix to add to the story, especially date wise (and especially the MAM/ London? connection, or not)

There is a a small link here showing Baku (1974)

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=TlIhAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA4298&lpg=PA4298&dq=Baku+publishing+company+chandler&source=bl&ots=IE99fO25Ld&sig=ACfU3U1HipvRyb5mKHCzG0xhOZsY5FAIUg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJl_jSrpToAhX1QEEAHbfsDSAQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Baku publishing company chandler&f=false

soul Jack US

soul Jack

soul Funkateers

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Aha!  So THAT's the reason for "R. Montague" instead of "N. Montague".  It stands for Rose Montague.  So Nathaniel Magnificent Montague wasn't involved.  Just a coincidence that the group's name was changed to "The Magnificents".

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
20 hours ago, Ady Croasdell said:

Baku was Lorraine’s publishing company so it actually hints at her involvement, both she and Jack couldn’t remember much. It would be good to find a Smith Brother. Minefield!

i`ll wager that if a smith brother was found they would have no recollection of any mam/miko 45.. but thats something we are likely never to find out

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Robbk said:

Aha!  So THAT's the reason for "R. Montague" instead of "N. Montague".  It stands for Rose Montague.  So Nathaniel Magnificent Montague wasn't involved.  Just a coincidence that the group's name was changed to "The Magnificents".

So that begs another question who is Rose ? the dates for the Pure Soul Band and The Funkateers are the same year, were they the same group ? (interesting that Bill Moore who played on Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On" was featured as well in 1971)

Perhaps someone on here knows him and can contact him

http://www.jackashford.com

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Those scans are very interesting, thanks. I’m afraid Jack wouldn’t be able to help on any of these things, he’s either got a poor memory or not interested in the minutiae of his flops 

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Anyone know those two Baku songs? Was DJ Smith one of the Smith Brothers? 

  • Up vote 1

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
4 minutes ago, Ady Croasdell said:

Anyone know those two Baku songs? Was DJ Smith one of the Smith Brothers? 

Which songs ? D.J. Smith the hockey player born in 1977 ?

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
4 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

Which songs ? D.J. Smith the hockey player born in 1977 ?

No idea, the songs are in the link Blackpoolsoul put up a few posts up

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
1 hour ago, Ady Croasdell said:

No idea, the songs are in the link Blackpoolsoul put up a few posts up

OK, song 'on the wild' and 'wishing'. Miss Chandler and a certain D.J. Smith... But no. Not even after some digging around on the net.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tlscapital said:

OK, song 'on the wild' and 'wishing'. Miss Chandler and a certain D.J. Smith... But no. Not even after some digging around on the net.

Could they had been an early name of the "Smith Connection" Danny Smith, Louis Smith and Michael L. Smith, or is that another cul de sac I have driven down

Edited by Blackpoolsoul

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted

Could "The Smith Brothers" actually be "The Just Brothers"?  If he was trying to use old, unused tapes to pretend to have new product, and was disguising the artist names to do so, that seems plausible.

Share this forum post


soul source url
Posted
4 minutes ago, Robbk said:

Could "The Smith Brothers" actually be "The Just Brothers"?  

 

No- according to the liner notes of  "Jack Ashford- Just Productions" (Kent), Lorraine Chandler remembers the Smith Brothers as Donald,

Jesse and John Smith and Eugene Johnson. 

    She also said they changed their name to the 11th Commandment and recorded two singles for her R.J. label in 1981 and 1983.

  • Thanks 1

Share this forum post


soul source url

Look At Your Box - Source Forum

Get into the record & soul music talk

Join Soul Source

A free & easy soul music affair!

Get started now!
Log into Soul Source

Get max use of the forums

Log in now!

  1. Eddie Holman “Eddie’s my name” on parkway
    Record Sales by Jamie Walker on Sun 05 Apr 2020
    • 1 / 292
    • Jamie Walker on 05 Apr 2020
  2. Sonny Parker - what can I do
    Record Wants by Bnla2016 on Sat 28 Mar 2020
    • 1 / 138
    • BNLA2016 on 28 Mar 2020
  3. Eddie Holman
    Record Sales by Soulvillecol on Thu 19 Mar 2020
    • 1 / 394
    • Soulvillecol on 19 Mar 2020
  4. Hold me in your arms - Eddie Holman
    Record Sales by Tom9455 on Mon 16 Mar 2020
    • 1 / 254
    • Tom9455 on 16 Mar 2020

Source Adverts



×
×
  • Create New...

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.