Just browsing on e bay & came across this - King Tutt 2nd issue on Fun City.

Looks like a proper u'n to me but the seller clearly lists it as a 2nd issue & it's the first I know of it.

https://cgi.ebay.co.uk/KING-TUTT-YOUVE-GOT-...%3A1|240%3A1318

Anybody?

label looks to shiney thought the label was matt paper

Crap photo but the text looks as if it's quite heavy on the middle left an right, I looked mine out and the text is fine and well defined. Could just be caused by blurring on this photo though?!

gary

never seen or heard of a 2nd issue before. picture is infact a bit blurry, label looks kosher to me. but the thickness of the vinyl makes me thinkin it might be a carver. why not contact seller to see why he thinks it's a 2nd issue?

never seen or heard of a 2nd issue before. picture is infact a bit blurry, label looks kosher to me. but the thickness of the vinyl makes me thinkin it might be a carver. why not contact seller to see why he thinks it's a 2nd issue?

Seems he's already been asked & here's his reply below copied & pasted from e bay.

this is a limited press , not a carver...The differences that I can see next to my original are that when you look at the printing with an eyeglass it is not as crisp and clean as the original..... It also has fwtc scratched into the run out groove on both sides and the original only has fwtc scratched on the A side. The print also looks darker than the original. I may date stamp the A side so no one can sell this on as an original, as it is very convincing....... Best regards David

At least he's been honest about it I suppose.

Not sure about the 'limited press' bit though? Seems more like a pretty good boot to me.

Anybody???

Seems he's already been asked & here's his reply below copied & pasted from e bay.

this is a limited press , not a carver...The differences that I can see next to my original are that when you look at the printing with an eyeglass it is not as crisp and clean as the original..... It also has fwtc scratched into the run out groove on both sides and the original only has fwtc scratched on the A side. The print also looks darker than the original. I may date stamp the A side so no one can sell this on as an original, as it is very convincing....... Best regards David

At least he's been honest about it I suppose.

Not sure about the 'limited press' bit though? Seems more like a pretty good boot to me.

Anybody???

I saw that too. left it alone as it did look like a bit of a shiny boot. I've not heard of a legal 2nd issue and it may just be the photo but it looked different to issues I've had in the past. Not much help sorry.

Kev

"the original only has fwtc scratched on the A side"

Is this right?

If so when did these 2nd issues appear?

Mine has FWTC on both side and a dead wax of 7 to 8 mm + KKC461 B on YGMHU

D-A-N-C-I-N is the A side.

Edited December 15, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

"the original only has fwtc scratched on the A side"

Is this right?

If so when did these 2nd issues appear?

Just checked my real un & it has FWTC scratched into both sides but it's clearer on the A side (dancin) & very faint on the Hung Up side.

Wouldn't have even noticed it if it hadn't have been mentioned.

Also the real copy is lighter & not as glossy as mentioned earlier in the thread.

Not got the rooftops missing either like the e bay 2nd press/boot??

Real copy below.

A very thin paper label that goes greenish under those funny energy saving bulb's.

Just checked my real un & it has FWTC scratched into both sides but it's clearer on the A side (dancin) & very faint on the Hung Up side.

Wouldn't have even noticed it if it hadn't have been mentioned.

Also the real copy is lighter & not as glossy as mentioned earlier in the thread.

Not got the rooftops missing either like the e bay 2nd press/boot??

Real copy below.

roof tops not cut off , just not a great photo , as i have said on ebay will date stamp A side As this is very convincing, picked this up in Italy and it is a limited press as I have seen all the paper work....... will check my original again as did not see fwtc on both sides, if it's faint then i could have missed it.

First original I had was glossy, but it was new then , it is the same thickness as the original and the run out groove is the same...... again will date stamp A side as I do not want this sold as a 1^st press original...... I do not know if this is a second press or a top quality boot?

lots of interest in it though

all the best

David

Edited December 19, 200816 yr by CAMBRIDGE SOUL

quote name='Prophonics 2029' post='949823' date='Dec 16 08, 12:02 AM']A very thin paper label that goes greenish under those funny energy saving bulb's.

Edited December 19, 200816 yr by CAMBRIDGE SOUL

just to say if anyone wants a good look at this will take it to Fulbourn do ( cambridge soul collective)on sat 20th.... and you can have a good look !

I DID NOTICE THE ROOF TOPS MISSING COMPARED TO MY COPY.

SO COULD PROB USE THAT AS A GUIDE.

IF GONE TO A LOT OF TROUBLE TO DECIEVE,BUMMER THE LABEL PRINTED OUT OF PLACE.

I DID NOTICE THE ROOF TOPS MISSING COMPARED TO MY COPY.

SO COULD PROB USE THAT AS A GUIDE.

IF GONE TO A LOT OF TROUBLE TO DECIEVE,BUMMER THE LABEL PRINTED OUT OF PLACE.

read post above , it's just a bad photo, the rooftops are not cut off just checked against the original i have and the fun city logo is printed 2.5 mm higher on the 2nd issue/boot

any more info wanted just ask

all the best

David

Edited December 19, 200816 yr by CAMBRIDGE SOUL

any more info wanted just ask

all the best

David

"picked this up in Italy and it is a limited press as I have seen all the paper work."

What paperwork do you mean David? Any idea when these were done (or when you picked it up?) Is it an Italian job? Any idea of quantity or any more floating around? Cheers

"picked this up in Italy and it is a limited press as I have seen all the paper work."

What paperwork do you mean David? Any idea when these were done (or when you picked it up?) Is it an Italian job? Any idea of quantity or any more floating around? Cheers

the paperwork i had a very quick view of, upside down on the desk i might add , gave me the number pressed and other info that makes me 99.9% sure no more can/will be pressed..... it was in english but the letter head was covered by other paper and the details at the bottom of the paperwork were to small to read from where i was situated & i did not feel the best thing to do was say i had noticed it ! being in english and that the 45 looks like it was pressed in the USA from the information i have collected , i would take a guess it was pressed in the USA but i could be wrong....... everything looked proffessional but i was not happy in asking to many questions..... did not wish to sleep with the fish ! as they say in italy !

best regards

David

Sounds like it's a recent press(?) Mine came from the US some years a go so safe to say it's an original, even though the FWTC is on both sides, like a lot of others here. Also never doubted it's vintage as it looks like an old record. If there was paperwork with the represses you'd assume they're legal reissues, but where are the rest of them and who did them...any idea? Were you sold it as an original or reissue? Intriguing ,all this

I GOT MY COPY OFF A M8 WHO HAD 2 COPIES.

HE HAD THEM SINCE EARLY 80S.

I HAD A LOOK @ BOTH COPIES WHEN I BOT IT.

I DID NOTICE THAT THERE WAS A SLIGHT DULLING OF THE VINYL ON BOTH COPIES,JUST TO THE LEFT MIDDLE EDGE OF HUNG UP SIDE & @ BOTTOM OF DANCING SIDE.

LOOKS AS IF IT WAS CAUSED BY EDGE STICKING OUT OF A SLEAVE & THE SUN OR HEAT HAD GOT TO IT.

THEY HAD BEEN SITTING IN MY M8S HOUSE FOR YEARS.

OR COULD JUST BE OFF THE PRESSING.

DOES ANY1 ELSE HAVE THIS ON THERE ORIGINAL?.

MIGHT JUST OF BEEN HIS 2 COPIES LIKE THAT.

quote name='Prophonics 2029' post='949823' date='Dec 16 08, 12:02 AM']A very thin paper label that goes greenish under those funny energy saving bulb's.

not sure what you are looking at with your energy saving bulb's but if it's green time to throw it out ! , the paper on this is the same as the original good quality and the yellow is the same shade , and not as glossy as it looks , that the flash back from the camara someone went to a lot of trouble if this is a boot ...... if you scuffed it up a bit i feel it could be sold on as an original, thats why i will date stamp it on the A side.

this pic is to show the thickness of the 45, i can not get a clear pic as my camara is not up to it !

all the best

David

Why do you feel the need to scuff a record up, mine is M+ and an original with no marks or scuffs??

As I say under an energy bulb the paper has a green tinge to it like its thin paper and you can see the black coming through.

The scans give an orange tinge to the record where as its more yellow.

Checked again and in this light its more green and yellow than yellow.

the paperwork i had a very quick view of, upside down on the desk i might add , gave me the number pressed and other info that makes me 99.9% sure no more can/will be pressed..... it was in english but the letter head was covered by other paper and the details at the bottom of the paperwork were to small to read from where i was situated & i did not feel the best thing to do was say i had noticed it ! being in english and that the 45 looks like it was pressed in the USA from the information i have collected , i would take a guess it was pressed in the USA but i could be wrong....... everything looked proffessional but i was not happy in asking to many questions..... did not wish to sleep with the fish ! as they say in italy ! laugh.gif

best regards

David

Sorry o pick holes in this statement Dave but you didnt see the small print, it was upside down and you didn't know where it was from or pressed up so are you sure you are not filling in the gaps cause you haven't really seen all the paper work.??

The scan you posted Dave has the record got a name in the dead wax.

Edited December 20, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

Why do you feel the need to scuff a record up, mine is M+ and an original with no marks or scuffs??

As I say under an energy bulb the paper has a green tinge to it like its thin paper and you can see the black coming through.

The scans give an orange tinge to the record where as its more yellow.

Checked again and in this light its more green and yellow than yellow.

the paperwork i had a very quick view of, upside down on the desk i might add , gave me the number pressed and other info that makes me 99.9% sure no more can/will be pressed..... it was in english but the letter head was covered by other paper and the details at the bottom of the paperwork were to small to read from where i was situated & i did not feel the best thing to do was say i had noticed it ! being in english and that the 45 looks like it was pressed in the USA from the information i have collected , i would take a guess it was pressed in the USA but i could be wrong....... everything looked proffessional but i was not happy in asking to many questions..... did not wish to sleep with the fish ! as they say in italy ! laugh.gif

best regards

David

Sorry o pick holes in this statement Dave but you didnt see the small print, it was upside down and you didn't know where it was from or pressed up so are you sure you are not filling in the gaps cause you haven't really seen all the paper work.??

The scan you posted Dave has the record got a name in the dead wax.

Glad you have a m+ record, never seen one of those before..... Is a mint + before it is put into a sleeve and untouched by human hands?

If the record was made to look used then the differences would not be as noticeable, I did not suggest I feel the need to scuff a record up? The reason I will put a date stamp on the A side is so that it will not be sold on as an original...

Sorry but I can see no green in any of the scans? They all look yellow to me?

I'm not looking for an argument or a heavy debate, I was asked a question and I gave an answer, I am not going to explain every post I put up as I have better things to do, but for your information as you have twisted some of the things I have posted I will say the following ...... I could not see the print at the bottom of the letter (this is sometimes where the address is printed on company paper) as it was small.... I did not say I could "not see the small print" as you suggest........ I made out all of the information on the body of the letter..... I am not filling in the gaps, I have stated that there is some information I do not have, if you read my post I said "I would take a guess it was pressed in the USA but I could be wrong"... I'm offering a suggestion based on the information I have and the experience of myself and others on the 45...... I see shipping orders and delivery notes every day and I am sure all the relevant information was on the sheet on the desk, all the information you would need was on the paperwork I looked at, I'm sure there is a fax or a shipping order somewhere and also an email but I cannot think of anymore information that would be on them that was not on the paperwork I looked at, the only thing I could not see was the company name and address as stated before.

As for reading letters/ memo's upside down on a desk, it's a skill I picked up years ago and I'm sure many people can do the same.....

The information in the dead wax is the same as the original

All the best

David

Sounds like it's a recent press(?) Mine came from the US some years a go so safe to say it's an original, even though the FWTC is on both sides, like a lot of others here. Also never doubted it's vintage as it looks like an old record. If there was paperwork with the represses you'd assume they're legal reissues, but where are the rest of them and who did them...any idea? Were you sold it as an original or reissue? Intriguing ,all this

I was sold it as a 45 record that was it..... I have no idea when they were pressed...

I re checked my original and as stated in another post the fwtc is on both sides but very faint on one side, and I missed it on the first look.

Just because there was paperwork is no reason to assume they are legit reissues, it just means they were ordered and delivered...... I stated 2^nd issue on eBay as you are not allowed to use the term boot and most people use 2^nd issue to show the 45 they are selling is not an original first issue and I did not wish to mislead anyone as they do look very convincing.

Anyway it's a great sound and I'm sure who ever owns one of these issues will enjoy the sound in the grooves without having to pay £00's for one.

All the information I have I will pass on to John Manship for the next edition of his bootleg/ other issues guide.

Best regards

David

Edited December 20, 200816 yr by CAMBRIDGE SOUL

Thanks Dave, err the scan is showing and orange tinge as I said there is no orange tinge on the record.

I read just what you posted no twist just a slight contradiction I thought.

It all seems a bit strange a re-issue and only one copy to show with a gloss that an original would of had but hasn't any more??

Just trying to make sense of it all.

Glad you have a m+ record, never seen one of those before..... Is a mint + before it is put into a sleeve and untouched by human hands?

I take care of my records can't see paper damaging the record unless it has dirt or dust in the sleeve.

Thanks for your reply.

It all seems a bit strange a re-issue and only one copy to show with a gloss that an original would of had but hasn't any more??

Just trying to make sense of it all.

yes i'm sure my first one had gloss when i got it but that was a long time ago....... there are more than one copy of this 2nd issue or what ever you wish to call it , but from the information i have this was a small limited press. if i had, had the cash i would have got all of them ! i may go back and get the rest in the new year.

Every time a King Tutt thread comes up I have, over the years, posted this possibly dull point of (possible) interest, but anyway here we go again:

I remember an interview in one of the old fanzines (Poss Blackbeat) with him (seeing as I've met you, would you mind if I called you 'King') and apparently KT was Jimmy Bo Hornes drummer and had no recollection of recording 'YGMHU', I would think due to his skunk fixation - I may have made that last bit up but what else could it have been?

Only track I remember being played at Wigan that I actually realised played in stereo on the Cas speakers.

Just giving this a bump as John Manships on site so maybe he can clear it up.

The information in the dead wax is the same as the original

It can't look exactly the same as on the original so it would be great if you could post up some pictures of the dead wax matrix info. And focused pictures of the labels as well (turning on the "macro" setting on your camera should do the trick)

Here are pictures of the matrix details on an original copy.

"D-A-N-C-I-N'" side:

"YOU'VE GOT ME HUNG UP" side:

It can't look exactly the same as on the original so it would be great if you could post up some pictures of the dead wax matrix info. And focused pictures of the labels as well (turning on the "macro" setting on your camera should do the trick)

Here are pictures of the matrix details on an original copy.

"D-A-N-C-I-N'" side:

"YOU'VE GOT ME HUNG UP" side:

Many Thanks for the Matrix Details Sebastian.

I don't own this record so couldn't help on this occasion.

It can't look exactly the same as on the original so it would be great if you could post up some pictures of the dead wax matrix info. And focused pictures of the labels as well (turning on the "macro" setting on your camera should do the trick)

Hi , It's the same details...... they may may not be in the same place but to be honest i did not take that much notice , i just checked what was in the run out groove,........ sorry will not be posting photo's of the run out groove...... i have better things to do at the moment ! ....... if anyone wants to drive over and take the photo's just PM me , i will even make you a cuppa while you work

best regards

David

into the last half hour and its over 50 quid.

dave

ooooooooooooooh 80 quid

ooooooooooooooh 80 quid

For a chuffin boot, would be interesting to see it hope the buyer is on here.

For a chuffin boot, would be interesting to see it hope the buyer is on here.

it's a limited press, you can get a carver on ebay for 15 inc post .......Al Mason on 3rd issue went for well over 100.... it's a strange world we live in ....

if i go to the 100 club xmas party this week will bring one , so you can have a look at it , my xmas prezzy to you Prophonics and you can have it for 80.99 less the paypal and ebay fees as it's the last one i have

all the best

David

it's a limited press, you can get a carver on ebay for 15 inc post .......Al Mason on 3rd issue went for well over 100.... it's a strange world we live in ....

if i go to the 100 club xmas party this week will bring one , so you can have a look at it , my xmas prezzy to you Prophonics and you can have it for 80.99 less the paypal and ebay fees as it's the last one i have

all the best

David

Your a gentleman Cambridge I cant wait to see it.

Edited December 22, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

so then.when were they done. bearing in mind al mason has been brought into the equasion. thats 20 years old. legally done and you never see it. nobody else noticed them b4 and mostly what are the differences because theres not been a 100% perfect boot done yet

dave

I have read through all of this a few times and I still find all this very misleading 1st shiny issue, 1st non shiny issue, 2nd shiny issue or a convincing boot with paper work???

so then.when were they done. bearing in mind al mason has been brought into the equasion. thats 20 years old. legally done and you never see it. nobody else noticed them b4 and mostly what are the differences because theres not been a 100% perfect boot done yet

dave

Not sure what you mean re Al Mason that was a ref to price nothing more....

Do you mean nobody else noticed the king tutt ....... as I said before I found them in Italy, and I had the first one..... this is why they have not been seen before......please read info above as I am not going to post the same info again and again....... for differences on them see above posts.......

if someone made a boot you could not tell the difference from the original in any way , then you would never know it exists would you

And I would call it a Counterfeit not a boot, as most boots are not made to mislead

Found a green one on popsike.

Found a green one on popsike.

Found a green one on popsike.

What about the blue ones

Think what we all really want to know though is are loads of them going to turn up now like the Daybreaks did a couple of years ago.

Remember them going for silly money on e bay in the 1st few days.

if someone made a boot you could not tell the difference from the original in any way , then you would never know it exists would you

That is extremely unlikely to happen - if not actually impossible.

And sorry for harping on about this... but proof about the difference between originals and counterfeits can usually be found by studying the info in (and the size of) the run-out grooves. You've written that the info in the run-out grooves is the same on both the originals and the counterfeit/"limited reissue" that you've sold, but I don't believe that it is written in the EXACT same way as on the original and it's almost entirely impossible to make the run-out and run-in grooves match the width and amount of turns on the originals.

Would be great if you could post up this info for the "limited reissue", but I'm not holding my breath.

a blue wow and I thought my grey was rare.

That is extremely unlikely to happen - if not actually impossible.

And sorry for harping on about this... but proof about the difference between originals and counterfeits can usually be found by studying the info in (and the size of) the run-out grooves. You've written that the info in the run-out grooves is the same on both the originals and the counterfeit/"limited reissue" that you've sold, but I don't believe that it is written in the EXACT same way as on the original and it's almost entirely impossible to make the run-out and run-in grooves match the width and amount of turns on the originals.

Would be great if you could post up this info for the "limited reissue", but I'm not holding my breath.

Sorry Sebastian

But I am not going to get my ruler out and measure the run out grooves on this one and my original..... The run out groove and turns look the same and the information in the run out grove is the same..... was the scratching done by the same person, well as this is a 2nd issue/ boot then probably not , but if the same original press was used then yes it would be ..... These are questions I do not have the answers to as I did not press the record...... I came across them and have collected as much information as I could get.

At the end of the day the differences do not really matter as no one is trying to sell this as an original, as I have said the one's I have sold will have a date stamp on the A side, I will post what the stamp looks like on this thread later ....also I will take my copy of this to John Manship in the new year so he has all the information to put in his next price guide book.

Also anyone that would like to see my copy of this is welcome to come and have a cuppa and take as many photos of it as they like, they can even scrape some vinyl off the record to have it analysed if they wish

If you would like to buy the last copy I have for sale then you can do an autopsy on it and post it all up on here, as I have many other things that need my attention at the moment.

All the best and season's greetings

David

That is extremely unlikely to happen - if not actually impossible.

And sorry for harping on about this... but proof about the difference between originals and counterfeits can usually be found by studying the info in (and the size of) the run-out grooves. You've written that the info in the run-out grooves is the same on both the originals and the counterfeit/"limited reissue" that you've sold, but I don't believe that it is written in the EXACT same way as on the original and it's almost entirely impossible to make the run-out and run-in grooves match the width and amount of turns on the originals.

Would be great if you could post up this info for the "limited reissue", but I'm not holding my breath.

thanks for that sebastian. i was always hopeless at writing letters. thats pretty much what i wanted to say

theres always a difference. down to the type of vinyl, type of paper, the markings and thats just on the not so obvious reissues

dave

That is extremely unlikely to happen - if not actually impossible.

This is for another thread, but I beg to differ.... if I was going to counterfeit a 45 then I would make it look like the original in everyway..... Even to the point of melting down old 45's on the same label and pressed at the same plant at the same time as the one I want to counterfeit, so if anyone tested the vinyl it would show the same chemical make up as the original.........and so with the ink and paper...etc

The point is a perfect counterfeit will never be out'ed, the one's that get out'ed are the one's that don't make the grade ...so never say never

? surly if you have an original and this other copy they are the same markings and run out or not, I have many copy's of the same records and can tell the difference without and electron microscope Dave.

I have noticed that the S in distributed is very odd on my copy almost like a g.

Edited December 22, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

? surly if you have an original and this other copy they are the same markings and run out or not, I have many copy's of the same records and can tell the difference without and electron microscope Dave.

I have noticed that the S in distributed is very odd on my copy almost like a g.

they are the same markings , but are they in exactly the same place, i don't know and am not going to pull out my original right now and check, sorry but it's not a matter of life and death ....... will let John Mnaship look at it and then he can put the details in his book......... it's not the original end of .......

if one of you would like to buy one and do all the work feel free, but i have loads of other stuff to do, like makeing a living and i have lots to do before christmas

This is for another thread, but I beg to differ.... if I was going to counterfeit a 45 then I would make it look like the original in everyway..... Even to the point of melting down old 45's on the same label and pressed at the same plant at the same time as the one I want to counterfeit, so if anyone tested the vinyl it would show the same chemical make up as the original.........and so with the ink and paper...etc

The point is a perfect counterfeit will never be out'ed, the one's that get out'ed are the one's that don't make the grade ...so never say never

The only way you could do what you describe above is if you had the original "mother stampers" that the original 45 was made from. If you have that AND you're able to press it at the factory where the originals were made AND they let you bring your own plastic mixture that you've made from old melted 45s... then you will get the exact same audio reproduction and run-out etchings. Perhaps that is what has happened with the King Tutt 45 you've got? I don't know, I just think it's fascinating and would like to know how to distinguish between an original and the counterfeit.

If you don't have the original "mother stampers" then you will not be able to make an exact counterfeit of a record. You might get the run-out groove etchings and run-in/run-out widths correct, but the the volume and wave form of the audio WILL differ between the original and the countereit no matter how much work you put into it. Properly mastering and cutting a lacquer/stamper for vinyl production is a dying art (and has been for about 25 years).

This is for another thread, but I beg to differ.... if I was going to counterfeit a 45 then I would make it look like the original in everyway..... Even to the point of melting down old 45's on the same label and pressed at the same plant at the same time as the one I want to counterfeit, so if anyone tested the vinyl it would show the same chemical make up as the original.........and so with the ink and paper...etc

The point is a perfect counterfeit will never be out'ed, the one's that get out'ed are the one's that don't make the grade ...so never say never

The only way you could do what you describe above is if you had the original "mother stampers" that the original 45 was made from. If you have that AND you're able to press it at the factory where the originals were made AND they let you bring your own plastic mixture that you've made from old melted 45s... then you will get the exact same audio reproduction and run-out etchings. Perhaps that is what has happened with the King Tutt 45 you've got? I don't know, I just think it's fascinating and would like to know how to distinguish between an original and the counterfeit.

If you don't have the original "mother stampers" then you will not be able to make an exact counterfeit of a record. You might get the run-out groove etchings and run-in/run-out widths correct, but the the volume and wave form of the audio WILL differ between the original and the countereit no matter how much work you put into it. Properly mastering and cutting a lacquer/stamper for vinyl production is a dying art (and has been for about 25 years).

as i said never say never...... but this is for another thread........ the last one i have is up for sale so pm me if you want it .... i may go and get the others in the new year if they have not been crushed or melted down...... if they have been then there will only be a few of these 2nd issue/ boots around...... will that make them worth more than the original

Just to recap, your are selling a 2nd issue or a boot, with a shiny label like the first issue but not like the first issue with the matt label of the scan you posted up with some bodys name in the dead wax, with a matrix number on both sides like the original has but your other copy hasn't, that may or may not match the original, that you will sell but show to JM for listing as a second issue, where you have seen half of some paper work that sates the company may have imported them to Italy to be crushed to a pulp but you are willing to take a trip to see if they are still for sale. Not very clear cut at all.

If you are too busy to get the details of the matrix don't worry It all sounds a bit fishy to me so don't bother to bring the 45 for my benefit to the 100 I have no interest in 2nds or boots, I have better things to spend my dosh on and not for 80 smackers. cheers..Good luck with your find.

Edited December 23, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

Off at a tangient here but to quote but a few examples of Modern tracks where, to me, the 7" original edit is better than the, in most cases, poorly extended 12" versions.

I say 'poorly extended' as indie 12" extended versions tend to simply straight cut edit the track [repeat the previous 8 bars], they don't tend to do a Shep Pettibone on tracks.

Yet strangely the 12"s tend to command a premium, maybe due to their 'scarcity' and the recent interest from the Disco fellows.

Alfie Davidson, King Tutt, Curtis to name a few of the more popular all are more complete edit-wise in their original 7" form.

This view doesn't apply, to me that is, regarding every 12" version - Eddie Holman, Greg Perry, Skip Mahoney for eg. all work better in their longer edited formats (looking at that last sentence, two of them were Salsoul tracks, a label with the money to pay for quality, re-worked by savvy engineers, Thom Moulton etc but you get me drift.)

Edits can make or ruin a track - look at that awful 'The Bottle (drunken mix) edit for example.

The only reason I love 12"'s is for the response you get over a system from them, but I will forever be happy with my KT 7" (even with it's poor response) over the rather annoying extended version.

Am I rattling again?