Tlscapital

Would it rather be not the other way around whatever the real figures are... 900 (or less) sold and 100 (or more) went "in the trunk" of Jerry's car to be smashed and melted back. Which was the way in the USA before the unsold records found their way into the 'drilled' and 'cut outs' sales stacks. Would Jerry Reed really do a repress of a record with a revised "easier" artist credit that did not sell some in the first place ? I seem to remember reading that 'somewhere there is a paradise' had some air play success amongst the teens and high school circles. And that seems rather plausible.

Coronavirus skeptic at a younger age; freaky Why Jack ? Right wing, left wing, but not that twat... 😭

Yes they are made from the very same stamper believe.

The same guy with the blurb & snippet who sold his L. Allen on the evilBay as shown here above sold a (at least one) Larry Allen as well... Does he have that 900 batch copies out of Jerry's car trunk ? 😉

OK, this is a great little piece of paper and could leave us to understand that the Larry Allen is a rerun/second release to supply either a public demand or a re-promotion campaign for the 'somewhere there is paradise' side as this article from mid 1966 highlight to back-up the label company "hit" records. So if we could understand that the record was issued first by fall 1965 as L. Allen And A Band Of Angels which is not the best name to promote even more so for the DJs on air-play to say the least. Still facing up with some local success (or further some) a smart move would be to simplify the credits while repress it. A bit like the Edwin Starr on Ric-Tic first batch title 'Agent OO Soul' quickly changed to 'Agent double O soul' due to issue for the radio DJs to present/promote the record title correctly. Maybe was the Larry Allen was (re-)pressed for similar reasons. Even if it should have been Leonard Allen... The numbering catalogue of Jerry Reed's Jeree and Green Dolphin labels seem of utter simplicity. As the labels here below show the numbering starts with the last two numbers of the year (65-66) followed by the chronology of issued sides (1 & 2, 3 & 4, 5 & 7...) leaving little doubt for the year of release. So L. Allen was 65-7 & 65-8. The Larry Allen release used the same number. Even with a gap after this 65-7 & 65-8 Green Dolphin release with the only following number I could find being the Caprees on Jeree 66-13 & 66-14 as quoted in the small paper article from May 1966. So L. Allen is 1965 and Larry Allen 1966 maybe ?

No it's older and taken 'as is' from the eVilBay auction guy who was friend with L. Allen who took it from somewhere on the net. I've read that bit before as from a text borrowed somewhere else... About to become a legend 🤗 Even on '45cat.com' it's copied, pasted and commented as such...

What specific source mentions that exactly ? A name ? It's a "tell tale" I've read here and there but without a name to back it up some or to counter verify... Numbers evidently don't add up in my book neither. Like you I'd have believe more than double that of copies just in circulation plus those still sitting uncovered.

The sellers blurb sounds genuine to me and he mentions a certain L. Allen rathe that a Larry ! But he evidently tries to sell a L. Allen copy... The snippet on the other hand is some words spread here and there on the net and borrowed as a "tell tale". How true is all that in real ?

Many examples as such where people give wrongly an "alternative" press the "first" press annotation because then, or just to them, it's rarer as "unusual" and so... But not ! Sometimes at least it's not the case. In this case many leads are not so reassuring about the Larry Allen copies I feel.

Well, they're both done at the same pressing plant. Some copies of the Larry Allen sold on the eVilBay over the years and few were in not so great shape. But that doesn't tell something when there's money to be made... Not implying this is necessary the case here, but it could also be some forgery. Mind you beside the different shade of green print, the Larry versus the L. and the move of the 'Jerry Reed Production' credits either at bottom or middle right, I love the annotation on the real 'A' side under the L. Allen 'and a band of angels'. Why this change ? For 'air play' clearer presentation ? This could be and explain why more copies of the Larry Allen came out later and cleaner as the 'second' release success wouldn't have made it to the sales and poped-up later as NOS. Only a theory but they looks so close to each one another it's hard to tell if they're really contemporary or not. Hence from this previous tread a Dave Thorley comment; The Label was owned by the same guy that owned Jeree records, Jerry Reed. The studio was still open up until a few years ago and you could walk in and just chat to Jerry and the other guys there. The studio was a contract studio, where they would record anyone that walked in the door and paid their money. As part of the deal they could arrange records to be pressed or just put it out on the Jeree label.

My first copy 20 years ago was a L. Allen bought directly from the USA in G+ condition. Worn and scruffy from a rough life but still playable with snaps and pops. Then I manage to trade a L. Allen copy in Ex condition from a UK seller who said that he had just "upgraded"his copy for a rarer Larry Allen one. But when I finally got to see a Larry Allen copy I remained unimpressed. Few years ago I was reading stories on here on Soul Source with knowledgeable people like Dave Thorley about the L. Allen copies first being found and brought from the USA. After what some Larry Allen copies started surfacing... as a rarer, supposedly first pressing with the full name... But with the 'A' side of 'somewhere there is paradise' for the L. Allen and a Band of Angels credits...

So the Smith Brothers were 4 members then of whom 3 were brothers. Eugene Johnson, Donald Smith, Jesse Smith & John Smith. So 'D.J. Smith' could still be any of them 3... Or them 3 actually ?

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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'...

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 😉

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 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...

Yes, different takes.

Joe Matthews's tone pitch is similar but indeed his singing phrasing is more melodic. If Billy Kennedy's tone and syncope way of singing is similar, like almost talking, he still doesn't groan at all. And if Emmanuel Laskey timber is of the lower kind; he groans, talk and has that 'tremolo' in his voice... Aftermath; Emmanuel Laskey sounds more of a match in comparison with the other pair after closer attention. IMHO. Maybe one needs to listens to Emmanuel Laskey's 'I've got to run for my life' to compare "similarities" even if pitched up. Sounding like it could even be from the same studio session.

Well yes. The thing is that I read that whole subject's comment a while ago as a 'theory'. Yet the only record to my ears where Joe sings almost like that is his 'nothing you can do'. But Spyder's imposter 'he's good enough for me' might have been pitched up in speed. Where if it's Emmanel's voice it sound 'pinched' some and more of "higher" tone somehow. So it could very well be Emmanuel's distinctive groaning there and not Joe's doing it.