|
|
Post by Doc on Apr 10, 2004 4:04:17 GMT -5
So, there I am at the home of a friend who has just moved to a new residence. We are moving through the dining area, viewing his new digs exitedly. Suddenly, atop a packing box I spy it--could it be---yes it is--and original album of Sgt Pepper.
How odd it looks to me-----------a 1967 edition. Woah. The record player wasn't all set up--I am going to return to hear it. I don't think he'll loan it to me (can't blame him) but we are to have a listening.
Where are all the other pics? I guess there is a little folio that was missing. The CD has all these othere shots. There was only the front cover, rear cover, and gate fold whatever that's called. Anyway, I am anxious to see how clarified the CD is from this old vinyl. The actual album LOOKS spotless. So, we'll see...........
|
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Apr 10, 2004 6:36:50 GMT -5
;D nice!
|
|
Harb
Help! 
Posts: 74
|
Post by Harb on Apr 10, 2004 18:01:44 GMT -5
Back in 1967, original copies of the LP had the gatefold cover, an inner sleeve that faded from red to white (like it was soaking up blood), a cardboard cutout giveaway and the disc itself.
Only original UK copies of the LP have the 'Inner Groove'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Apr 11, 2004 1:38:23 GMT -5
Ah-ha, then, its not original. There was no red on the inner sleeve, and there was no cardboard cutout..........
I will talk to him tommorrow and ask when he got it. It is discernably old--perhaps it came a few years later. He thought it came from the time of the release, as he bought it all when it came out--but maybe he was late on that one.....................still, I'd like to hear the fidelity and quality of it.
|
|
Harb
Help!
Posts: 74
|
Post by Harb on Apr 11, 2004 13:02:48 GMT -5
Just because the inner sleeve and cutout insert have gone doesn't mean that it isn't an original.
I'm assuming that you're talking about an American copy here. Original pressings were on a black Capitol label with a rainbow perimeter and the rimtext does not have the word 'subsidiary' within it. That word was added in 1969 just before it was moved onto Apple. Other reissues are on a pink.red label and on a purple label.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Apr 11, 2004 19:42:27 GMT -5
Actually, it has a black center label that says Capitol. Trouble is, the album belongs to the ROOMATE of the person whose home I was at. I have never met this person, the owner of the record. And the irony is, he disappeared 15 days ago and no one has seen him since. The missing persons reports have been made, the parents are on a vigil, and his friends (there are two obviously that I know) are on pins and needles. Would you leave your house in your car one morning and not even call anyone you knew for over two weeks? Not a phone call--nothing. He's not on holiday, we don't believe.  |
|
|
|
Post by LarryC on Apr 14, 2004 8:23:00 GMT -5
I have an original 1967 Capitol release of Sgt Pepper as well, with the black Capitol label with the rainbow border, but I have never seen the sleeve which turns from white to red as you described, Harb. Was that something unique to the UK release of said album? Or perhaps it was in the very first lot of those published immediately after the album was put on the shelves. I didn't actually get mine until very late 1967, or early 1968.
As to the folio, Doc, the record album did not have one. To my own knowledge, the only Beatles Record Album which had anything like that in it was Magical Mystery Tour, and that was basically several pages of photos from the movie. And then the White Album had the four portraits and the poster inside.
Here's another clue for you all...the pic that originally appears on the back of the Sgt Pepper record jacket, the one where Paul is facing away from the camera, and George's thumb is pointing to a particular song lyric, etc....look really closely at that pic and you will notice that the publisher's flipped the image...there are little things you can see in the image which indicates this other than the way George's hair flips on the opposite side of his head from the other photos. I had never realized this before I started looking at all these darn pictures so much recently, but it's there. And the obvious indicator is that they are standing in the exact opposite order from the inner photo and all the others which were taken of them standing.
Just thought I'd throw in this small tidbit of useless information for your consumption...hehe ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Apr 14, 2004 8:37:22 GMT -5
Thanks , Larry. Not useless at all, thanks for the info. (I say hair-splitting is fine by me--I hope others feel likewise.)
So, where I think George makes the L, John makes the V, and Ringo makes he E, each with their hand position, at one site I went to( Iforget) they didn't speculate about the "O". So, is this old PID clue lore---forgive me if I rehash--the three buttons on the back of Paul's coat could be morse code for, well, "S" if taken as dots, but since they are bigger buttons, maybe they are symbolic of dashes, which would be "O". So, somehow, in some interpretation, the coat buttons finish the word. I dont know.........
|
|
|
|
Post by LarryC on Apr 17, 2004 9:07:16 GMT -5
Thanks , Larry. Not useless at all, thanks for the info. (I say hair-splitting is fine by me--I hope others feel likewise.) So, where I think George makes the L, John makes the V, and Ringo makes he E, each with their hand position, at one site I went to( Iforget) they didn't speculate about the "O". So, is this old PID clue lore---forgive me if I rehash--the three buttons on the back of Paul's coat could be morse code for, well, "S" if taken as dots, but since they are bigger buttons, maybe they are symbolic of dashes, which would be "O". So, somehow, in some interpretation, the coat buttons finish the word. I dont know......... The spelling of L O V E with the hands is something I, too, have just recently read about on the web somewhere. If memory serves correctly, the fact that Paul's hands are not visible is supposed to be indicative of a 0, or zero, which could also be interpreted as an O, or o. Perhaps someone in the art design department saw this and this photo was intentionally flipped so that this subliminal message would be found by clue hunters...who knows. Then again it could have just been someone's effort to affect a subtle change in the artwork of the album by sort of mixing up the order in which the boys are lined up. In every group picture of that photo session, the ones which were published anyways, they are all lined up in the same order...Ringo, John, Paul, George...someone somewhere along the way may have thought it was getting too boring and decided to reverse the order just for a little subtle variety or some such...who knows. |
|
|
|
Post by SimMHoward on Apr 17, 2004 11:28:29 GMT -5
I always thought his round butt formed the o
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Apr 18, 2004 2:18:14 GMT -5
Not a very classy idea, though. Forgive me, that's just not the direction I think we should expect here. O isn't the math value of nothing in this context; O is a letter. O is omega, O is the last, the end, so maybe we see the "end" of the person standing there. Maybe we can go that far. I still feel the morse code 'three dashes' plays in somehow. Maybe they symbolize three dots, but because "Paul" is turned around, that is the symbol of telling us to REVERSE it. Reverse 3 dots,and you have 3 dashes. Its either dots or dashes, right? Like, we show you 3 buttons, or 3 dots, and pictorially suggest to you to "turn it around" so to speak. Oh, then they want us to get 3 dashes. Or, im stuck on stupid again.............  |
|
