Date:         Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:09:08 -0600
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         phillip holmes <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Philips U.S. releases in the 60's
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

A collector/dealer friend of mine told me that Wing didn't start off as 
a budget reissue label.  He's pretty knowledgeable and what you say 
corroborates his opinion.
Phillip

Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:
> The Wing label that was around in 1955-6,was essentially a different label.It was not a reissue label.As a collector of 50s rock,and R&B,I am very familiar with the original Wing,as the home of Freddie Bell and The Bell Boys,and the label some of the records by Buddy Johnson,The Griffins,etc. were issued on.
>
>
>                                       Roger
>
> David Lennick <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Wing was started in late 1955 as both an LP and a 78 label. See Gart's ARLD, 
> page 244. I have Wing 78s (jazz) and we had a couple of Wing LPs in the house 
> in 1959, no classical material at that time.
>
> dl
>
> Tom Fine wrote:
>   
>> Dave -- There were no Wing reissues made in the 50's, at least of 
>> classical material. Wing was launched in the early 60's and was not the 
>> idea of the classical division, not by a long shot. It was a marketing 
>> department plan to fill voids in the rack-jobber world and get Mercury 
>> stuff on racks at places like supermarkets and other sell-cheap outlets. 
>> This was during a downturn in the record business. The Wings were 
>> considered cheap junk by those in the know. The interesting thing is 
>> that Mercury kept the name even after receiving ridicule for the early 
>> 60's Wing records. Like I said, they were still repackaging jazz albums 
>> as 2-LPs-for-the-price-of-1 in the early 70's under the Wing label. I 
>> think Wing was finally clipped for good in the mid-70's. I notice it did 
>> not fly again in the CD era.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lennick" 
>> To: 
>> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:57 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Philips U.S. releases in the 60's
>>
>>
>>     
>>> The Philips US reissue label I was thinking of was World Series. All 
>>> that I've seen are Canadian pressings, mid 60s, from when London 
>>> distributed the label up here. I think these were the first to 
>>> proclaim themselves "compatible mono stereo", and I vaguely remember 
>>> (don't own any, used to see them in radio stations and nobody ever 
>>> wanted to play them) that they were low level and had phasing 
>>> problems, or at least sounded slushy in mono.
>>>
>>> Wing did some tolerable reissues, at least if you got the mono 
>>> versions or were assured that the original had been recorded in 
>>> stereo. But yes their fake stereo releases were pretty awful. Wing 
>>> blue label pressings from the 50s are appalling, pressed on styrene in 
>>> the US..at least up here we got Quality's low grade vinyl, better than 
>>> nothing. I have some 60s Wing US pressings that are as good as any 
>>> contemporary Mercurys. I also have Wing 78 issues from the 50s, so 
>>> Mercury may have used the name for a spinoff label similar to 
>>> Columbia's Epic and RCA's Vik (X, Groove).
>>>
>>> dl
>>>
>>> Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Tom,David,et al,
>>>>
>>>> I have never seen a US budget Mercury reissue of a Philips Lp.I'm not 
>>>> saying they don't exist,but,I have never seen one.Their buget label 
>>>> was "Wing",that put out inferior reissues of mono Living 
>>>> Presences.There are the Mercury-pressed Philips of Willem 
>>>> Mengelberg,which I think are grossly underrated.Tom,you are well 
>>>> aware of the Svastiaslv Richters,on Philips,that your mom produced,in 
>>>> like 1963,and '64.
>>>>
>>>> Some of these deep groove US PhilipsLps,on a black glossy label,are 
>>>> as good as Living Presences,IMHO.These would be the pressings from 
>>>> roughly 1963-67, by '68,they were beginning to go downhill,as were 
>>>> Mercurys themselves.Philips began to export records to the US,around 
>>>> late 1969,or early 1970,perhaps Don,or someone else could clarify 
>>>> this date.Both British and Dutch pressings were imported.
>>>>
>>>> Philips did,indeed,export pressings,from Holland,to other countries 
>>>> before this.I just learned this last year,when I bought such a 
>>>> record,from somebody in Mexico .(eBay of course.)This is one of those 
>>>> 1956 Clara Haskil Mozart Jubilee Lps.The pressing is a 
>>>> post-minigroove maroon label Dutch pressing from the early 60s.(No 
>>>> photo of record in the listing,just the cover.) I cannot recall,if it 
>>>> says "Made in Holland" on the label,it may not.The cover is a copy of 
>>>> the Dutch one,except it looks like it was printed in The 
>>>> US.Heavy,laminated cardboard,like an early 60s Merc.On the back 
>>>> cover,is a round orange sticker,slightly smaller than a quarter,that 
>>>> says imported from Holland,in Spanish.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                                   Roger
>>>>
>>>> David Lennick  wrote: Philips came into the 
>>>> picture when US Columbia lost its arrangement with English Columbia, 
>>>> which began exporting its product to the US as Angel (around 1953). 
>>>> There were no imported Philips pressings sold over here in the 50s 
>>>> except odd items like musicals and revues (Joyce Grenfell etc). Epic 
>>>> probably relied a lot more on Philips than Columbia, being a new 
>>>> label with not much homegrown classical product except Szell and the 
>>>> Cleveland Orchestra, but all Beecham's recordings appeared on 
>>>> Columbia (that was probably because of a contract with Beecham). As 
>>>> well, all US Columbia product that was issued in Europe came out on 
>>>> Philips.
>>>>
>>>> As for recycling the 50s Philips recordings once Philips owned 
>>>> Mercury, I recall some domestic pressings and budget reissues, but 
>>>> I'd say (without being certain) that the full price stuff came in as 
>>>> imports, as did Deutsche Grammophon titles in the 60s (there was a 
>>>> period when those were imported by MGM and packaged on this side).
>>>>
>>>> Partial answer, anyway. One way to answer whether Columbia and Epic 
>>>> held onto old titles is to check in 60s Schwanns.
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>>>
>>>> Tom Fine wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> I'm hoping there is a student of Philips history here.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I understand it, before Philips bought Mercury, they had a U.S. 
>>>>> distribution deal with Epic (CBS). I've seen Epic tapes and LPs of 
>>>>> Concertgabouw (sp?) and I Musici and perhaps others. After Philips 
>>>>> bought Mercury, by the mid-60's, they had a bunch of their classical 
>>>>> records on sale here, I believe manufacturered here and sleeves like 
>>>>> Mercury records (not thin paper like European Philips records from 
>>>>> the 60's).
>>>>>
>>>>> So here are my questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Was some or all of the material originally out on Epic reissued 
>>>>> on US Philips?
>>>>> 2. Was the entire European classical catalog issued here by the 
>>>>> mid-60's?
>>>>> 3. Were the LPs indeed manufactured in the US or just sleeved here?
>>>>> 4. Were new masters cut or were European manufacturing parts sent here?
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>        ---------------------------------
>>>> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  
>>>> Try it now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>     
>
>
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
>
>