BBs Home recordings?

[bgas]

went to a collectibles dealer nearby today, and he had this disc for me, but he said it plays at 78RPM and I don't have a player.
 anyone know anything about these two songs? 

     

     

[ontor pertawst]

Neato! I wonder what's on it. There's this "Surfin' hootenanny" by Al Casey and Lee Hazelwood. Which BBs records did Casey play on again? My googling is lazy at best... some links claimed Good Vibrations. Huh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjZ17QjcuM8

[Shane]

Wow, that is a major major curiosity.  If you could post it (or part of it) at 45rpm, someone here (including me) could speed it up.

[DonnyL]

something about this looks fake to me. but if you are really holding that in your hand, you ought to buy it ASAP, or tell me where it is and I'll buy it.

[ontor pertawst]

Yeah, wouldn't the date put it smack dab in the middle of the Surfin' USA sessions, on a day they weren't in the studio and playing a live show?

Or they are just alternate titles for Stoked and Surf Jam.

I'm surprised there's not more interest, real or hoax!

[DonnyL]

Yeah, wouldn't the date put it smack dab in the middle of the Surfin' USA sessions, on a day they weren't in the studio and playing a live show?

Or they are just alternate titles for Stoked and Surf Jam.

I'm surprised there's not more interest, real or hoax!

somehow, if it is real, it seems like these titles would be some kind of Murry demos !

[The Shift]

Wow, that is a major major curiosity.  If you could post it (or part of it) at 45rpm, someone here (including me) could speed it up.

Wouldn't that wreck the needle and the vinyl simultaneously?

[Custom Machine]

Wow, that is a major major curiosity.  If you could post it (or part of it) at 45rpm, someone here (including me) could speed it up.

Wouldn't that wreck the needle and the vinyl simultaneously?

No problem playing a 78 at 45 rpm, except for the fact that this is an acetate and thus should be played with top quality equipment with a light tracking force.

Looks like it's probably a ten inch record, which was typically 78 rpm when there was only one song per side, but it's possible it could be pressed at 45 rpm.  Being a 78 seems odd for 1963, but maybe 78 rpm acetates were being pressed then, although that's around four years after they were last commercially pressed in the US.  There are a few Beatles acetates from the mid-sixties pressed with this same Capitol label.

Typically 78's back then had wide grooves made to be played back with a 2.7 to 3.0 mil stylus (needle), whereas 45s and 33s have microgrooves intended to be played back with a 0.7 mil stylus.  Assuming it's a microgroove recording, playing it back with wide 78 rpm stylus could damage the soft acetate recording.  On the other hand, if it truly was pressed as a 78 with wide grooves, a typical 0.7 mil microgroove stylus would ride in the bottom of the groove and be far noisier in playback, with less bass, than if a 78 rpm stylus was used.  Anyway, this is something to be handled with care on playback.

Bgas, can you post a photo of the record itself, without the sleeve?

[BergenWhitesMoustache]

Apart from this being an acetate (thin wax coating over a metal base), which means it should be played on decent gear, ideally as few times as possible (but even then, acetates are a hell of a lot more resilient than recieved wisdom would have you believe), there are zero issues with playing it at 45 and speeding it up. It won't have wide 78 grooves if it's from '63, cos they didn't really exist by that point.

Even some of the later commercially issued 78s here in backwards old Blighty had microgrooves, and we're talking 58/59.

Looks like a 7 or possibly a 6 inch to me...acetates came in all kinds of rum sizes.

Is it DEFINITELY a 78, or is it a general dealer who doesn't really know much about records just spouting guesses? If it's 78, I'd perhaps hazard to guess it was cut on a home cutting machine...just don't see why capitol would have done that at this point UNLESS, these tracks were to be used to sync to film. Library houses and film companies used 78rpm til well into the sixties. Why? Because it was better quality than the slower ones!


Either way- just slap it on and record it, first time!

[Andrew G. Doe]

Something just doesn't feel right here. Need to hear those tracks. I know someone who would know, but he's a bit tied up for the next few days.

[harveyw]

Yeah, looks dodgy to me too. Those labels are just too clean, and the writing too unworn, for something that's nearly 50 years old. Fake acetates are turning up on ebay all the time these days (more often than real ones it sometimes seems) including some with those "pro-disc" labels. Neither title rings any bells either (apart from Al Casey's version as previously mentioned).

I'd love to be proved wrong though.
 

[Jon Stebbins]

They played an afternoon show in L.A. that day. One possibility is that they taped a couple of jams from that show and pressed it on an acetate just to see what it sounded like.  Could have already been toying with the thought of a live album. I'd say the likelihood of these being real is about 10%. But if they were real they'd be worth a pretty penny.

[Rocker]

They played an afternoon show in L.A. that day. One possibility is that they taped a couple of jams form that show and pressed it on an acetate just to see what it sounded like.  Could have already been toying with the thought of a live album.

But were titles of that name in their set at that time?

[Rob Dean]

Something just doesn't feel right here. Need to hear those tracks. I know someone who would know, but he's a bit tied up for the next few days.

AGD , that was certainly my initial impression BUT I didn't post as such as I didn't want to look a complete tosser

[BergenWhitesMoustache]

Just a thought, this 'collectibles dealer' isn't currently searching out something that plays at 78 is he? An ancient wind up with a nice fresh NOS steel needle and a tracking weight of about ten grammes? 

The date could refer to the date it was cut, but it does look a bit dodge. 'Demo' isn't something you generally see written on acetates. Most acetates with handwritten labels I see usually cut to the chase. Often just the track title, not even a band name.

[Jon Stebbins]

They played an afternoon show in L.A. that day. One possibility is that they taped a couple of jams form that show and pressed it on an acetate just to see what it sounded like.  Could have already been toying with the thought of a live album.

But were titles of that name in their set at that time?

Well if you look at the Surfin USA LP its filled with instrumental jams...two of them made up in the studio on the spot. When you are playing long sets and jamming to fill space, titles are pretty much irrelevant. Again, I doubt these are real, but that jamming scenario is one long-shot possibility.

[punkinhead]

How much are we talking here?

[Rob Dean]

How much are we talking here?

Well IF it is real , priceless
The product has NEVER been heard of before , and the disc thus is a one of a kind

[punkinhead]

How much are we talking here?

Well IF it is real , priceless
The product has NEVER been heard of before , and the disc thus is a one of a kind

How much is this dealer talkin of sellin?

[SBonilla]

"Capitol Pro-Disc" - I have a feeling that these discs were commercially available to studios and home recording enthusiasts. Capitol later had its own recording tape brand. I seems plausible that they had their own consumer brand of blank acetates.
In-house acetates often had typed labels applied to generic discs. My suspicion is that the acetates already had the labels affixed, which necessitated the handwriting for labeling.
I could be way off base, but that's my first impression.

[Custom Machine]

"Capitol Pro-Disc" - I have a feeling that these discs were commercially available to studios and home recording enthusiasts. Capitol later had its own recording tape brand. I seems plausible that they had their own consumer brand of blank acetates.
In-house acetates often had typed labels applied to generic discs. My suspicion is that the acetates already had the labels affixed, which necessitated the handwriting for labeling.
I could be way off base, but that's my first impression.

Yes, as you say, the disc came with the label pre-attached, as can be seen from the way it is pressed into the disc.  And the Capitol Pro-Disc was a format commercially marketed for home use, as can be seen from the backside of the sleeve, stating "For finer home recordings. ... Now for the first time this unexcelled quality is available for home use at low prices."  So while Capitol Records probably used these Pro-Discs for their own acetates from time to time, this could have come from another recording studio, or even someone's home unit.

[SBonilla]

"Capitol Pro-Disc" - I have a feeling that these discs were commercially available to studios and home recording enthusiasts. Capitol later had its own recording tape brand. I seems plausible that they had their own consumer brand of blank acetates.
In-house acetates often had typed labels applied to generic discs. My suspicion is that the acetates already had the labels affixed, which necessitated the handwriting for labeling.
I could be way off base, but that's my first impression.

Yes, as you say, the disc came with the label pre-attached, as can be seen from the way it is pressed into the disc.  And the Capitol Pro-Disc was a format commercially marketed for home use, as can be seen from the backside of the sleeve, stating "For finer home recordings. ... Now for the first time this unexcelled quality is available for home use at low prices."  So while Capitol Records probably used these Pro-Discs for their own acetates from time to time, this could have come from another recording studio, or even someone's home unit.

Also, I feel the title WILSON TWIST is exploiting a cache of  the Wilson name that didn't exist at time.  These are dubious titles. And, highlighting the word "DEMO" seems to indicate that someone is baiting the Collector and not soliciting an A&R or publishing guy, even if in-house.

[Jason Penick]

"Surfin' Hootnanny" by Al Casey, 1960, certainly sounds like something they could have covered in concert. However, it is possible that these tracks were recorded earlier and the date on the label is the date they were transferred from tape to the acetate.

Either way, I'd be stoked to find out if these are legit or not. The sleeve does seem to be in almost impossibly good condition, as mentioned previously.

[SunBurn]

I would guess this is a fake, but fake or not, I'd love to hear what's in those grooves!

[bgas]

For all those that want to hear it: 
  I was able to play one side ( Surfin' Hootenanny) I then sent it to Custom Machine, who converted it to 78 rpm and cleaned up the clicks,pops,rumble, and other extraneous noise on the home recorded acetate.
it turns out to be about as far as one could get from being the BBs.
After hearing this side, I didn't play the other, so as not to tempt fate

https://www.yousendit.com/download/TEhYTmZTZ2dQb0ozZU5Vag