The Smiley Smile Message Board

EDITED TO ADD: before clinking on the link within this post and washing money down the plughole, please read the rest of the thread: you might conclude that the item isn't one for the Smithsonian after all!
 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

This is one ebay item that oughta have its own thread and ought to be secured for the nation (your nation, not mine…)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/252185697042

zoinks and double zoinks !!
not quite as exciting as the I'm In Great Shape/my children were raised acetate though. 

 :o :o

I threw in a few bids for the hell of it.  I didn't really expect to get it for $37, but it never hurts to try.

Someone with better knowledge will hopefully chime in on this point: why is a demo recorded in LA pressed up on an acetate manufactured in Paramus NJ ? Seems a tad odd.

Edit: eh, never mind. Google is my friend.  :)

I had the same question. Were the discs with sleeves a proprietary product supplied by Presto under their brand for use on their equipment?

I am not going to come right out and declare this to be a fake, but color me skeptical for the following reasons:

1) Presto recording discs and their related equipment were mainly used by radio stations for transcription purposes.  Audiodiscs were the dominant acetate blank of the late '50s and '60s for the professional studio scene.  That's not to say that a lower-budget studio couldn't have re-purposed a radio transcription machine for studio use, but so could an amateur hobbyist desiring to cut his or her own "vintage" acetates.  Blanks are still out there, and occasionally show up on eBay.

2) This appears to be a 12" recording blank, repurposed for a 7" cut.  Most 45 rpm acetates from this time period are cut on 8" or 10" blanks.  Again, this smells of a leftover acetate blank being put to use.

3) Most condemningly, check out the Beatles acetate shown on this site:

http://www.beatlesource.com/bs/ao-askmewhy.html

Check out the position of the artist name in all-caps, the "45 RPM" in all-caps, the title in all-caps without quotation marks around it, the use of a single initial with a period in the name of the Recorder (although one is in all-caps, and one is not), and the format of the date -- month abbreviated to 3 letters, a period, followed by a comma and a space, followed by the year.  This is enough evidence to me to indicate that both of these acetates were cut by the same individual -- one purporting to be from February 1962, and one from November 1962.

I will NOT be bidding on this, and I would warn others against bidding until the evidence I've presented above is refuted.

Lee

Were I going to bid on this, the minimum of info I would expect would be who is the owner, how did they come by the disc, and where. In short, provenance. There is none.

Coupled with Lee's incisive observations, I'd have to say this item is looking increasingly suspect.

I just sent an eBay message to the seller inquiring about the commonalities with the Beatles acetate, and he/she quickly responded that they were from the same source -- but they didn't reveal that source.

Lee

Those alarm bells ? They just started ringing a little louder.

Some photos of Eddie Cochran acetates from 1957 here, with the same Presto label:

http://www.eddiecochran.info/Discography/USA/Miscellaneous/I.htm

YouTube of Dave Burgess (The Champs) Presto acetate from 1959:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iQXTfSCg4Og

I suppose it's possible that the same label was still in use in 1962...

Oh blimey… apologies if I've posted something that's had folk here bidding on what might turn out to be a fake.

Might Jim Murphy be able to shed any light, or pass the question to those who would know?

Maybe I'm being super dim here... but how do you typewrite a label that's stuck to the acetate ?

Very astute observation Andrew; that label was glued on at the factory. The studios typically covered up the acetate manufacturer label with their own typed label.  All the other Presto examples on the internet that I've been able to find are handwritten.  You would have to steam or scrape the label off, type the info, and re-apply it.  Or make a copy on a color printer...

Also note that on the vintage handwritten examples there are two additional holes covered up by the label at the 2 o'clock and 10 o'clock positions.  You can see the impression on the label.  Where are they on this acetate???

Those alarm bells are starting to give me a headache...

If you didn't post it, the experts may not have been able to raise their q's/observations - at least those chasing such stuff via eBay now have some what to think about tips when shopping.

Sent him an email via eBay outlining my concerns. We'll see what the reply is. If any.

The vendor is no serious BB fan, or he'd know about the original lyric.

Beattles with two 't's' and Huntingtton with two 't's' ?

Re: The Beattles disc... did it never occur to him to ask, "what is a US manufactured acetate doing in Abbey Road ?"

Exactly.  I would have thought that the story of it being made for E.M.I. but having a U.S.-formatted date would have raised red flags with the Beatles experts.

Are there any known cases of Presto supplying blank labels which could be typewritten on and then pasted on top of the original Presto label? Otherwise, yeah, how could you have a legitimate typewritten Presto label? Did that ever occur to whomever removed and repasted the original label, assuming that's what took place?

As I write this it's up to $426 with 5 ½ days to go.

A reply. He claims it's a 10" disc. It's clearly not. Compare the width of the dead wax on it with The Beattles disc, also listed as a 10". On the latter, it's roughly the width of the label on either side. On the BB disc, it's clearly wider.

Amusingly, in response to my asking why a disc made in NJ was being used in an LA studio, he said "The Beachboys originated in the L.A. area and not in New Jersey. I think as a historian you would know this very well known fact." Er... well yes, I do... and that wasn't my question. Less amusingly, he completely ignored my question about the label being typewritten. Note that when an acetate of "Surfin'" with the label - typed - as being by The Surfers was altered to The Beach Boys, it was handwritten.

Seller's completed auction for a cutter head for an acetate lathe:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Audax-Lathe-Record-Cutter-Head-Device-Model-RH5-for-Presto-and-Rek-O-Kut-/252073543055?hash=item3ab0c1058f%3Ag%3A3DAAAOSwd0BV4bi9&nma=true&si=ZUv9%252Bw5rxbaxExYhpoikshfpzNw%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Has he sold any typewriters recently?

Andrew's alarm bells are giving me a headache now.  ;D

Alarm bells? Thanks to you guys I can now see the locomotive lights. Puts my money back in pocket and walks away.

 :lol

So he deals in vintage cutting lathes and the like. How very coincidental... not that I'm drawing any unwarranted conclusions, of course. Oh no.

An aside: this thread is going some way to restoring my faith in this desperately troubled forum and the vast majority of the posters therein. This is one of the things we do like no other board. Because no other board can.

You know, Andrew is right.  There is some serious sleuthing going on in this thread!   :police:

Just throwing my two cents in.  As a guy who owns a record store, it's rather shocking to see the amount of unused acetate blanks from this era that are still out there.  At times, collections of records have walked in the door with stacks of these things in the middle of the box.  Aside from radio stations, these Presto blanks were also available to the general public for use with consumer-grade recording lathes.

I have read somewhere that the lacquer does dry out over time, making them difficult to record on, but I have no personal experience trying this.

...and he'd know how to spell Beach Boys.

Word

I don't post a lot here, and when I do it's usually to provide factual or contextual information.  I try to avoid the editorialization that sometimes plagues this board -- and that more than one time has had me debating leaving for good.  But as the owner of a record and memorabilia collection (including quite a few acetates) that will very likely pay for my son's college tuition, I feel an obligation to the members of this board and to the hobby in general to raise a red flag when I see something that is of dubious authenticity / provenance.  Back in the 1980's I was burned by the purchase of a number of Beach Boys acetates that now appear to be either a) outright fakes, b) deejay dub plates for private use, or at best, c) in-house copies made for a radio station library -- but in any case likely worth quite less than what I paid for them.  When a Beatles acetate with identical markings to those appeared on the Steve Hoffman board I was quick to share my experience and warn potential buyers.

If this acetate is proven to be a fake it possibly has even more serious implications for the Beatles collecting world, as that "Ask Me Why" acetate is probably valued in the thousands of dollars.  And it opens up a lot of potential charges related to the sale of that acetate -- which as far as I know have no statute of limitations that would apply to the 2004 sale should the buyer wish to pursue them.

I agree, it's great to see us all band together to protect our hobby.

Lee

Like these (courtesy of the website www.discopatrick.com):

(http://www.discopatrick.com/Disco%20Acetates-4/41.jpg)
(http://www.discopatrick.com/Disco%20Acetates-4/40.jpg)

I can add little to this type of sleuthing, but if one is looking for the "radio station" angle in how a disc like this could have been cut at any time (e.g. LOOOONG after 1962), the seller, who doesn't have very many recent auctions, did try to auction off a mixing board that he admits was used at a radio station:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ARRAKIS-2000SC-PROFESSIONAL-BROADCAST-IN-GOOD-CONDITION-WITH-POWER-SUPPLY-/252170485519?hash=item3ab6883f0f:g:KD8AAOSwMmBVxSob

I'm the first to say this is proof of nothing. The guy could have a legit acetate and also have come across a mixing board from a radio station. The mixing board looks far newer than 1962, probably 70s or early 80s I would guess.

I wonder what the chances are that this record wasn't cut like a few months ago, but was cut, say, in the 80s. Which of course would still make it rather worthless. I wonder if playing it would lend credence to any particular theory. (e.g. If it plays beginning to end like the million grey-market Hite Morgan compilations going back to the 70s, versus having extraneous pre-song or post-song session tape material that wasn't circulating or still isn't).

The guy appears to be offering little detail in the acetate auction, which at first I figured would absolve him of any complaints. The wording "original" could be taken a number of ways (e.g. "an original 1962 recording on a disc cut this afternoon"). But he also says it has been in his collection since the early 60s, which would be the problem.

While I can understand the difficulty in coming across something that may truly be rare, wanting (or needing) to sell it but not being an expert in the field, I certainly wouldn't get anywhere near this auction unless the description could offer more evidence/provenance, etc.

Maybe I need to bone up on my early era BB history, but is there even a particularly compelling reason that they would have cut an acetate solely of the Hite Morgan version of this song back in early 1962? I know stuff could be cut to acetates for all sorts of reasons (demo-ing for others, for publishing/copyright purposes, etc.), but I wonder about that as well.

Are there any other acetates from this era that have a label showing "H. Morgan"?

I don't even collector old memorabilia like this but find this stuff interesting.

Sale has ended due to 'error'.

Result.

Nice job guys!

It appears the auction has been ended by the seller.

PF beat me to it.

After reading all of this I retracted my bid of 400$ and the highest bid left was $59 or something. The seller then ended the auction and has put a new one up where you can buy it now for 1200$.

Wow, and the new auction didn't even alter the wording of the description at all. If the guy would just remove "original" and the reference to being in his collection since the early 60s, and just sold it as-is, it would be clean. Of course, then nobody would bid on it.  :lol

Nice work, everyone. Now let's hope that there is some way to revive the old Beach Boys Central concept so the future of access to all the music will be what we'd all like it to be--a reasonable democratic process that promotes the widest possible access and a platform for non-exploitative profit.

Well, it may very well be the "original demo" of "Surfin' Safari" on the acetate, and maybe the blank acetate has been in his collection since the early '60s?...

If I took a CD of the Hite Morgan sessions, and recorded the "Surfin'" demo on my reel-to-reel deck to a vintage reel of Scotch 101 recording tape, I suppose I could sell it as "an early 1960's reel-to-reel tape containing the original demo of 'Surfin'" if I worded it just right.  :-\

I breathed a sigh of relief when the listing was ended prematurely but am a bit flummoxed by the fact that it'e been re-listed.

As Lee implies, this chap could offer a genuine 1962 acetate containing a demo of U2's forthcoming single next week…

Just looked at the sellers eBay User ID and realized I've met this person on a few occasions, but in the context of radio, not in the context of Beach Boys collecting. He seemed like a very nice upstanding guy. I've sent him a message asking about the typewriting on the label, as well as how he acquired this item in the early sixties.

The width of the dead wax is a function of both the length of the recording and how closely the grooves are spaced together, which can be varied. As a result, comparing the width of the dead wax to the width of the label is not necessairly an accurate way to determine the diameter of a record.

Looking at his other sales he had some Elvis acetates that went for $1500 and it matches this sale from last year....

http://www.popsike.com/ELVIS-PRESLEY-RARE-SUN-RECORDS-ACETATES-OF-HIS-FIVE-45-RPM-SUN-RELEASES/251569203543.html

A 3 day auction with only one bid?

The price does not match the like of this eBay sale...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Elvis-Presley-complete-set-of-ORIGINAL-1950s-Sun-45s-NEAR-MINT-/181861399656?hash=item2a57c8bc68:g:z4IAAOSwrklVebci

"You are buying a complete set of Elvis Presley records on rare acetates originally recorded by Sam Phillips at Sun Records recording studio in Memphis, Tenn."

Very carefully worded.  The "complete set of Elvis Presley records" was most definitely "originally recorded by Sam Phillips at Sun Records".  The prepositional phrase "on rare acetates" doesn't necessarily apply to the "originally recorded..." portion of the sentence.

Lee

Having sold some things on eBay and having run into countless situations from buyers, I think it's interesting if the seller of this record is trying parse the wording of his auctions, because eBay nearly always errs on the side of buyer. I once had an auction where a buyer said something wasn't included that was never advertised as included, and the auction even had a specific notation saying this additional item was "NOT INCLUDED", yet when the buyer filed a claim, eBay blindly sided with the buyer. Eventually sorted it out, but the system is set up to favor the buyer. I've even had buyers attempt pretty clear fraud and it's tough to get eBay to do anything about it. But if a buyer says *anything* is off at all about what they bought, it's immediately the seller's responsibility to just suck it up.

I only say this to point out that *if*, and it's a big if, *if* buyers in some of these scenarios described above complained and asked for their money back, I'm pretty sure eBay would force the seller to do it.

There must just be some deep-pocketed, yet less discerning collectors out there.

Wow. I'm completely ignorant of all subject matter discussed
 here but am wildly impressed.

Here's the message I sent to the seller:

Got a question for you. All the blank Presto discs I've seen came with the label pasted on. As a result, when they have been used the recording info is handwritten on the label. So I can't figure out how the info is typewritten on this Presto label.
Also, since this has been in your collection for years, where and from whom did you originally obtain this acetate?

And here's the response I received:

I guess some Presto labels came separate when recording studios purchased a box at a time?
I have a couple like this in my collection from various sources.
I made a promise when I obtained this Beach Boys acetate that I would not tell people the source but will give that information to the buyer.
I can tell you it was from someone in the industry.

So... no provenance until you've coughed up the bucks. I call bullshit on that.  As for the "I guess...", well...

You have to admire someone keeping that sort of promise for longer than 50 years. On the other hand ...

More kind of murky wording from the same seller regarding an acetate:

Here's your chance to bid and win a Bill Haley studio acetate recording for the song "Shake Rattle Roll"!!! I've had this acetate in my collection for over 40 years.

Wonder if he has any Robert Johnson acetates?

Wonder if he has any Smile acetates ?

Just give him a little more time.  :-D

Emily, I couldn't find that on eBay. Could you include a link?

Just search 'Bill Haley acetate'...
Different seller from what I can see but that may be as I didn't have my reading glasses on...  :3d

My mistake. I'm not an eBay user, so I assumed the listings on the same page as the OP were the same seller but they were actually "more like this":
http://m.ebay.com/itm/BILL-HALEY-AND-HIS-COMETS-1954-ACETATE-RECORDING-SHAKE-RATTLE-ROLL-/151873032528?_trkparms=aid%253D222007%2526algo%253DSIC.MBE%2526ao%253D1%2526asc%253D20150519202348%2526meid%253D146f05560e154619826ac54a137e6bb0%2526pid%253D100408%2526rk%253D9%2526rkt%253D15%2526sd%253D252185697042&_trksid=p2056116.c100408.m2460

Note the plain, typewritten label... :)

Well, we're really off the Beach Boys topic, but on the original US Decca 45, "Shake, Rattle and Roll" was backed by "ABC Boogie," not "Dim, Dim the Lights."  I have a copy of the original 45.  The German release on the Brunswick label had "Dim, Dim the Lights" on the flip side.

My musical horizons expand beyond the Beach Boys...

The "SURFIN SAFARI THE BEACHBOYS ORIGINAL DEMO ACETATE H. MORGAN BRIAN WILSON" US $1,200 Buy It Now listing "was ended by the seller because the item is no longer available."

Well gosh and golly... wonder why ?