| Author |
|
Tim Lyman
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: 18 June 2006 at 2:09pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Pat,
Your database entry for "96 Tears" lists two variations for the Cameo 45. One has a stated running time of (2:53) but actually runs (2:40), and the other states a running time of (2:38) but actually runs (2:40).
I have a third 45 variation which has a stated running time of (2:38) but actually runs (2:56). This version is identical to the version that appeared on the 96 Tears vinyl LP.
Tim
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Grant
MusicFan
Joined: 12 October 2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 211
|
| Posted: 18 June 2006 at 3:44pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tim Lyman wrote:
Hi Pat,
Your database entry for "96 Tears" lists two variations for the Cameo 45. One has a stated running time of (2:53) but actually runs (2:40), and the other states a running time of (2:38) but actually runs (2:40).
I have a third 45 variation which has a stated running time of (2:38) but actually runs (2:56). This version is identical to the version that appeared on the 96 Tears vinyl LP.
Tim |
|
|
I don't know about the times, I have long lost the 45 I grew up with, and cannot locate another. But, I did once have the LP version on CD.
What I remember about the 45 I grew up with is thet it ran slower than any version I have heard on CD, including the Cameo-Parkway box. What's up here?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Brian W.
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: 20 October 2006 at 3:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tim Lyman wrote:
Hi Pat,
Your database entry for "96 Tears" lists two variations for the Cameo 45.
I have a third 45 variation which has a stated running time of (2:38) but actually runs (2:56). This version is identical to the version that appeared on the 96 Tears vinyl LP.
Tim |
|
|
Tim, what is the catalog number on your 45 with the LP version?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Tim Lyman
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: 20 October 2006 at 6:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Brian W. wrote:
Tim, what is the catalog number on your 45 with the LP version?
|
|
|
C-428-A. The matrix # in the runout groove is C428A.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Brian W.
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: 20 October 2006 at 1:32pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hmm, interesting. There's a poster on BSN that says his original Cameo 45 from 1966 is the album version as well.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BillCahill
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: 29 October 2006 at 6:48am | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is a tough one for me to figure out. My two Cameo copies sound totally different. Of course, one could be a bootleg. It doesn't LOOK like a bootleg but it wouldn't surprise me.
Copy 1 has a copyright date of 1963 on the label (Cameo didn't bother to print new labels each year) and is written by Randy Martinez. The sound on it is the highest quality I've ever heard for the song, as if it came straight from a master. I believe future pressings including the album versions compressed it a little more to cover up all his mike pops, which were strong enough to knock some needles out of the grooves. Copy 2 has a copyright date of 1960 on the label and is written by the Mysterians. (As all future ABCKO reissues said). The quality is not so great and it could be a boot. Sounds like the more compressed full length version faded early. It has the full length time (2:54) on the label but fades out at 2:40.
Maybe somebody else has more definitive infomation.
Anyway, I would suspect there are many boots, and possibly slightly different speeds here and there depending on the pressing plant. We all know that Cameo wasn't the best run company, especially by 1966..
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BillCahill
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: 29 October 2006 at 6:49am | IP Logged
|
|
|
(Correction) 2:53 not 2:54. Typo.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Brian W.
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: 29 October 2006 at 2:23pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
BillCahill wrote:
| Copy 1 has a copyright date of 1963 on the label (Cameo didn't bother to print new labels each year) and is written by Randy Martinez. |
|
|
Is Copy 1 the full-length album version?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BillCahill
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: 29 October 2006 at 2:35pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Both copies fade at 2:40
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndrewChouffi
MusicFan
Joined: 24 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1091
|
| Posted: 29 October 2006 at 8:20pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Bill,
Did it actually say 'Randy Martinez' or *Rudy* Martinez?
If the 45 is handy could you re-check it for me?
Andy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Todd Ireland
MusicFan
Joined: 16 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4219
|
| Posted: 13 March 2007 at 12:43pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Pat:
Since it appears the 45 pressings of "96 Tears" running 2:40 are an early fade of the 2:56 length, I'm wondering if the Abkco CD appearances in the database running 2:55-2:56 should contain the comment: (LP and long 45 length). What do you think?
Edited by Todd Ireland on 13 March 2007 at 12:45pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BillCahill
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: 17 March 2007 at 4:53pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
No it's Rudy not Randy.. typo
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TomDiehl1
MusicFan
Joined: 13 January 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 719
|
| Posted: 19 April 2008 at 1:45am | IP Logged
|
|
|
BillCahill wrote:
This is a tough one for me to figure out. My two Cameo copies sound totally different. Of course, one could be a bootleg. It doesn't LOOK like a bootleg but it wouldn't surprise me.
Copy 1 has a copyright date of 1963 on the label (Cameo didn't bother to print new labels each year) and is written by Randy Martinez. The sound on it is the highest quality I've ever heard for the song, as if it came straight from a master. I believe future pressings including the album versions compressed it a little more to cover up all his mike pops, which were strong enough to knock some needles out of the grooves. Copy 2 has a copyright date of 1960 on the label and is written by the Mysterians. (As all future ABCKO reissues said). The quality is not so great and it could be a boot. Sounds like the more compressed full length version faded early. It has the full length time (2:54) on the label but fades out at 2:40.
Maybe somebody else has more definitive infomation.
Anyway, I would suspect there are many boots, and possibly slightly different speeds here and there depending on the pressing plant. We all know that Cameo wasn't the best run company, especially by 1966.. |
|
|
I find it odd that what I assume is the first version, lists a 1963 copyright date on the label while the 2nd later issue shows a 1960 copyright date?
I recently came into posession of a copy of this 45 with the last Cameo Parkway label style with the red and orange, it runs 2:40 (Label states 2:38), credits The Mysterians as the writers, no copyright date on the label, but is definitely an original pressing, with bell sound and audio matrix stamped in the trail out area.
__________________
Live in stereo.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 19 April 2008 at 12:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I didn't like "96 Tears" quite enough to buy as a current, but loved the follow-up, "I Need Somebody." So I bought the "stereo" 96 Tears LP. The pressing defects and the rechanneling prompted me to return it in exchange for the "I Need Somebody" 45 and a couple of others. A few months later, I bought the "96 Tears" 45, which had already transitioned to the new Cameo label by then (left, below, the one Tom mentioned above.) I was later given the used Cameo copy on the right.
Tom, while I only have the above two variations of "96 Tears," I'll cite a couple examples of the varying copyright dates from another Cameo 45 that followed it by a few months. "Harlem Shuffle" was a big regional hit in the Plains states and the Upper Midwest by The Fabulous Flippers, a Lawrence, Kansas group that constantly toured the entire region. "Harlem Shuffle," like "96 Tears," was a regional master picked up by Cameo. And it, too, produced a confusing variety of label and sonic variations. The four copies I have are all different in some way or another.
There were two versions of "Harlem Shuffle:" A pseudo-"live" version that was the airplay hit, and a studio version that was an entirely different recording. Pictured below are two promo variations of the "live" version. The Monarch pressing on the left bears a "Copyright 1960" notation, with no mention of Parkway. The song title is on the top, with the group name at the bottom. The more-typical Cameo pressing on the right has the title and artist positions swapped, and has "Copyright 1963 Cameo-Parkway Records, Inc." at the bottom. Both of these "live" versions show "Harlem Shuffle" as the B-side, with C-439-B in the dead wax.
The copy on the left below looks similar to the one on the right above, but "Harlem Shuffle" is now the A-side on the label, and the publishers have flip-flopped. This is the studio version, as is the Columbia-pressed stock copy on the right below... which still has "Shuffle" listed as the B-side. Both of these copies carry the 1963 copyright date, and both show C-439-B-2R in the dead wax.
So it looks like the "96 Tears" fiasco was not an isolated case. I agree with Bill's statement that Cameo wasn't very well-run after the label's 1965 sale. Couple that cluelessness with product being farmed out to several different pressing plants, and the result is chaos (and discussion board fodder 40-plus years later.) :)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: 19 April 2008 at 3:59pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Interesting that all your promo copies are the red stock label with "not for sale" printed. Every C-P promo I've ever seen was white label with the exception of the C-P distributed Lucky 11 label (Terry Knight & Pack) which were the stock green label with promo info added.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 19 April 2008 at 6:17pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hykker, there were at least a few more to come. This period was toward the end of the red label's run, so it is entirely possible that the print stock of white labels for the promos may have been depleted by that point, assuming that the logos were pre-printed. But the promo-on-stock-label practice continued even with the redesigned 1967 logo. Some of the Lucky Elevens also fell during this period.
While the Seger single below gives a preview of things to come, the Gingold record takes more than a giant step backwards (ditto for its B-side, "I've Got The Rudy Vallee Blues.") Exactly what were they smokin' in the A & R office? Love the "(we think)" disclaimer.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: ? & The Mysterians "96 Tears"
