https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Wed, 06 May 2026 18:24:32 +0000 Tue, 16 Apr 2019 05:09:36 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 360 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=932 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum//images/Top-40-Music-on-CD-Forum-Logo.png https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51684&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51684 Author: KentT
Subject: 932
Posted: 16 April 2019 at 5:09am

Nashville pressings of this would have if legitimate, been
pressed at Southern Plastics (now United Record Pressing).]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2019 05:09:36 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51684&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51684 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51683&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51683 Author: Paul Haney
Subject: 932
Posted: 16 April 2019 at 4:06am

jebsib wrote: Never knew until the other day that "Isn't She Lovely" actually did earn a Billboard chart ranking back in 1977: AC #23. Was bowled over!

Billboard did allow album cuts on the AC charts.

"Love Song" by Elton John peaked at #18 in 1976 and "More
Than A Woman" by the Bee Gees peaked at #39 in 1978.

Edited by Paul Haney]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2019 04:06:44 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51683&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51683 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51682&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51682 Author: jebsib
Subject: 932
Posted: 15 April 2019 at 10:06am

Never knew until the other day that "Isn't She Lovely" actually did earn a
Billboard chart ranking back in 1977: AC #23. Was bowled over!]]> Mon, 15 Apr 2019 10:06:58 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51682&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51682 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51680&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51680 Author: prisdeej
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 12:26pm

Yah Shure wrote: * The "SINGLE VERSION 3:26" and "ALBUM VERSION 5:00" designations are conveniently right where the matrix numbers and listed times would be on the "Sir Duke" promo. I have also never seen the numeral "5" in a font like that on any legit 1976 or 1977 Tamla promo 45 pressed in Nashville.

What struck me as odd is I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "single
version" on a 45 RPM record, much less ever. ]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 12:26:51 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51680&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51680 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51679&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51679 Author: AndrewChouffi
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 11:37am

Thanks everybody!!

Andy]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 11:37:19 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51679&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51679 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51678&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51678 Author: Yah Shure
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 10:36am

There's no question it's a fantasy item. As Aaron says, the "6"s are different and the fonts don't match. I compared the scans to my promo 45s of "I Wish" and "Sir Duke", and the bogus mock-up was lifted directly from the latter. There are several additional giveaways:

* The title fonts on Nashville-pressed promos on both "I Wish" and "Sir Duke" are the same font and same size as the artist fonts. The "ISN'T SHE LOVELY" is in a smaller font size than the artist.

* The quotation mark fonts around the song titles of the above two promos match. The ones on the fantasy item are entirely different.

* The "SINGLE VERSION 3:26" and "ALBUM VERSION 5:00" designations are conveniently right where the matrix numbers and listed times would be on the "Sir Duke" promo. I have also never seen the numeral "5" in a font like that on any legit 1976 or 1977 Tamla promo 45 pressed in Nashville.

* Ditto for the "LOVELY 1" sitting right where the "T 54281F" catalog number would be.

* The discogs label scans are monochrome, which obscures any definition in the playing area, thus making it even more difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between a legit promo pressing and a photoshopped paste job.

* The fact that the fantasy item appears on a typeset Tamla promo label at all. Even if Motown ever did arrange to have a promo 45 sent or hand-delivered to a very, very select number of key reporting stations, it would never have gotten to the typesetting stage for the labels. You'd have been looking either at acetate copies or plain white-label (test pressing) copies with handwritten title and artist. No way would an independent like Motown have spent the additional bucks to have the facility in Nashville do typesetting for a pressing run of only a handful of copies.

I worked for a major independent distributor in Minneapolis at the time all of the singles from Songs In The Key Of Life were issued. We got every promo item Motown sent out, including 45s, LPs, posters and other in-store display items, all of which were delivered to my office. An "Isn't She Lovely" promo 45 was never among them.

Edited by Yah Shure]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 10:36:43 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51678&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51678 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51677&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51677 Author: aaronk
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 8:53am

I'm also going with fantasy item. Some of the label was likely scanned from a different Stevie Wonder 45, but you can see places where the fonts don't match. For instance "Single Version 3:26" looks like a different font and even looks crookedly pasted in. The 6s also look different between the run time and copyright date.]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 08:53:18 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51677&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51677 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51676&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51676 Author: KentT
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 8:43am

Yes, it is either a bootleg or fantasy item. Tamla wasn't
allowed to even service a promo 45. Catalog number prefix
on that 45 isn't Tamla's. If this had been serviced, the
station I worked at would have gotten copies. Motown was
very excellent about Promo 45 single service. Always got
them dependably, and major act LP discs from them.

Edited by KentT]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 08:43:00 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51676&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51676 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51675&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51675 Author: AndrewChouffi
Subject: 932
Posted: 13 April 2019 at 7:16am

Bump this thread!

I noticed on Discogs a picture of a "promo 45" of "Isn't She Lovely".

Is this picture a clever bootleg?

Any information?

It's shown on YouTube also.

Andy]]> Sat, 13 Apr 2019 07:16:25 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=51675&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#51675 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=27569&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#27569 Author: sriv94
Subject: 932
Posted: 26 August 2010 at 12:30pm

Jeff H. wrote: It's rather ironic that Stevie wouldn't allow an edited version of "Isn't She Lovely" to be released as a single. The other two singles released, "Another Star" and "As" were both dramatically edited down from their original LP lengths when released as 45's. Both of those singles barely scraped the bottom half of the top 40.

In the case of "As" it's just a very early fade. I Don't remember the LP version of "Another Star" to know if the 45 was an edit or a fade.]]> Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:30:54 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=932&PID=27569&title=promo-45-of-isnt-she-lovely#27569