My point is that of my two copies with thr R suffix, one has take
numbers and one doesn't. So how com?
In the larger sense, does this tell us anything we need to know
(discographically speaking) about English Columbia's matrix numbering policies?
Steve Smolian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Warren" <richard.warren@xxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Discographical puzzle
Hi Steve,
3546 [original, no -R] has matrices A 612 and A 1186 for Boughton
and Martin, respectively, published April, 1925 (apparently no logs
survive to tell rec. date)
3546-R [copy also at Yale] is as you list: matrices are as you and
the book about Columbia 10-inch discs agree, Boughton recorded Aug.
26, 1926, Martin rec. Aug. 31, 1926. Columbias this age do not
usually show take numbers in the dead wax, so you're lucky this one
did on one side. The "R" does normally indicate a remake or replacement.
Best, Richard
At 11:04 AM 1/18/2008, you wrote:
I've two copies of English Columbia 3546 R. One side is The Faery
Song from Boughton's "Immortal Hour," matrix A 3551-5. The
reverse is Easthope Martin's song, "The Minstrel," matrix A
3817-1. The singer is Philip Heseltine.
The "R" indicates "remake," as far as I can tell, and replaces an
earlier, idenical coupling.
One copy has the take number after the matrix number in the dead
wax, the other the matrix number only.
What's going on here? Is one a dub? Any idea?
Steve Smolian