Announced Double Disc Records?

[victorIIvictor]

I can't name one, but I bring them up as a likely reason for the announcements being physically removed from the masters. In case I wasn't clear, I am referring to the "scheme" records with the non-standard (pardon the pun) spindle holes.

As JohnM succintly described these in this thread:

"This refers to a group of Chicago-based companies with interlocking boards of directors, whose primary function was to liquidate 'cut out' Columbia records by relabelling and drilling out the records. Ads were then placed in magazines offering a dozen records for $6 with a free talking machine. Of course, the Columbia-made [scheme] phonograph had a large spindle locking the purchaser into buying only the records drilled for that particular machine. Other brands include Harmony and United, which used progressively larger holes."

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=1634

I would expect these labels to use a Columbia master from 1903, and I would also expect them to want the telltale announcement removed from the master. Since Columbia produced these labels' records, as well as the machines, Columbia would also have an incentive to remove the announcement.

As for the scheme labels:

Harmony was controlled by Columbia from 1909 to about 1916. Columbia did not revive the label until 1925. To the best of my knowledge, there were no Harmony records, at least in the USA, ca. 1920, and certainly none using Columbia masters.

Standard was in business from 1905 to 1917. I'm sure Standard would've been pleased to issue a master only two years old, as in your example.

Diamond was in business from 1906 to 1916 (although I don't know when Columbia took over their production from Leeds and Catlin).

Aretino was in business from about 1907 to 1914.

I don't have operating dates for United handy, but i imagine it overlapped with these.

All I know about Republic I found here:

http://www.mainspringpress.com/murray_labels.html

[victorIIvictor]

Wolfe wrote, "Can you name one? An old Columbia master from ca. 1903 that was issued on a ca. 1920 Harmony or other client label?"

I should have looked at the Columbia Master Books first.

"The Whistling Coon," matrix 211-9-11, was issued on Columbia 211, Columbia A292, Columbia (UK) D4, Harmony A292, and Manhattan 211.

There are many, many other examples.

By the way, Nathan,what are the numbers under the label on your copy of Columbia A452? The Columbia Master Books only show an unannounced matrix for this release.

[NateO]

By the way, Nathan,what are the numbers under the label on your copy of Columbia A452? The Columbia Master Books only show an unannounced matrix for this release.

The numbers for A452 are 1805-2-12, and the disc is self announced by J.W. Myers.
Could you also check on Columbia A247, with the numbers 397-13? This is the disc I suspect was announced. I believe it is by Myers again, but the label only states "Baritone Solo". I understand why Columbia would not give credit on a client label, but I wonder why they didn't give credit on their own label?

Do you suppose anyone, upon hearing an announcement one of their new Double Disc records turned around and said "Oh, Ethel, how about that announcement? It's so old fashioned!" We're only a few year off from when announcements were still the norm.

That is a good point. I'm not sure how long some of these announced discs remained in the catalogue, but if they lasted until the mid 1910's, wouldn't it make the Columbia catalogue look dated?

[Wolfe]

I should have looked at the Columbia Master Books first.

"The Whistling Coon," matrix 211-9-11, was issued on Columbia 211, Columbia A292, Columbia (UK) D4, Harmony A292, and Manhattan 211.

There are many, many other examples.

Okay, thanks!

My question wasn't intended as a challenge, it was a genuine inquiry. If I ever come across a Harmony with song from 1904 on it, I won't be surprised.

[Rastus10]

In regard to how late Columbia records had announcements, which I didn't see answered, that, as well as how long Victor retained them has always fascinated me.

The "latest" Columbia single-sided record I have with an announcement is "Always in the Way," numbered 1692, I believe.

I do not have the Columbia master book, but I imagine that would be late 1903/early 1904?

I love the announcements on the double-discs. Victor's policy of re-recording things much too often makes it look as though the firm had an attention deficit and was decidedly amateurish in its obsessive approach to "staying current." That mindset might also explain why their recordings are so sterile in their supposed "perfection" from about 1906 onwards. Columbia's are clunky, and spontaneous by comparison--and I personally like that. In retrospect, Columbia's stodgy policy of re-issuing recordings from 1901 onwards on Double Disc is charming...105 years later. I also don't have to worry about finding as many single-sided discs of theirs as one would for Victor, especially that mess of early to mid-1903 with the matrix transition.

[Victrolacollector]

I think many of the early pressings were basically similiar or the same as the cylinder records, particularly in the early years.

[Wolfe]

Columbia's stodgy policy of re-issuing recordings from 1901 onwards on Double Disc is charming...105 years later.

It's not just stodgy, they needed product to spread around on the double discs. I have many Victors of the 1910-ish period that have a "current" selection on one side and the other being something that was issued years earlier.

[Rastus10]

Well, Columbia certainly used some of their matrices that ante-dated 1904 more generously than Victor. That is what I should have stated originally.

[victorIIvictor]

Wolfe wrote, "My question wasn't intended as a challenge, it was a genuine inquiry."

I did take it as a challenge, but as a friendly challenge, I assure you. What I mean is, I wanted to make sure what I said was correct. Somewhere (probably Sutton's American Record Labels and Companies) I recall reading that 1904 Columbia matrices showed up on the post-1925 version (!) of the Harmony label. But I don't have that book handy, so I wanted to figure out for myself when the "scheme" labels were offered, specifically Harmony. After I did all that research, I figured I might as well post it. Then I realized I could have answered your question more succinctly by just looking in the Columbia Master Book. Anyway, I'm glad it was helpful.

Nathan wrote, "The numbers for A452 are 1805-2-12, and the disc is self announced by J.W. Myers."

On page 231, the Columbia Master Book shows this matrix as being originally issued on Columbia 1807, and then reissued on Columbia A452. Interestingly, the Master Book does not show this matrix as being announced. (I have a theory about why, below.) The immediately surrounding matrices were listed in Columbia's August, 1904 catalog.

Nathan wrote, "Could you also check on Columbia A247, with the numbers 397-13? This is the disc I suspect was announced. I believe it is by Myers again, but the label only states "Baritone Solo". I understand why Columbia would not give credit on a client label, but I wonder why they didn't give credit on their own label?"

On page 105 of the Master Book, your take 13 saw issue on Columbia 397, Columbia A247, and Standard A247. The selection is "Near, my God, to Thee," **announced** and performed by J.W. Myers. To give you an idea of the date, matrix 335 appears on a 1902 Climax Records list, and matrix 398 appears in the December 1904 Columbia catalog.

Because take 13 was re-issued on both Columbia A247 and Standard A247, I will theorize that the announcement was removed because of the reissue on Standard, so as not to tip off consumers of "scheme" records that they were purchasing a reissue of elderly material. Probably Columbia A247 and Standard A247 came out simultaneously, so the announcement was purged for both issues. I would imagine the compilers of the Master Book had access to the original issue only, and never heard your reissued version with the announcement removed, which is why it is not noted in the Master Book.

As to why Columbia didn't credit Myers on Columbia A247… 1) maybe Columbia used the same linotype block for the credits of both the Columbia re-issue and the Standard issue, since Columbia produced both labels… 2) perhaps Myers wasn't credited on the original issue either and the Columbia staff at the time of reissue didn't know who performed (most of my pre-"Magic Notes" label Columbias lack performer credits… 3) maybe Myers was exclusively signed to a rival label by then. It's hard to say, but my first explanation is the most likely.

Rastus10 wrote, "The "latest" Columbia single-sided record I have with an announcement is "Always in the Way," numbered 1692…."

Columbia 1692 appeared in the February 1904 Columbia catalog. Matrix 1848-1, J. W. Myers singing "Meet Me in St. Louis, Louis," is self announced and also the last matrix in the Master Books showing an announcement; it appeared in the September 1904 Columbia catalog.

Seven numbers later, Matrix 1855 [no take number shown] appears on NINE labels, NONE of them Columbia: Aretino, Climax, D&R, Harmony, Harvard, Lakeside, Oxford, Silvertone, and Star. I can see why Columbia would not wish to continue announcing their recordings as "Columbia Records"!

Best wishes, Mark

[NateO]

On page 105 of the Master Book, your take 13 saw issue on Columbia 397, Columbia A247, and Standard A247. The selection is "Near, my God, to Thee," **announced** and performed by J.W. Myers. To give you an idea of the date, matrix 335 appears on a 1902 Climax Records list, and matrix 398 appears in the December 1904 Columbia catalog.

Because take 13 was re-issued on both Columbia A247 and Standard A247, I will theorize that the announcement was removed because of the reissue on Standard, so as not to tip off consumers of "scheme" records that they were purchasing a reissue of elderly material. Probably Columbia A247 and Standard A247 came out simultaneously, so the announcement was purged for both issues. I would imagine the compilers of the Master Book had access to the original issue only, and never heard your reissued version with the announcement removed, which is why it is not noted in the Master Book.

As to why Columbia didn't credit Myers on Columbia A247… 1) maybe Columbia used the same linotype block for the credits of both the Columbia re-issue and the Standard issue, since Columbia produced both labels… 2) perhaps Myers wasn't credited on the original issue either and the Columbia staff at the time of reissue didn't know who performed (most of my pre-"Magic Notes" label Columbias lack performer credits… 3) maybe Myers was exclusively signed to a rival label by then. It's hard to say, but my first explanation is the most likely.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions about that disc. My reissue is actually on the "Gold Band" label, so that dates it to the mid 1910s (when did they change labels?). I assumed the announcement was removed to avoid showing its age. Your theory with the client labels makes a good deal more sense.