Unopened copy of early Beatles Album...
doc_haynes
I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE BEATLES".
This record was released by Vee-Jay Records and has the number VJLP 1062 on
it's cover.
It contains the tracks;
I Saw Her Standing There, Misery, Anna, Chains, Boys and Love Me Do on side
one.
P.S. I Love You, Baby It's You, Do You Want To Know A Secret?, A Taste Of
Honey, There Is A Place and Twist And Shout on side two.
The cellophane is still intact and never opened on this album. I was just
wondering if it may be worth anything?
If anyone has any useful information, please contact me...
Chris
doc_h...@yahoo.com
Jeff U.
news:38c7f11d$0$20...@wodc7nh1.news.uu.net...
> I have a question...
>
> I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE BEATLES".
> This record was released by Vee-Jay Records and has the number VJLP 1062
on
> it's cover.
> wondering if it may be worth anything?
> If anyone has any useful information, please contact me...
>
> Chris
Still sealed? Wow, I hope you do have an original, but unfortunately,
there's a 95% chance that it's a 70's re-issue/reproduction. Here's a link
to a site that will tell you everything you need to know on identifying an
original...
http://www.eskimo.com/~bpentium/beatles/intro/intro.html
Jeff U.
gfausel
doc_haynes wrote:
> I have a question...
>
> I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE BEATLES".
It is unquestionably a counterfeit. The white Stereophonic banner across the
top is a dead giveaway. Especially since the record is not Stereo!
Glenn Fausel
Ehtue
>doc_haynes wrote:
I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE BEATLES".
>
> It is unquestionably a counterfeit. The white Stereophonic banner across the
>top is a dead giveaway. Especially since the record is not Stereo!
How do you know Doc's record isn't stereo if it hasn't been opened?
Actually, it may not even be counterfeit. In the 70s, the album was
re-released. Or was it re-re-re-released by that time? Anyway, legitmate copies
were released in the 70s, in stereo (not to be confused with legitimate stereo
copies were released). For the later version, though, some songs from the
original were left off (Ask Me Why, Please Please Me) while others were added
(Love Me Do, P.S. I Love You). It's the same "stereo" you can hear on Capitol's
release called The Early Beatles. I think he might have one of those.
(Sorry, I missed the original post.... I only have the above quoted description
to go on. If there are other, tell-tale signs of counterfeit, please disregard
all the above. Either way, it's not the original record released by VJ,,, which
is probably what Doc was asking. But, it may not be strictly "counterfeit"
either.)
-Ehtue
Mr Daniel McEvoy
count. I am in the same frame of mind as the fabs themselves here thinketh
I. (Didn't John introduce Baby's in Black and didn't know what US lp it was
off?).
Start looking for a Gold Lable PPM and just file ITB in the pile that's
marked doesn't count.
Danny
Ehtue <eh...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000311021501...@ng-fk1.aol.com...
lennon fan
record collecting are:
a sealed first state issue of the Butcher cover Stereo version of
Yesterday and Today and:
a sealed Stereo original issue of Introducing The Beatles *vj*
these lps, both USA issues, are worth $20,000+ each.
I don't think the gold label PPM tops it, and besides, the British
didn't seal records in those days.
regards from lennonfan
v
Group: rec.music.beatles Date: Sat, Mar 11, 2000, 10:03am (EST-3) From:
thewalru...@free-beenet.co.uk (Mr Daniel McEvoy) Re: Unopened
copy of early Beatles Album...
Danny McEvoy
people would spend fortunes on it - more fool them - now the Butcher cover -
I take your point -
The thing that doesn't help those US lps is the shoddy quality, the don't
seem well crafted.... I'm really not talking out of my arse.... compare a
British copy of any album, say.... Badfinger's No Dice with a US one, and
the difference is phenomenal (sp?). The Us lps are all thin and floppy with
nasty middles, whilst the sleeves are all cardboardy and stiff and matt....
and the sides don't match... gimme a British *proper*album any day.
Danny
lennon fan <lenn...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:3535-38...@storefull-247.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Danny McEvoy
doesn't make it right... now the butcher cover - I take your point.
Actually US lps are generally shoddily produced, just compare say ,a us copy
of Badfinger's No Dice with a British one and it's obvious.
Us lps are all cardboardy and matt and stiff, and the record themselves are
all floppy with nasty middles.. gimme a nice shiny well crafted UK copy any
doc_haynes
> > I have a question...
> > I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE
BEATLES".
Glenn Fausel responded with the following;
> It is unquestionably a counterfeit. The white Stereophonic banner across
the
> top is a dead giveaway. Especially since the record is not Stereo!
Well, I have gone to a site that Jeff U. had directed me to and found the
ways of differentiating a counterfeit from an original.
That site is http://www.eskimo.com/~bpentium/beatles/intro/intro.html .
I also found my record listed there as the fourth listing under the
Stereo Covers Version 1 (look for VJ 1062 (1).SC3 or follow this link
http://www.eskimo.com/~bpentium/beatles/intro/vj1sc3.jpg.). It clearly shows
the white Stereophonic banner across the top (thanks anyways Glenn) and
lists the value of an authentic copy in VG+ condition at $7000 with Mint or
near Mint condition albums being worth more. I would say an unopened copy
might be considered Mint.
As it stands so far, the record I have seems to pass all but one of the
criteria for being authentic. Because it is unopened, I obviously cannot
tell whether or not the back cover is glossy paper stock or flat paper
stock. I have no plan at this time of taking the cellophane off to find out
either. If this record is valuable, then it being unopened would surely make
it even more so.
I still do not know whether or not this album is authentic, but I will
keep researching the matter. So I thank you for your help Jeff and anyone
else who has taken an interest in this subject. Any other information that
anyone might have would still be appreciated, just don't ask me to take the
cover off :o)
Chris
doc_h...@yahoo.com
lennon fan
thewalru...@totalise.co.uk (Danny McEvoy) Re: Unopened copy of
early Beatles Album...
Butcher cover - I take your point -
it's please please me minus 2 tracks, not unusual, because U.S. lps
usually had 10-12 tracks.
The thing that doesn't help those US lps is the shoddy quality, the
don't seem well crafted.... I'm really not talking out of my arse....
compare a British copy of any album, say.... Badfinger's No Dice with a
US one, and the difference is phenomenal (sp?).
with 70's pressings, I agree with you, but careful....the German and
Japanese vinyl lps beat the British issues by miles.
The Us lps are all thin and floppy with nasty middles, whilst the
sleeves are all cardboardy and stiff and matt.... and the sides don't
match... gimme a British *proper*album any day.
funny, here I totally disagree. I prefer the stiff cardboard to the
flimsy British covers. I like how the British often-laminated covers,
but they bend and crease too easily. and the way British record stores
used to stock them...eech....just the covers, with lps stored behind the
counter. after 50-60 rummagers, the covers looked like hell.
BTW, the original Beatles VJ was very thick vinyl, as thick as British
or German and very well pressed, as well. The master plates were done
for the 1st version VJs in July of '63. ...also the 60's British issues
are much better pressed than 70's & 80's issues, and they became cheap
by pressing them on thinner vinyl too. Check the black/yellow stereo
Parlophones compared to the silver/black stereo issues.
I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE
BEATLES".
It is unquestionably a counterfeit. The white Stereophonic banner across
the top is a dead giveaway. Especially since the record is not Stereo!
Danny McEvoy
it hadn't werked.
Danny
Tim Brent
BELO HORIZONTE,BRAZIL
United States 1,England 0 :P
Tim
------------------------
"With God as my witness,I thought turkeys could fly"
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
gfausel
doc_haynes wrote:
> In an earlier post I had written;
> > > I have a question...
> > > I have an unopened copy of the Beatles record, "INTRODUCING THE
> BEATLES".
>
> Glenn Fausel responded with the following;
> > It is unquestionably a counterfeit. The white Stereophonic banner across
> the
> > top is a dead giveaway. Especially since the record is not Stereo!
>
> Well, I have gone to a site that Jeff U. had directed me to and found the
> ways of differentiating a counterfeit from an original.
> That site is http://www.eskimo.com/~bpentium/beatles/intro/intro.html .
>
> I also found my record listed there as the fourth listing under the
> Stereo Covers Version 1 (look for VJ 1062 (1).SC3 or follow this link
> http://www.eskimo.com/~bpentium/beatles/intro/vj1sc3.jpg.). It clearly shows
> the white Stereophonic banner across the top (thanks anyways Glenn) and
> lists the value of an authentic copy in VG+ condition at $7000 with Mint or
> near Mint condition albums being worth more. I would say an unopened copy
> might be considered Mint.
>
> As it stands so far, the record I have seems to pass all but one of the
> criteria for being authentic. Because it is unopened, I obviously cannot
> tell whether or not the back cover is glossy paper stock or flat paper
> stock. I have no plan at this time of taking the cellophane off to find out
> either. If this record is valuable, then it being unopened would surely make
> it even more so.
>
> I still do not know whether or not this album is authentic, but I will
> keep researching the matter. So I thank you for your help Jeff and anyone
> else who has taken an interest in this subject. Any other information that
> anyone might have would still be appreciated, just don't ask me to take the
> cover off :o)
>
> Chris
> doc_h...@yahoo.com
Well, in all my years of collecting Beatles (back to the late 60's) that cover
was always considered counterfeit. As a matter of fact, in 1973 I bought 50
copies for $1 each at a K-Mart type store, all counterfeits. I will still go
with that idea, although there are a "few" copies of yours known to exist
according to Perry. The type of material used in the seal would tell a lot. If
not, I do not think many people would buy it un-opened. And the value would not
drop considerably. I tend to stay away from sealed albums, as resealing is very
easy. I have bought records that were "sealed", only to open them and find they
were used, and twice they were the wrong record.
If yours is original, congratulations. And I will be the first to admit I am
wrong if it is. Just don't bet the house on it!
Glenn