Given all this, is there a (early) KLF record *without* any history? (/me hopes not!)
-----Original Message----- From: Jon Doe [mailto:jondoe@clsmweb.fsnet.co.uk] Sent: 29 June 2003 11:02 To: munkie@cloud9ine.com; All bound for Mu-Mu Land. Subject: Re: [KLF] Re: KLF 4R strangeness
cant help much here but Orlake is a pressing plant (was, went bust about 2 years ago, sold on etc)as is Damont, so at some point this looks like the pressing plant was chnged as you cant have one side pressed in one place and the other somewhere else without usually paying to get the metalwork back.
At 19:04 28/06/2003, Chris Peel wrote:
KLF 004 R A / ORLAKE KLF 004 R B (the R and B are scratched over what look like a T and an A) / DAMONT
my copy is like this, i assume it was cheaper to use the pressing plate from the KLF004T a side, rather than to re-master it.
KLF 004 R A / ORLAKE 'KLF 004 R B' scratched out and 'KLF 004 R B' written separately next to it) / 'DAMONT' scratched out and '9J4 79' written underneath it.
that's weird, given the scarcity of this 12" i wouldn't
assume they
pressed it twice in 1989.
if you play the b side, is it really the correct (original wtil) mix, or could it be mispressed with something else? or perhaps it was a bad run that was discarded? is the quality of the pressing as good as the first one?
or could it be yet another 2001/2002 (counterfeit) re-press? when did you buy it?
cheers
Robert
_______________________________________________ KLF mailing list KLF@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-> bin/mailman/listinfo/klf
_______________________________________________ KLF mailing list KLF@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/klf