Uk Tamla Motown 45S

[Funky 4 Corners]

Can anyone tell me what the last UK TMG release was with the tall type face please? I guess into the late 600s?

[Denbo]

Can anyone tell me what the last UK TMG release was with the tall type face please? I guess into the late 600s?

I could do better if I were at home but off the top of my head, the latest one I might have is TMG 620.

Why? Do you only collect the 'flat back' G's as I call them?

Now the Demos continued with the 'flat back' G's for some time, even after the last 'flat back' G issue, whatever number that actually turns out to be.

Edited October 26, 2010 by denbo

[Guest s0ul45]

I think the last flat back TMG is 600 Shorty Long - that's if my eyesight and understanding of the question are both accurate. I think that the typeface of the demos remained the same up antil the first black demo TMG 867 although 868 was also a Green & White.

Edited October 26, 2010 by s0ul45

[Denbo]

I think the last flat back TMG is 600 Shorty Long - that's if my eyesight and understanding of the question are both accurate. I think that typeface remained the same up antil the first black demo TMG 867 although 868 wa a lso a Green & White.

Nah, you're definitely incorrect there. I know I have one at TMG 620 or perhaps even TMG 624. And there may be later ones than those.

Nice thought though, ending the 'flat backs' with the last of the first 100.

[Funky 4 Corners]

I think the last flat back TMG is 600 Shorty Long - that's if my eyesight and understanding of the question are both accurate. I think that the typeface of the demos remained the same up antil the first black demo TMG 867 although 868 was also a Green & White.

They go on further than 600, although I don't collect UK TMGs I have a few and have 639, `My Baby Must Be A Magician` with tall type face and a demo of 646, `I Am The Man For You Baby` with the TMG 646 in tall print but smaller lettering on the titles.

Edited October 26, 2010 by Keith Rylatt

[Denbo]

I have a few and have 639, `My Baby Must Be A Magician` with tall type face and a demo of 646, `I Am The Man For You Baby`, again tall face.

There you go, that's one more issue with a 'flat back' G that I didn't know about. Ta.

[Funky 4 Corners]

There you go, that's one more issue with a 'flat back' G that I didn't know about. Ta.

The reason I asked the question originally is a notion that these were the original pressings. In John Manship's guide he also quotes that up to TMG 703 they also have "Sold in the UK...." in small silver type printed on the push-out centre.

[Denbo]

The reason I asked the question originally is a notion that these were the original pressings. In John Manship's guide he also quotes that up to TMG 703 they also have "Sold in the UK...." in small silver type printed on the push-out centre.

A notion I believe to be true.

As for the "Sold in the UK. . . ", I'm not as certain about that aspect of the label design.

Might there be some with 'round back' G's also with the "Sold in the UK. . . " printed on the push-out centres? If so, then they are of no interest to me. It's 'flat back' G's or nothing for me, with or without the "Sold in the UK. . . ".

Nerdy or what?

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

They go on further than 600, although I don't collect UK TMGs I have a few and have 639, `My Baby Must Be A Magician` with tall type face and a demo of 646, `I Am The Man For You Baby` with the TMG 646 in tall print but smaller lettering on the titles.

646 might well have been the last one, Keith (and Dennis) I don;t have that myself in 'tall type' but I do have a 639 lin tall (the last one I have) and I don't have anything in tall after that, in a run of stockers and demos that is complete up to and including 680.

I also have all the non-reissues through to the end of the 600s and none of them are tall type. I think that EMI must have stopped using that font around the time they started to make more 45s with solid (i.e. non push out) centres.

I;'d be interested to know how many 'tall types' there are in total - I don;t think it amounts to a very big percentage of the overall catalogue once you get past 600.

Edited October 26, 2010 by TONY ROUNCE

[Denbo]

646 might well have been the last one, Keith (and Dennis) I don;t have that myself in 'tall type' but I do have a 639 lin tall (the last one I have) and I don't have anything in tall after that, in a run of stockers and demos that is complete up to and including 680.

I also have all the non-reissues through to the end of the 600s and none of them are tall type. I think that EMI must have stopped using that font around the time they started to make more 45s with solid (i.e. non push out) centres.

I;'d be interested to know how many 'tall types' there are in total - I don;t think it amounts to a very big percentage of the overall catalogue once you get past 600.

Sorry Tony, the following extract doesn't make sense?

I also have all the non-reissues through to the end of the 600s and none of them are tall type. I think that EMI must have stopped using that font around the time they started to make more 45s with solid (i.e. non push out) centres.

But didn't you just say you had a TMG 639 in 'tall type' (my 'flat back')?

Sorry if I missed something???

PS - Off to the Belgian 'Lowlander' on Drury Lane tonight if you fancy a pint, or two?

[Ted Massey]

will someone kindly post up some scans cause i have almost a full run up to 700 and i dont know what you trainspotters are on about:lol:

[Guest s0ul45]

Sorry I should have gone to specsavers.

I naively assumed that when a run of the slightly rounder G began the original type face ended. The very last issue I have with the flat face is TMG 638 and unlike Tony my 639 does not as do none of the subsequent issues.

If it helps the copies I have with the earlier typeface after 600 are 609, 614 (both issues), 622, 624, 627, 628, 630, and 638. Does this mean they were pressed up in both formats?

Was 585 the first to be pressed using the later typeface?

Chris.

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

Sorry Tony, the following extract doesn't make sense?

I also have all the non-reissues through to the end of the 600s and none of them are tall type. I think that EMI must have stopped using that font around the time they started to make more 45s with solid (i.e. non push out) centres.

But didn't you just say you had a TMG 639 in 'tall type' (my 'flat back')?

Sorry if I missed something???

PS - Off to the Belgian 'Lowlander' on Drury Lane tonight if you fancy a pint, or two?

Makes perfect sense to me - are you sure that you haven't been to the Lowlander already, mate?

In the previous sentence I said i had a full run of TMG600s up to 680. I then went on to say - although perhaps I could have expanded it more - that I also had all the non-reissues through to the end of the 600s i.e. that i don't own copies of the reissued things like ''Dancing In the Street/Quicksand', 'Get Ready/My Girl' etc.

I also have copies of a few things from pre-585 in 'flat back' e.g. 547 which was in catalogue for years after most of the records around it had been deleted. And I have a 600 without the 'Sold In Uk etc etc' across the central area - it too was in catalogue for a good number of years, and was still in catalogue after Shorty's next two UK singles had been deleted...

Edited October 27, 2010 by TONY ROUNCE

[FrankM]

Check out two label scans of TMG 609 here.

The Marvelettes When your Young and in love

[Funky 4 Corners]

Hopefully there are a couple of examples here. I'm not sure why the Edwin Starr has a smaller font for the title and the taller one for the release number. I thought it might me to do with the number of words in the title and they had to reduce it to fit it in but as the flip side is `My Weakness is You`, also in small font, my theory doesn't hold up as there are longer titles in tall print. Incidentally, while we're doing dirty anorak talk, what significance has the `K T` got? For the sane folk on the site, these are two small raised initials, under the label at each side of the centre hole. I understand they stand for Kentish Town, the location of the pressing plant but is there anything else? A subliminal message perhaps? Finally, the US Tamla label also had tall, `Columbia` print on the original pressings. These are styrene and generally rare.

[Sean Hampsey]

Check out two label scans of TMG 609 here.

The Marvelettes When your Young and in love

Neither of those are TALL condensend font settings, mate.

Here's a 579 that is a good example - Its also unusual in that its the 'older' condensed font, but has solid centre.

Sean

PS: KT = Kentish Town (Pressing Plant) with no subliminal message that I'm aware of.

[Funky 4 Corners]

Hi Sean

Thanks for the scan but I can't see any difference between yours and mine. The scan of the Earl Van Dyke below surely has got to be an original and the font is 3mm high. The same as the two scans I posted. It must be an optical illusion I think. The other scan below is a re-issue and the font is 2.5mm high and that is what I assumed was the re-issue.

[Funky 4 Corners]

Hi Again Sean

I've just realised that you were referring to the scans that FM posted. Sorry mate, I assume we are in agreement with `our` examples?

Cheers

Keith

Neither of those are TALL condensend font settings, mate.

Here's a 579 that is a good example - Its also unusual in that its the 'older' condensed font, but has solid centre.

Sean

PS: KT = Kentish Town (Pressing Plant) with no subliminal message that I'm aware of.

[Tony Smith]

The embossed "KT" refers to the band of purchase tax was to be charged on each record, was my understanding. Was there a pressing plant in Kentish Town? EMI's plant was in Hayes. Middlesex.

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

The embossed "KT" refers to the band of purchase tax was to be charged on each record, was my understanding. Was there a pressing plant in Kentish Town? EMI's plant was in Hayes. Middlesex.

...and your understanding is 100% spot-on, Tone.

EMI never had a pressing plant anywhere other than Hayes. As far as I know, the only non-Hayes pressed EMI 45s from the 60s are a few Beatles things that were contracted out to the likes of Decca and Pye to press when the Hayes plant just could not keep up with enough supply to meet the demand.

I have never heard of a pressing plant in Kentish Town. Any pressing plant, not just an EMI owned one...

[Denbo]

Hi Sean

Thanks for the scan but I can't see any difference between yours and mine. The scan of the Earl Van Dyke below surely has got to be an original and the font is 3mm high. The same as the two scans I posted. It must be an optical illusion I think. The other scan below is a re-issue and the font is 2.5mm high and that is what I assumed was the re-issue.

The Jimmy Ruffin scan on the left is not an original label print release and can only conclude that it is a re-issue with the same number.

The Four Tops scan in the posting above is an original label print release.

Look at the back of the 'G' on the TMG. If it's 'flat backed', it's an original label print issue.

If it has a 'rounded back', then it's a re-issue, or a 'repress' if you prefer but repressed after the font style on the label design had changed.

Can't say when that actually happened?

Hope this makes things clearer?

God, I feel like a right nerd now but hey, we all collect for a bunch of different reasons.

[Guest s0ul45]

The Jimmy Ruffin scan on the left is not an original label print release and can only conclude that it is a re-issue with the same number.

The Four Tops scan in the posting above is an original label print release.

Look at the back of the 'G' on the TMG. If it's 'flat backed', it's an original label print issue.

If it has a 'rounded back', then it's a re-issue, or a 'repress' if you prefer but repressed after the font style on the label design had changed.

Can't say when that actually happened?

Hope this makes things clearer?

God, I feel like a right nerd now but hey, we all collect for a bunch of different reasons.

If my memory serves me correctly 577 was another number that remained on catalogue a lot longer than most. (I think 555, 571 and 599 similarly) As a result I'm not certain it was ever deleted, and if it was, it was only for a short period and repromoted with its original number - as was 555 and 599. Subsequently 577 appears with both fonts. I'm not certain about 555 or 599 as I only have the earlier type pressing.

Why did the demos continue to carry the original typeface right up until 1973 when the issues appear to have changed around March 1968, if 646 is of the flat backed type?

Like yourself Tony my 547 has the rounded G as does 575, are there any other 'early' numbers?

As Sean says the 579 with a solid centre is rather unusual as I've not seen one that early. My earliest is 586.

Could either of you Tony's answer Ivor's question of a couple of weeks back about exactly how many demos were pressed for each number. Was it 250?

Thanks, Chris

[Funky 4 Corners]

Hi Denbo

I did state that the Jimmy Ruffin was a re-issue with small print.

Cheers

K

The Jimmy Ruffin scan on the left is not an original label print release and can only conclude that it is a re-issue with the same number.

The Four Tops scan in the posting above is an original label print release.

Look at the back of the 'G' on the TMG. If it's 'flat backed', it's an original label print issue.

If it has a 'rounded back', then it's a re-issue, or a 'repress' if you prefer but repressed after the font style on the label design had changed.

Can't say when that actually happened?

Hope this makes things clearer?

God, I feel like a right nerd now but hey, we all collect for a bunch of different reasons.

[Denbo]

Hi Denbo

I did state that the Jimmy Ruffin was a re-issue with small print.

Cheers

K

Yeah, no probs Keith, I was just reiterating whilst trying to get my point across.

I only collect the 'flat back' G font style on TMG releases and am trying to complete my attempts at having the first one hundred with that font style.

I MAY attempt to do the same from 600 to 699 once I've completed the first one hundred.

I am looking to obtain the following TMG numbers, with the original 'flat back' G font styles. If anybody can help, please PM me.

TMG 509

TMG 518

TMG 520

TMG 521

TMG 522

TMG 529

TMG 544

TMG 549

TMG 551

TMG 557

TMG 572

TMG 580

TMG 587

TMG 589

TMG 593

TMG 599

Can't be sure 'cos I'm not at home but my palmtop computer suggests that I have original 'flat back' G font styles on TMG's 650, 662, 669, and 699.

Will confirm that at the weekend, one way or the other.

Cheers,

Denbo.

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

If my memory serves me correctly 577 was another number that remained on catalogue a lot longer than most. (I think 555, 571 and 599 similarly) As a result I'm not certain it was ever deleted, and if it was, it was only for a short period and repromoted with its original number - as was 555 and 599. Subsequently 577 appears with both fonts. I'm not certain about 555 or 599 as I only have the earlier type pressing.

Why did the demos continue to carry the original typeface right up until 1973 when the issues appear to have changed around March 1968, if 646 is of the flat backed type?

Like yourself Tony my 547 has the rounded G as does 575, are there any other 'early' numbers?

As Sean says the 579 with a solid centre is rather unusual as I've not seen one that early. My earliest is 586.

Could either of you Tony's answer Ivor's question of a couple of weeks back about exactly how many demos were pressed for each number. Was it 250?

Thanks, Chris

When I first started work in my local record shop in 1967, 547 was the oldest 'still available' Motown in the 500 series. And it was still available in 'tall type', too! As you say, 555 was also still available, the only Isleys TM single that was available in fact, and that you could also get in 'tall type' back then.

There didn't seem to be much rhyme or reason behind what was still available, and what was not. I could understand, for instance, why 547 was in catalogue and 584 - which had been a small hit, after all - was not. Or that you could still get 577 but not 593, which was also a hit.

Anyway, that's just me going off at a tangent - I've asked my pal Alan Warner, who actually worked at EMI from 1961 to the mid 70s, if he could give me some intel on the 'how many promos' thing. I'm betting that it wasn't the same number for everything - I can't imagine for a minute that EMI would have pressed the same quanitity of, say, Lewis Sisters demos as they would of a new Beatles or Hollies A kabel.

But let's wait and see what Alan says, and I'll get back to you...

The oldest Statside that was still available was, I think, 359 - anyway, it was Betty Everett and Jerry Butler's 'Let it Be Me'. All Motown Stateside's were deleted by then - but you could still get 'Open The Door To Your Heart' on its original press!

[Guest s0ul45]

The oldest Statside that was still available was, I think, 359 - anyway, it was Betty Everett and Jerry Butler's 'Let it Be Me'. All Motown Stateside's were deleted by then - but you could still get 'Open The Door To Your Heart' on its original press!

Thanks Tony, that seems to ring a bell. Why the hell had they kept that on catalogue? Much as I like it. Stateside didn't hang around with their deletions did they.

Another point of interest to me concerns the number of Green & White demos that featured BOTH sides as an 'A' side. I know of 599, 690 and 692, are there any others?

Edited October 27, 2010 by s0ul45

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

Right, I've now asked three people, who worked at EMI during the 1960s, how many A labels constituted a run.

The short answer is - nobody knows for sure. The person who would have known - because he had to sign off the work orders - died a couple of years back, so it looks like that information might have died with him...

All are agreed, though, that the quantities pressed were dependent on the artist involved, and that there definitely would have been a bigger run of Supremes/Four Tops/Temptations etc than there would of Chris Clark/Lewis Sisters/Dorsey Burnette etc.

But as all three of them said, they just got a quantity of demos to suit their requirements and didn't really bother about how many others there were in the building. I guess that things like that were not considered terribly important back then, as to my knowledge nobody was specifically collecting demos at that point!

Chris is quite right - EMI most certainly did not hang around with their deletions back then. If the record wasn't a hit it was usually binned almost immediately. TMG 616 was newly released on the day that I started work in my local shop, and I can remember seeing a deletions sheet with some early 600s on it around the same time. In fact I ordered up a copy of 606 because I didn't have it and it was among those that were going...

Contrast that with Decca, who seemed to keep some things in catalogue forever. I can remember being able to order up some of those very early 60s Bobby Bland Vogue/Vocalion 45s (which could only have sold a handful of copies, at best) as late as the end of 1967, when the catalogue passed to Sue and, subsequently, Action. And what's more they still came in their original brown sleeves, so they sure hadn't sold enough to be re-pressed!

[Guest s0ul45]

Thanks for that Tony. Fascinating, and something that's been puzzling me for a very long time.

As for collecting demo's you're dead right. I cannot recall ever seeing any because I had to buy all of my records from a shop. Even when I did see a trickle of them in the late sixties early seventies I didn't like the look of them and can clearly remember swapping a couple of my stateside demos for the issues!! Perhaps my colour blindness improved.

Is it in any way possible that there were more demo's than issues of some of those more obscure items that you mention?

Chris.

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

Thanks for that Tony. Fascinating, and something that's been puzzling me for a very long time.

As for collecting demo's you're dead right. I cannot recall ever seeing any because I had to buy all of my records from a shop. Even when I did see a trickle of them in the late sixties early seventies I didn't like the look of them and can clearly remember swapping a couple of my stateside demos for the issues!! Perhaps my colour blindness improved.

Is it in any way possible that there were more demo's than issues of some of those more obscure items that you mention?

Chris.

...mmmm, I don't know that there would actually have been more demos pressed than stock copies on anything, be it soul, pop, or whatever.

But given how poorly some stock 45s sold during their brief catalogue life, and how many were returned for destruction by retailers as part of what was then a 5% returns allowance, I would say with some certainty that there have ended up being more demos than stock copies in existence on many of the rarest UK issues .

I was once told (and I may have said this on here before), by one of my 'there at the time' EMI guys, that many acknowledged Motown and other soul classics only sold in the low-to-mid-hundreds here when originally released. Apparently the first Motown Stateside 'Heat Wave' sold approximately 300 copies across the counter. As you can imagine, Berry Gordy was not best pleased, as apparently most of the bigger selling Oriole 45s had done considerably more than that.

Of course, sales would have improved as the whole of the UK began to know and embrace the Motown Sound, but even after the ill-fated tour and the RSG Special it apparently wasn't always a given that record by upper-echelon Motown artists would hit their sales targets

I have been told, too, that 'Get Ready' was a particularly poor seller on 557 for what would have been considered a 'priority' Motown act. So, I would think, was the original release of the Isleys' 'I Guess I'll Always Love You' judging by how long it took me to actually find either a stocker or a demo (a few decades!)

[MotownDave]

of course if you wanna be a real anorak to identefy first press single use the master codes (the letter / number embossed at 180 degrees to one another ) G 1 is the first stamper used they should if all letters are used spell gramphone (looking for this should keep some of you occupied )lol

[Guest s0ul45]

The scanty sales of those early Motown releases right up to Stateside can't really come as much of a surprise Tony and there are several factors that contributed towards those poor figures.

Firstly there was the problem of access to the music. The chances of hearing any of them on the radio were very slim. There was no 'pop' radio station, very little vinyl was permitted to be played and the lifeline of Radio Luxemburg was very much hit and miss. (Sorry for the Juke Box Jury pun, but you could also forget that programme.) I seem to recall they aired a programme called Battle of the Labels so you prayed that if it were Pye vs. Decca we'd be treated to some Pye International or London snippets. More often than not it would have been gems from the Piccadilly label! There was also Pick of the Pops BUT until a record hit the Top Twenty it was not played. Invariably a record played on POTP generated much greater sales. Of course if you happened to be over eighteen you could hear some of the tracks in clubs but it doesn't appear today that a very large proportion of Motown fans are in their late sixties.

Secondly there was the speed at which those who were old enough to hear the tracks found a U.K. group to cover them. Mr. Gordy himself was duped by Brian Epstein into approving the cover of several Motown tracks by the Beatles. Without airplay the vast majority of teenagers genuinely believed that they were listening to the original recordings of 'Do You Love Me', 'Money', 'Go Now', 'You Better Move On', 'If You Gotta Make A Fool Of Somebody', 'Sweets For My Sweet', 'I'm Into Something Good' etc etc. The birth of RSG did alert more people to the blatant theft of recordings by Dionne Warwick, Tommy Hunt and even the Righteous Brothers, yet the covers continued.

Even if you had been fortunate enough to hear a track you liked, it was not always that easy to buy it. Even the larger town centre stores only concentrated on the guaranteed sales of the well know groups.

There were music papers, so it was possible to read reviews of many of the Motown releases, especially in the Record Mirror. Yet how easily could you overlook what are now regarded as some of the greatest performances ever. Here's the review of SS336 Baby I Need Your Loving by The Four Tops in 1964:

"Jaunty but disjointed vocal delivery on a not-so-commercial song. Probably too way out for here."

Ironic then that just weeks later the U.K. group The Fourmost have a top ten hit with their vastly truncated and inferior version. As for Tony's reference to 'Get Ready' by The Temptations it was said to be: "An O.K. Tamla sound. Arrangement a bit messy, but fine for the specialists." Is it any wonder that precious pocket money was spent elsewhere? I am a little surprised by the evidently poor sales of 'Get Ready' at the time because even then it was a club anthem. Remember that these reviews came from what seemed to be the only music paper with any real interest in 'R 'n' B'. The RM published a weekly Billboard Top 100 and from '66 had their own R 'n' B top twenty.

So, the music was very difficult to hear, difficult to buy, not always reviewed very favourably and then covered immediately by a U.K. group. What hope for sales?

[Guest TONY ROUNCE]

The scanty sales of those early Motown releases right up to Stateside can't really come as much of a surprise Tony and there are several factors that contributed towards those poor figures.

Firstly there was the problem of access to the music. The chances of hearing any of them on the radio were very slim. There was no 'pop' radio station, very little vinyl was permitted to be played and the lifeline of Radio Luxemburg was very much hit and miss. (Sorry for the Juke Box Jury pun, but you could also forget that programme.) I seem to recall they aired a programme called Battle of the Labels so you prayed that if it were Pye vs. Decca we'd be treated to some Pye International or London snippets. More often than not it would have been gems from the Piccadilly label! There was also Pick of the Pops BUT until a record hit the Top Twenty it was not played. Invariably a record played on POTP generated much greater sales. Of course if you happened to be over eighteen you could hear some of the tracks in clubs but it doesn't appear today that a very large proportion of Motown fans are in their late sixties.

Secondly there was the speed at which those who were old enough to hear the tracks found a U.K. group to cover them. Mr. Gordy himself was duped by Brian Epstein into approving the cover of several Motown tracks by the Beatles. Without airplay the vast majority of teenagers genuinely believed that they were listening to the original recordings of 'Do You Love Me', 'Money', 'Go Now', 'You Better Move On', 'If You Gotta Make A Fool Of Somebody', 'Sweets For My Sweet', 'I'm Into Something Good' etc etc. The birth of RSG did alert more people to the blatant theft of recordings by Dionne Warwick, Tommy Hunt and even the Righteous Brothers, yet the covers continued.

Even if you had been fortunate enough to hear a track you liked, it was not always that easy to buy it. Even the larger town centre stores only concentrated on the guaranteed sales of the well know groups.

There were music papers, so it was possible to read reviews of many of the Motown releases, especially in the Record Mirror. Yet how easily could you overlook what are now regarded as some of the greatest performances ever. Here's the review of SS336 Baby I Need Your Loving by The Four Tops in 1964:

"Jaunty but disjointed vocal delivery on a not-so-commercial song. Probably too way out for here."

Ironic then that just weeks later the U.K. group The Fourmost have a top ten hit with their vastly truncated and inferior version. As for Tony's reference to 'Get Ready' by The Temptations it was said to be: "An O.K. Tamla sound. Arrangement a bit messy, but fine for the specialists." Is it any wonder that precious pocket money was spent elsewhere? I am a little surprised by the evidently poor sales of 'Get Ready' at the time because even then it was a club anthem. Remember that these reviews came from what seemed to be the only music paper with any real interest in 'R 'n' B'. The RM published a weekly Billboard Top 100 and from '66 had their own R 'n' B top twenty.

So, the music was very difficult to hear, difficult to buy, not always reviewed very favourably and then covered immediately by a U.K. group. What hope for sales?

I hear what you're saying, but I don't actually agree with you about radio play....

I used to hear Oriole 45s on their sponsored show on Luxembourg, and I went out and bought 'When The Lovelight Starts Shining Through His Eyes' after hearing it on EMI's sponsored show on on the same station. Just about all of the major labels had sponsored shows on 208 and the likes of Tony Hall (for Decca) in particular would always play hew R&B/Soul releases on his show, because that was what he was into. I first heard 'Cry To Me', 'Hello Stranger', 'Don't Play That Song', Jackie Wilson's 'Baby Workout' and innumerable other classic tracks on Tony's Decca programme, and I vividly remember hearing 'Heatwave' on the EMI show, although I can't remember who was hosting it at that point (it used to be Ray Orchard, but I think he'd moved on by then...)

When the pirates came in during 1964 there were many opportunities to hear new R&B and soul records on a variety of stations. The majors used to pay for play, and by 1965 Caroline South was playing the Cashbox Hot 100 every Sunday morning - which pretty much dictated where my own paper round money would be going the following Saturday.

Actually, the more I think about it, hearing the records was never a problem. Most of the younger DJs on Caroline and London (e.g. Tony Blackburn, Johnnie Walker, Emperor Rosko) actually loved soul anyway and didn't need a playlist to tell them to play it.

There were also plenty of US soul 45s that can't blame their failure on a UK cover (and, to be fair, a lot of UK covers of soul records made even less impression on the charts than the original versions did)...

I don't even think that favourable reviews were as few and far between as you suggest. Certainly Penny Valentine at Disc (and Music Echo) and Norman Jopling at Record Mirror were soulies and generally gave very positive reviews to plenty ofl UK soul releases of the time. Likewise Tony Hall's column in Record Mirror was always quick to tip the best soul singles, not just the ones that Tony played on 208 either.

My view on the poor sales of certain records boils down to this - I just don't think there were as many soul fans out there at that time with the surplus expendable income to invest in the records that they went out and danced to. Collecting was still a fairly new concept in the world of soul - and although there were collectors, they weren't around in the quantities that they exist in today. Lots of people just didn't buy records, and I think that's either the bottom line or very close to it...

[FrankM]

Of course if you happened to be over eighteen you could hear some of the tracks in clubs but it doesn't appear today that a very large proportion of Motown fans are in their late sixties.

Secondly there was the speed at which those who were old enough to hear the tracks found a U.K. group to cover them. Mr. Gordy himself was duped by Brian Epstein into approving the cover of several Motown tracks by the Beatles. Without airplay the vast majority of teenagers genuinely believed that they were listening to the original recordings of 'Do You Love Me', 'Money', 'Go Now', 'You Better Move On', 'If You Gotta Make A Fool Of Somebody', 'Sweets For My Sweet', 'I'm Into Something Good' etc etc.

Most young people heard the songs played by beat groups in clubs which as they didn't sell alcohol were open to under eighteens.

No one needs permission to cover a published song so Brian Epstein did not put one over on Mr. Gordy. Berry knew from experience the ups and downs of music publishing that what you want are loads of covers. As a label owner yes he would want the record sales.

My workmate has an NME with four adverts for the Counters Do You Love me and its three covers. Readers would have known which was the original. Oriole released both The Contours version and a cover by Faron's Flamingos.

BBC Light programme producers were wined and dined by pluggers who pushed British covers on to them. British bands could appear on radio programmes such as Saturday Club, Easy Beat and The Joe Loss show and play the covers live thus getting round the needle time restrictions on records played. There was a tea time show which played new releases and the announcer gave the label and catalogue number thus making it a record review and again that got it round the needle time restriction.

And last but not least there was a BBC producer who felt Tamla Motown records had too much tambourine on them.

[Guest Paul]

...No one needs permission to cover a published song so Brian Epstein did not put one over on Mr. Gordy. Berry knew from experience the ups and downs of music publishing that what you want are loads of covers. As a label owner yes he would want the record sales...

True, once a song has been published in a particular territory (by mechanical or public performance means) it can be covered by anyone who obtains a statutory license.

These days it's more difficult to control but it was once much easier for a publisher to place a restriction on a song, refuse a first license or at least delay it.

I remember when Motown / EMI and Jobete / Carlin tried to delay the UK cover of 'Isn't She Lovely' but as soon as the Stevie Wonder LP was out and the song was played on UK radio they couldn't stop Pye's cover version by Des Parton.

These day most new releases are pressed and shipped before companies even submit applications for mechanical licenses, it's very hard to enforce.