Robbk

That's an interesting question because it's really hard to peg a label colour to a specific time, for Fraternity, as they used different colour labels in different pressing plants at the same time. Worse yet, I seem to remember the earliest Fraternitys being blue, then, the label went to maroon, then back to blue then back to Maroon again. I would guess that you'd have to go by whats scratched and stamped into the runout. A second pressing might use the same pressing number, because the same stampers were used. But, maybe there would be different code letters after it. My Albert Washingtons are all in the 900s and 1000s. That longer series was later. But I don't know offhand if that means it is automatically a 2nd pressing. All my Albert Washingtons have different extra codes etched into the wax. We'll need to get an expert on Fraternity to answer this. I even have one that has BOTH a Coumbia AND an RCA pressing code number!!!

Mine has T-118 etched in on the top, it also has a stamped seemingly 4 letter cursive word written into the top area to the left of the T-118, and it is right side up, while T-118 is upside down. The stamp also has a roundish, pushed-in area in the stamped area's centre, and THAT makes it difficult for me to read. It looks like ARP in caps and a small letter "s" after those. There is another stamped area on the left side of the upright label. It is ARP all in fancy Italic script -all capital letters. It's interesting that my Topper 1015 "Challenge My Love"/"Sweep It Out In The Shed" has only the cut pressing number etched in and the ARP stamp, while 1011's "Talkin About Love" has those and also adds a set of initials (capital letters URN), and the Temple records have ALL that (initials only 2 letters-WS) plus the record catalogue number etched in as well, and Nashville Matrix in cursive script stamped in. Could the initials be those of the masterer?

Well, even Canadian ice hockey star, Joe Thornton, after hearing thousands of people mispronounce his name, probably just gave up trying to tell them how it is pronounced properly. The name must come from a rural place somewhere in England. The suffix "ton" meant "a small settlement" in later Old English and all of Middle English. In Canada we pronounced the "n". In England they pronounce the "n". I wonder if it is pronounced in India, and Papua Pidgin English?

Well, Thornton is a cousin of Brian and Eddie Holland, and he owned a recording studio, with which many of the Motowners, and other Detroit Soul singers were familiar. So, I think his association with Motown was for several years. I think his name being left off The Elgins' record was a random oversight, which had been included on The Supreme's release, and would be corrected on Chris Clark's (notwithstanding the misspelling). Why is it that Americans can't seem to pronounce the "n" in the name "Thornton"??? In my 70+ years I have met, read about or heard of literally hundreds of people with the name "ThorNton", but not one single person with the name "Thorton".

So, with Thornton being on the inside at Motown, The Wonderettes could have been signed by Motown. They certainly were talented enough. But, They would have trouble beating out The Velvelettes for getting good material, getting releases, and having their records plugged, let alone competing with The Supremes, Marvelettes, and Martha and The Vandellas.

Yes.

I can't tell who they are or aren't from the voices, but it stands to reason that the might well be, as Johnnie Mae ran all sessions of production of this song, and because she listed them on HER version, we know they sang backgrounds to the backing track. Hard to believe it was missed when the recording was delivered for mastering. Maybe the tapes got switched into the cans of the opposite versions?

Thanks. Yes, the Ruby issue was several months before the UA. They must have been playing the latter into early 1966.

Here's The Wonderettes' Enterprise flip:

The Wonderettes don't seem to be singing in the background of Johnny Mae's "Lonely You'll Be", there WERE in the BG of Calvin Williams' version.

Yes to both of your surmisings. I'm pretty sure that Rose was Johnny's wife, rather than sister or daughter. I'll ask my Detroit '60s friends left on Soulful Detroit Forum if they remember Johnny. Yes, the Enterprise 1964 release was earlier than the Ruby (Late 1965). Interesting that also Sammy Solo's Ruby record was released earlier (1965) on Enterprise, and that Joe Terry's and Lee Gates' Soul releases on Enterprise are still not shown or listed on Discogs.

Surely they recorded for Ruby Records first, (which may have been co-owned by Bob Schwartz and the owner of Different Music (Detroit's Enterprise label group , which included Enterprise, Ruby, Dynamic, Cindy, and Heart Records, and, I think one or two others)), and leased their record to UA after, to get national distribution. I say that, not only because most records that appear on 2 labels started on the smaller label, and moved to the larger one to gain national distribution, but also because the Ruby issue listed ONLY Enterprise's "Different Music", while the UA issue added "Unart Music" (United Artist's in-house publisher), thus splitting the publishing rights in half for UA's paying pressing costs and distributing the record nationally; and, most importantly, I bought the Ruby record when it was out, at least a couple months before I ever saw a UA copy.

I can't believe Matchy has never seen photos of Eddie and Brian standing together showing their family resemblance, or seen videos of both of them and not seen videos of Jackie. I've seen both of them in person, and all kinds of people I know have talked about them for 70 years. It's like the fake moon landing conspiracy controversy. If Jackie Wilson and Eddie Holland were the same person, why did they look so different, when we saw them and heard the music coming out of their mouths (not just lip sinking)? How could such a secret have been kept for over 50 years? It's very absurd. I think Matchy was pulling your leg. Nobody, especially a Soul fan, could have missed seeing film of both singing.

The original poster put Jackie's picture on it and listed it as him as a joke to see how many people would be fooled by it into believing it was him. Maybe he was betting with a friend whether or not anyone would catch the mislabeling.

Thanks, I knew that everyone has a unique tone in their voices, and that voice didn't sound much like Jackie.

I found this on YouTube, with Jackie's photo, saying it is him. This version is listed at 3:13. The 45 was under 3:00. This guy sounds a little like him, but certainly not the way he sounded in 1967-68. But in later parts of the song he sounds like a completely different person. Is this someone else, or a late remake by Jackie from the early 1970s? The instrumental is different from the hit 45 version, and also different from the alternate LP version. The bass, drums, and horns are different too, as are the background singers (not The Andantes'45 version): https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=191&v=mzDVaKRApcg&feature=emb_logo

It stands to reason, as He looks way too young to have been even within 20 years of the 1964 singer.

I would guess that there is a very, very good chance, given that The Fantastic Four and he were all within a year or 2 in age, when they were singers in Detroit. It was a small, tight community. Everyone knew of everyone else in the business, and many of them were friends of many of the others. Now they're appearing together in Detroit. I would guess (and bet) this Eddy Hughes is the singer who recorded for Bard Records.

Clearly Hysong's version was just a demo for Eddie Hughes' commercial release. I'm sure Hysong's being pressed up on Bard was just an extremely small "vanity" pressing. I really doubt that more than 100 were pressed. Back in the day, I remember seeing a reasonable number of The Eddy Hughes record both in Detroit and Chicago, but never saw the Don Hysong. I really doubt that Bard thought they could get Hysong's played on Pop stations, and could sell it to Pop fans. Hughes' is great. Hysong's wasn't commercial quality. It's the songwriter giving his artist a not-very-good idea of how it should be sung, knowing Hughes would "spruce it up" and put a soulful take on it. It pre-dates Billy Stewart's "I Do Love You", but has an extremely similar musical phrase in it.

Clearly Hysong's version was a demo for Eddie Hughes' commercial release. I'm sure Hysong's being pressed up on Bard was just an extremely small "vanity" pressing. I really doubt that more than 100 were pressed. Back in the day, I remember seeing a reasonable number of The Eddy Hughes record both in Detroit and Chicago, but never saw the Don Hysong. I really doubt that Bard thought they could get Hysong's played on Pop stations, and could sell it to Pop fans.

Those with white labels, handwritten black or blue ink, with the turquoise quality control stamp (which IS the real one) look just like most of those in The Motown Vault. There were also a few solid yellow labels there. I'd say these were all legitimate. Those with other-coloured labels and no stamp, I can't say.

I don't know. But that's what Ron told me. He used ARP for pressing some of his own labels. So, he should know. I didn't handle the details of pressing orders with Airwave, so I don't have practical experience and detailed knowledge in that area.

I owned a record company. I would want a test pressing from each pressing plant just before they do our press run. I'd want at LEAST 2 copies made, one to stay at the plant, in case it sells well and we'd need to order another press run, and, I'd want a 2nd one for my company, in case the pressing plant's copy gets misplaced. I would guess that any plants other than ARP probably made at least 2 or 3, but possibly 5 or 6, too. If someone put a gun to my head and would shoot if I'd be wrong, I'd guess 3 first, then 2. Motown's policy in late 1965 was to press in Detroit, RCA East(Pennsylvania), and Monarch, in L.A. So, I believe there's a small possibility that one or 2 from Monarch might show up. But, the fact that none have surfaced in all these years means that there's a chance that theybwon't surface, because they may have been destroyed, or are in the hands of a hermit-like collector. It could have been thrown into the trash by his grandson or granddaughter, who have no idea it could be worth anything, and so, wouldn't even try to put it on E-Bay, to find out. I'm sure I've seen test pressings for the same record release from two different plants. But, I can't remember which records they were. Some were hits, and some were uncharted, so I'm sure it was a regular policy. Why didn't we ask all these questions of Motown producers who were around Motown in then mid-late '60s, and were still alive and with their memories intact? If you had all asked these questions in 2001-2007 or so, we could have had Mickey Stevenson, Joe Hunter, Jack Ashford, Clay MacMurray, and others ALL posted on SoulFul Detroit forum. Berry's still got all his marbles. But none of us would bother him with such questions.

Maybe Berry replaced the missing one Tom got with his own?

The copy Soussan got from us was one of the 2 file copies. It was either the Motown File Copy, or The Jobete file copy, as far as I remember, they were BOTH missing before Tom first showed me "Our copy". I'd bet the farm ours was one of those 2. Also, we got The Andantes, and several other very rare ones, Tom said he found them in a box that someone was going to throw away, and "someone said he could take them." Several of the file copies had gone "missing" (many of the rarest Motown 45s). That happened in 1976 or 1977.