Was ELP's Welcome Back, My Friends designed with record changers in mind?

[lak611]

Given the reasonably priced availability of originals, I'm more perplexed that there is even a market for this as a priced-up "reissue."

In my case I just didn't want to swap records rather than simply turn over a record to play "KE9" in its entirety.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[Luckie]

Tales from Topographic Oceans is a double LP but it is 1/2, 3/4, not 1/4, 2/3.

Maybe Yes felt that most of their listeners don't like record changers.

Can you imagine how pristine most of the LPs with Sides 2 and 3 on would be?

I was a teenager when I bought Stevie Wonder's Songs In The Key of Life double LP, and can vaguely remember being annoyed at Side 4 being on the reverse of Side 1. I didn't know why, I just figured it was a stupid mistake. (Would you stack the extra 7-inch EP that was included on top, underneath, or in the middle?)

[lak611]

Can you imagine how pristine most of the LPs with Sides 2 and 3 on would be? [emoji14]

I was a teenager when I bought Stevie Wonder's Songs In The Key of Life double LP, and can vaguely remember being annoyed at Side 4 being on the reverse of Side 1. I didn't know why, I just figured it was a stupid mistake. (Would you stack the extra 7-inch EP that was included on top, underneath, or in the middle?)

LOL. 😛 That's a good question.

Nobody I knew had a record changer. The thought of stacking one record on top of another would have been a horrid thought.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[JeffCarney]

In my case I just didn't want to swap records rather than simply turn over a record to play "KE9" in its entirety.

I'm lost as to your dilemma here. My original has KE9 on Side 5 & 6 of LP3.

But either way, this reissue is digitally mastered, and costs about three times as much as a Mint analog mastered original.

Again, the mind boggles at how BMG can sell more than 10 copies of this stuff.

[lak611]

I'm lost as to your dilemma here. My original has KE9 on Side 5 & 6 of LP3.

But either way, this reissue is digitally mastered, and costs about three times as much as a Mint analog mastered original.

Again, the mind boggles at how BMG can sell more than 10 copies of this stuff.

Side 5 is the back of side 2 on my original. So I have to play the back of the second record, followed by the back of the first record. They're numbered 1/6, 2/5, 3/4 on my original album. Mine has ST-MC-74365 SP etched on the records. Manticore distributed by Atlantic Corp, 75 Rockefeller Plaza, NY, NY.

I've since listened to the reissue, and the sound is better.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[JeffCarney]

I've since listened to the reissue, and the sound is better.

Digitally sourced vinyl better than analog?

Seems hard to believe. How exactly is the sound better in your view?

[lak611]

Digitally sourced vinyl better than analog?

Seems hard to believe. How exactly is the sound better in your view?

The bass and cymbals are more prevalent than on the original album.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[Mister Triscuits]

I'm lost as to your dilemma here. My original has KE9 on Side 5 & 6 of LP3.

Sure your copy is an original? Mine, purchased at the time of release, is like Laura's, in automatic sequence.

[BravadoNJ]

my vinyl Yessongs is 1/6, 2/5, 3/4

[JeffCarney]

Sure your copy is an original? Mine, purchased at the time of release, is like Laura's, in automatic sequence.

Maybe I'm wrong. I have a US and a Japanese. I could swear at least one of them was 1/2 - 3/4 - 5/6

[JeffCarney]

The bass and cymbals are more prevalent than on the original album.

Interesting. Thanks.

[lak611]

Sure your copy is an original? Mine, purchased at the time of release, is like Laura's, in automatic sequence.

I mentioned the exact numbering of mine, since it could be looked up on Discogs. This is mine. It's from 1974. https://www.discogs.com/Emerson-Lake...elease/4946268

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[per anporth]

I have the 3lp vinyl release of Welcome Back released on Manticore in the UK in 1974 — K63500.

The side ordering is 1/2, 3/4, 5/6.

Laura - l looked through the Discogs listings of the 60+ issues of the record, & I couldn't see any that tallied with the code you cite.

Curiouser & curiouser!

[Yellow Jester]

I have the 3lp vinyl release of Welcome Back released on Manticore in the UK in 1974 — K63500.

The side ordering is 1/2, 3/4, 5/6.

This means that certain pressing plants did not press their albums with 'automatic record changers' in mind. As I had stated before my copy of "WBMF" (on Manticore/Atlantic USA) had Side 1 backed by Side 6, Side 2 backed by Side 5, and Side 3 backed by Side 4. It was convenient for me since I used a record changer in the '70s.

[per anporth]

I wonder if this is a North American phenomenon? - I bought plenty of double & triple lp's during the 70s, here in the UK, & I had never encountered the phenomenon that Laura introduced in the OP until I started reading this thread.

[infandous]

Yeah, my father had a cheap turntable that did have a changer (or he bought that separately? I really don't know). I never used the changer myself and don't remember him using it either (though it was quite a long time ago so it's entirely possible he did use it at some point). However, I bought a used copy of Welcome Back in 1989, and it was sequenced 1/2 3/4 5/6. I had a few doubles that were also in "normal" sequence as well. Of course, I bought all of my vinyl in the 80's, so I doubt any of it was original releases, though some of the used copies may well have been (I bought quite a few used).

[JeffCarney]

It is a bit of side conversation, but side sequencing aside, I still find it remarkable that these major labels bother reissuing albums which are readily available at very reasonable prices in their original pressings or an abundance of repressings.

I bought a stone Mint Japanese pressing of WBMF a couple of years ago for $12. The vinyl is CD-like quiet, it's got that analog brilliance and warmth, and yet people will pay like $40 for a reissue that admits to being transferred to 24/96 digital and then cut to vinyl? I mean ... who is buying these? And I assume it must be somebody since these reissues keep happening. My guess is that a market exists for people who want things brand new/sealed.

Bizarre.

[Stevie B]

I wonder if this is a North American phenomenon? - I bought plenty of double & triple lp's during the 70s, here in the UK, & I had never encountered the phenomenon that Laura introduced in the OP until I started reading this thread.

I was just about to ask the exact same question. Lots and lots of doubles and triples in my collection back in the day and like you I have never heard of this numbering convention...must be an American thing.

[JJ88]

^No, it's definitely a British thing as well. I've come across it a few times on British records, but my feeling is that it was only in a specific period here, possibly late 70s.

[Stevie B]

^No, it's definitely a British thing as well. I've come across it a few times on British records, but my feeling is that it was only in a specific period here, possibly late 70s.

Can you give a few examples? I was in a double-album buying frenzy in the late-seventies, and I worked in a record shop at the time, and I honestly have never come across this before.

[Stevie B]

Thanks. It's entirely possible I had albums sequenced this way and just never noticed!

[Victorian Squid]

As mentioned, I think for me Sheik Yerbouti is the only LP set I have sequenced 1/3 and 2/4. I think it was a more popular format in the US as well, but not unique.
Since I got mostly imports though, I think I do have some that weren't changer sequenced, but were in the US. I think Quadrophenia was a 1/3 2/4 in the States.

One of the other audiophile reasons for not doing this is you change the pitch of the stylus with a second (or third) LP, giving you inferior sound and potential for increased wear. A cartridge is only aligned for like a minute on an LP as it is!

PS, I love The Remembering: High the Memory. I was lucky enough to see them on the 1974 North American tour and play tales in its entirety.
And no, Rick didn't eat curry (not popular in San Francisco at the time) and remained more or less sober for the whole set.

[gojikranz]

I hate that about my LP copy of the show. might be a good argument for buying the new version if I can find a decent price on it.

I also can't believe on the cd that they chose to leave take a pebble cut up between discs when there would have been plenty of room to have it all on disc 2. sure the LPs are like that but that's what CD is good for not having to deal with that stuff!

[Victorian Squid]

I hate that about my LP copy of the show. might be a good argument for buying the new version if I can find a decent price on it.

I also can't believe on the cd that they chose to leave take a pebble cut up between discs when there would have been plenty of room to have it all on disc 2. sure the LPs are like that but that's what CD is good for not having to deal with that stuff!

I think it's called lazy. Even worse it makes me wonder about the source material for the CD.
I mean, it would be easier to have it all together if they were using the master tapes, yes? I just don't see an engineer sitting there going "Nope! We've got to edit it right where it was on the LP, so it's the way people remember it!"