How many vinyl copies did labels press I wonder?

[Retronic]

Does anyone know what a typical initial run would have been for De Wolfe or KPM in the 60’s - 70’s?  1000?  500? Even worldwide distribution wouldn’t be massive numbers would it. With DW they had the initial stripe releases, then some were repressed with red covers.  Just wondering how many are out there, bearing in mind how many were skipped and probably in landfill!

[Mr]

That's a very interesting question! I have no idea, and as far as I can tell this information is generally not publicly known.
In the UK, the mechanical rights society MCPS might know - but I'm not sure if they'd tell you if you asked.

A thread on the Steve Hoffman forum sums it up quite nicely, I think:

Is there any way to find out how many pressings were done of a specific LP (or CD for that matter)?

Is that information kept anywhere? Can it be cross referenced from matrix numbers, dead wax info or anything else? (...)

The user submitted info on Discogs is about as good as it gets.

Where do those users get their info? (...)

Unless it's a limited run or shared from the artist or label publicly, it's anyone's guess.

I've similarly seen mention of rarity/pressing numbers in some ebay listings as well; some of the rarer LPs I have, the Italian RCA Custom LPs were mentioned in one as being pressed in 'only' 500 copies - but then again, these sellers (like the Discogs submitters) don't mention where they got this info, so it could be completely made up.

Whether or not that's actually correct, the implication is clear; 500 copies is suggested to be a very small run - so I'm guessing a more widely distributed label like KPM would probably have had a much larger number of pressings.
So... ballpark-ing it (again, based on hearsay), maybe a starting run of 1500, with represses of 500 new copies if/when necessary?

[Retronic]

I was thinking about it because I have some of the rare De Wolfe but with the red covers instead of the striped and whether in terms of numbers of copies if second runs were smaller, i.e., rarer, even though the first press stripe is more desirable.  I am aware how geeky this is and clearly i have nothing else to worry about (no bad thing)

[Mr]

Ooh, nice! I've seen a few De Wolfe LPs housed in generic white sleeves as well, there's always more to collect
Here's a photo of one:



I agree, and would assume the later repressings would be rarer by existing in a lower quantity - though the originals could still be as rare due to age, I guess.
Not to mention it's definitely a sign of quality; one would assume these were repressed due to being in high demand, beyond the initial stock.

Speaking of, you have any duplicates, where you have both versions - or different versions of 'neighbouring' releases?
I don't think we're likely to get a concrete answer about the numbers, but these might give us some more details about the manufacturing - which is a start, heh.

[Retronic]

I have a few DW/LP on both 10” and 12”, not cos I need both but I’ve just seen cheap so picked up a secondary copy. I   do have some 12” with the blue & white cover as well as the later pressed red one.

[Mr]

Unanswered questions like these both fascinate and annoy me a bit (heh) - so I'm trying my best to wrap my head around the different De Wolfe pressings at the moment, and what info (if any) can be gleaned from the records themselves.
Once I started really looking at them, I quickly noticed that there are actually a lot of different small variations in De Wolfe's label designs over the years, particularly the ones with the red labels and "dW" logo.
- Hopefully, I'll eventually be able to make a sort of chronology of these different variations, which could help avid collectors like yourself pinpoint not only which specific version you have, but also how many pressings/repressings of these actually exist.

Some of the variations are pretty minor, like using different phrasing for the copyright text on the top of the label, but I think the listed addresses will be a good starting point; De Wolfe Ltd. were, at the start of their LP releases, based at 80-82 Wardour Street in London, but at some point (c. 1972/1973?) expanded to 80-88 Wardour Street. I'm hoping to nail down a more concrete year/date for this move in time.


The listed postal codes also seem to have changed a bit, and I'm hoping one of you brilliant Brits can maybe shed some light on this; the Wardour Street address is listed on some records with postal code W1, "W 1" or "W.1", some Dutch pressings list "W.L." and later pressings starting in about 1976/77 list W1V 3LF.
My guess would be that London changed its postal code system at some point, and the old "W1" was replaced with the more accurate "W1V 3LF", could that be correct?



Just to illustrate, here's two near-identical versions of the ever-coveted "Big Beat" I've found, one with the old address and one with the new one:


Sleeves for both seem to be identical, however, bearing the 80-88 address.

[nidostar]

A Brit I may be but I'm not sure I'm brilliant! I remember the postcode system being introduced in England in the sixties. The intention was to be able to more precisely identify a specific address rather than simply a locality. It was then that London W1 (London West 1) would have become, for example, W1V 3LF though I can't precisely pin a year on it. The Postal Museum mentions that the current codes were introduced between 1966 and 1974 (ht**s://www.postalmuseum.org/collections/postcodes/#). I suspect that, being the capital, they were introduced in London towards the beginning of the rollout. So on or soon after 1966.

It's quite likely that the company who pressed the records/labels misread the 1 for an L hence the W.L. address shown on the labels. But although you say they have one with the old address and one with the new they look the same to me.

[Mr]

Nice, thanks a lot for the clarification!
I was hoping for something a bit more precise than "between 1966 and 1974", haha - but it still means that: W1 = older, W1V 3LF = newer - which is very useful. I think you're right about the "WL" printing being a misinterpretation, that was my guess as well.

Heh yeah, it's a very minor difference - the one on the left reads "80-82 Wardour Street" on the bottom right, whereas the one on the right reads "80-88".

[nidostar]

Heh yeah, it's a very minor difference - the one on the left reads "80-82 Wardour Street" on the bottom right, whereas the one on the right reads "80-88".

Hah, yeah now I've got my glasses on I see!!

[Mr]

A quick update; I've identified no less than five separate pressings of DW/LP 3243 (Hogan, the Hawk and Dirty John Crown), and I'm not ruling out a possibility that more might exist.
Here are my findings so far:

1 - "Bugle" logo, presumably first pressing, with older 80-82 Wardour Street address:


2 - dW logo, repressing - note it still has the 80/82 Wardour Street address:


3 - dW logo, with name, updated with the new 80-88 Wardour Street address:


4 - dW logo, with name, also lists 80/88 Wardour Street address, this time with a slash. Minor change in text formatting and phrasing of copyright text at the top, "De Wolfe Ltd." added to bottom of label:


5 - dW logo, nearly identical to #4, but has address listed as "80-88 Wardour Street" (dash, not slash):

[Retronic]

Wow!  I never imagined there'd be five runs.  Interesting.  I imagine it did fairly well as a library release.
I should check mine- I assume it's the latest one as I bought direct from De Wolfe mid-90's which was likely the last of their stock I would suspect.

[Mr]

Wow!  I never imagined there'd be five runs.  Interesting.  I imagine it did fairly well as a library release.
I should check mine- I assume it's the latest one as I bought direct from De Wolfe mid-90's which was likely the last of their stock I would suspect.

Thanks, that would be very helpful!

I would love to be corrected on this, but so far the latest LP I've found with the red/blue 'bugle' logo is DW/LP 3254 (1972), indicating this is where they swapped it for the new red labels and "dW" logo. This would also suggest that any release before 3255 with red labels is a repress.

[Retronic]

Mine is the dash not slash version and also, my 3255 is a bugle label so maybe the switch came on 3256?

[Mr]

That's great, thanks!
This means my initial order must have been incorrect, I've swapped entries #4 and #5 now - and that the bugle labels ran until at least DW/LP 3255 (1972).


Though a bit more complicated, another key detail would be the postal codes, as mentioned a few times above.
- The Dutch ("Made in Holland") pressings seem to have held onto the old 'London, W1' postal code long after it was changed for the UK pressings, and it's still listed like that on the very last Dutch pressing I've found so far, DWS/LP 3435 (1980).
- Whereas the last UK ("Made in England") pressing I've found with the old 'London, W1' postal code, is DWS/LP 3349 (1976), after which 'London, W1V 3LF' seems to have been consistently in use.

So even though your pressing was presumably one of the last in De Wolfe's stock, it's seems possible that it's actually from 1976 or earlier.