How rare (or common) is the Beatles White Album with the Parlophone label?

You beat me to it re: the 1 box not actually existing.

FWIW, I think these originate from SE Asia (albeit legitimately), but I suppose Israel is possible.

 

That ain't a UK export pressing, it's a common muck Singaporean (SEA) pressing.

First SEA pressings came with UK numbered sleeves, some with black inner sleeves but many with sepia purple EMI sleeves.

 

Is the Malaysian/Singapore White Album pressed from UK provided stampers?

I have a Malaysian/Singapore Please Please Me definitely made from UK stereo stampers, and it actually plays and sounds great (as good as most UK copies I've heard).

 

Yep. Singaporean pressings from UK metal sound good...it's the Singaporean pressings from local cuts (like the subsequent censored releases) that sound, erm, average.

The Singaporean White Album is the most common one I see passed off as a "UK export", generally always being sold from the UK. Naive sellers? Or misleading sellers hoping for naive buyers?

 

People often confuse Israeli and Singaporean one-box pressings. Easy to do, as neither include a place of manufacture, but with just a little bit of knowledge, the confusion can be easily overcome.

Firstly, Israeli pressings of the White Album are often passed off as not just "rare UK export" copies, but "rare UK export Decca contract pressings (mega uber rare!!!)". Why?

Because they have the telltale CBS presing ring evident. As I posted here EMI UK entered into an arrangement with CBS Israel around 1972. Prior to that, discs were pressed by Isradisc. To my knowledge, no Isradisc pressings of the White Album exist.

Here's the Israeli label...


For comparison, here's the Singaporean label again...


The other obvious difference is the typeface. This typeface is extremely common on Israel pressings.

Then there is the printed ring around the label edge - the Israel label has it, the Singaporean does not.

You can apply this logic to practically any one-box pressing from either country (but as always, exceptions exist).

 

And I have an Irish copy of "The Beatles" on Parlophone (still crediting the other twos' songs to "Apple Publishing").

 

As is my understanding - yellow/black labels only on true UK export pressings. Meaning the OP paid a reasonable price for a non-UK one-box pressing, but not necessarily (would need pictures to confirm) what he thinks it is.

Paying $150 or whatever for a common Singaporean or Israeli pressing makes me cringe...so easily avoided.

 

And to close the loop, here's a scan of a "true" UK export pressing...



Again, put the three together and it's very easy to tell the difference. But good luck finding a true one-box UK export White Album!

 

You da man, Jae.

 

Interesting, only see copies with Apple publishing credits on 1 record. Can you post pics of all 4 labels please ??? Thanks in advance.

 

"Dear Producer" !?

 

Another day, another new variation

 

I have a later Singaporean pressing of the White Album. Sides 1, 3 and 4 are cut from UK parts. Side 2 is a local cut, which sounds average. NM condition too. I bought it for $10 on EBay. It's a side loader .

 

Interesting topic. I've got the 1981 Australian gold box [same as the blue box but limited release] and all discs are Parlophone labels. Although the sleeves are Apple
where applicable. Pressings are all Australian.

 

No such thing as a 1981 gold box - the earliest is 1984. By then the Apple label had been replaced with the silver/black Parlophone label (transition commenced April 1982).

And contrary to popular belief, the gold box wasn't really limited, despite a certificate that implied so. It was still available in 1988! I have a copy.

 

Yeah, I've had the misfortune of hearing a few of the censored Singaporean LPs. Let me just say that EMI Singapore may have utilised the (near) latest in EMI equipment, but their cutting experience left a bit to be desired!

 

See, I knew he would know

 

Intriguingly, the Aussie blue box had gone six-platinum by mid-1980, with 25,000 sets--equating to 325,000 albums--sold. This represented the highest global sales of the set at that time. To commemorate this achievement, ATV Northern Songs presented EMI Australia with a gold box in August 1980...yet it would be another four years before EMI Australia commemorated the achievement with the 'limited edition' gold box release.

 

They were censored? Do tell.

I also have copies of Hey Jude and Abbey Road, both use UK parts. Abbey Road is only in VG condition.

 

What a smart **** response. Maybe I have the date incorrect but my intention was to post something of interest on this topic but bit appears that to you it was an opportunity to slap down a know nothing so as to air your superior knowledge. BTW you may want to notify Discogs so they can correct their listing of this box as 1981.

 

Prior to August 1967, all EMI albums issued in South East Asia (SEA) were either pressed at India's Dum Dum factory or imported directly from EMI subsidiaries, mainly EMI Australia. In August 1967, EMI (SEA) opened a pressing plant at Jurong, Singapore. From that point, EMI (SEA) commenced pressing vinyl for domestic issue as well as export to Hong Kong and Malaysia. All UK-catalogue Beatles albums were pressed from UK supplied metal parts and carried the UK catalogue numbers (ie PCS - no mono releases by this time). The Australian GH v1 and GH v2 were the first non-UK (Beatles) albums that EMI (SEA) chose to press domestically; these were issued (in 1968) using the newly created domestic numbering system that covered non-UK sourced releases (including domestic cuts made from UK supplied tapes, but EXCLUDING domestic SEA artists, whose releases were issued in the domestic EMI (SEA) E-series).

In the same year, the Singaporean Government passed the Undesirable Publications Act. The act "allow[ed] for the ban, seizure, censorship, or restriction of written, visual, or musical materials if they determine that such materials threaten the stability of the State, are pro-Communist, contravene moral norms, are pornographic, show excessive or gratuitous sex and violence, glamorise or promote drug use, or incite racial, religious or linguistic animosities".

In 1970 [according to the Singapore Ministry of Communications and Information], the Singaporean Government started banning [this being the term used by the Singaporean Government] the sale of pop records that were considered to contravene the Act, particularly those that extolled the drug culture or hippy movement. The axe fell on a number of Beatles tracks (amongst numerous others).

EMI (SEA)'s response was to recut affected albums locally, by either removing or replacing the banned tracks with more acceptable tracks. This resulted in the pressing plant running two sets of masters: uncensored UK masters for titles exported to Malaysia and Hong Kong (these retained the PCS catalogue numbers), and censored masters for titles issued in Singapore. These were issued in the non-domestic artist S-LPEA series.

Reissues I am aware of (and own):

S-LPEA 1001 - Beatles Greatest Hits Vol 1 (not recut - same as original 1968 issue and pressed from Aussie parts)
S-LPEA 1002 - Beatles Greatest Hits Vol 2 (not recut - same as original 1968 issue and pressed from Aussie parts)
S-LPEA-1003 - A Mexican in the City (not The Beatles, but Pepe Jaramillo)
S-LPEA 1004 - Collection Of Beatles Oldies ("Yellow Submarine" replaced with "Penny Lane")
S-LPEA 1005 - Revolver ("Yellow Submarine" replaced with "Your Mother Should Know")
S-LPEA 1006 - SPLHCB ("With a Little Help", "Lucy In The Sky" and "A Day In The Life" replaced by "Fool On The Hill", "Baby You're A Rich Man" and "I Am The Walrus")
S-LPEA 1007/8 - The Beatles ("Happiness..." dropped)
S-LPEA 1009 - Toe Fat 2 (Toe Fat. Interestingly, Toe Fat's first LP was happily issued by EMI SEA with the topless woman on the front cover. Seems breasts were acceptable but yellow submarines weren't)

The ban was lifted on 26 May 1993.

For interest I've attached a photo taken in the press room of the Singapore Factory, just after it opened in 1967.

 

Incorrect info gets spread rapidly and its better to be corrected immediately rather than let it go on.

Jae is an asset to this forum and does not ever display any of the attributes you have a consigned to him - you would have to go a long way to find someone more knowledgeable on EMI Australia and/or The Beatles.

 

He may well be an asset - but that does not excuse an abrupt tone. It's great to have incorrect information corrected but a bit more tact would benefit the enjoyment here of all members.

 

Well I dont think he was abrupt or tactless - if you do then thats unfortunate.

You 2 do know who Jae is dont you?

 

100% agree. If anything was abrupt or tactless, it's the overreaction (and personal insult) to a simple correction of an incorrect statement of fact.