Beau Brummels "Laugh Laugh" previously undocumented long version?

[CollectorScum]

I recently got another white label promo of the Beau Brummels "Laugh Laugh" and adding it to discogs sent me down a rabbit hole where I discovered one of my copies plays a long verson.

The song is usually 2:48 and most pressings say this, with some listing it as 2:45.

This seems to be the earliest promo, it has a B-side song, no promo text and lower delta number than my other one. The song times were printed reversed. but when I timed the songs to double-check, Laugh Laugh came out as 3:08. I haven't yet had a chance to play it simultaneously against a 2:48 one to figure out where they diverge: https://www.discogs.com/The-Beau-Brummels-Laugh-Laugh/release/9780297

This seems to be a corrected version of the above, but I don't own this one to be able to confirm matrix or actual song timings: https://www.discogs.com/The-Beau-Brummels-Laugh-Laugh/release/4542344

Then it appears that they dropped the B-side from the promos and added promo text to the labels. This has a higher delta number in the matrix. But they screwed up and printed 2:30 for the song time. I timed it out to the correct 2:48: http://www.discogs.com/The-Beau-Brummels-Laugh-Laugh/release/9780186

And finally this appears to be the corrected version of the above, but I don't own one to be able to confirm matrix/timings: https://www.discogs.com/The-Beau-Brummels-Laugh-Laugh/release/9780259

Discogs also shows a stock version that says 2:30 for "Laugh Laugh" -- anyone own this?: https://www.discogs.com/The-Beau-Brummels-Laugh-Laugh/release/1200732

If anyone owns the 2 promos I'm missing or the 2:30 stock label and can provide matrix or confirm timings, please let me know and I'll edit the discogs listings. I'm also curious to know if the 3:08 version is a known thing or a new discovery.

 

[CollectorScum]

Most versions on youtube are just over 3:00. Now I'm really confused. 2:48 is most definitely the time most often printed on the releases including the LP. I'll have to dig out my LP and time it.

 

[CollectorScum]

My mono LP plays 2:48, maybe another couple seconds for the fadeout to truly hit zero. According to discogs, Sundazed CD reissue says 2:54 (?)

 

[vinyl01]

Here's a scan of the 2:30 issue.

 

[vinyl01]

I have a promo that also shows 2:30.

 

[MopTopMike]

I don't consider reversed label 45s to be different pressings, they are just errant pressings from the batch. Sometimes labels were loaded incorrectly into the stampers.

The long version has been known about for years, so it isn't some new discovery.

I have the long version of "Laugh Laugh", I would consider it to be the true 1st pressing from late 1964, it is a white label, red autumn leaf with back text. It isn't the promo, it is a stock copy made at Monarch. This was well before the recorded charted and became a hit.

When I used to contributed to 45cat ( a much better and accurate on-line discography for 45s than discogs, which is, in my opinion, loaded with errors) I posted the details on this release:

Also interesting - there are two white label promo/DJ pressings with "Laugh Laugh" on both sides. One has different running times per each side, while another shows identical 2:45 running times.

I picked this (white label Autumn #8) up quite a while ago, thinking I'd finally located the longer version. Despite the different running times per each side [2:45] and [2:30], both sides play the shorter / early fade version! The Monarch number tells the story, though: #55142 Re-1 is found on both DJ copies.

The white label red leaf stock copy with "Still In Love With You Baby" B side contains the longer fadeout, with the Monarch number 55135 on the "Laugh Laugh" A side.

 

[CollectorScum]

Thanks Mike - I suspected you'd know the deal.

I don't consider reversed label 45s to be different pressings, they are just errant pressings from the batch. Sometimes labels were loaded incorrectly into the stampers.

I 100% agree but none of the discogs listings above have reversed labels. Just in some cases the times are reversed: Laugh Laugh says 2:30 and Still in Love With You Baby says 2:45.

I have the long version of "Laugh Laugh", I would consider it to be the true 1st pressing from late 1964, it is a white label, red autumn leaf with back text. It isn't the promo, it is a stock copy made at Monarch. This was well before the recorded charted and became a hit.

Out of curiosity, how are you sure it's not a promo? I've seen some labels where a white label pressing is just a stock variation, and others where it's clearly the promo despite the missing promotional/not-for-sale text. If I called this one wrong, I'd like to fix the discogs listing, but need to cite some sort of proof which I hope you can provide.

Also interesting - there are two white label promo/DJ pressings with "Laugh Laugh" on both sides. One has different running times per each side, while another shows identical 2:45 running times.

As noted above one of mine says 2:30 on both sides, so there are 3 variations, not 2.

And a final aside:

When I used to contributed to 45cat ( a much better and accurate on-line discography for 45s than discogs, which is, in my opinion, loaded with errors) I posted the details on this release.

Frankly I think 45cat will disappear at some point -- it's got a small user base and no way to make real money. Discogs has errors because it is truly crowd sourced, but that's its greatest strength. Over time the database gets bigger and better. It's kind of a 'you have to crack some eggs to make an omelette' scenario. And that they've done so well integrating the commerce piece guarantees their survival.

 

[MopTopMike]

No, Justin, it isn't a promo, just the 1st pressing manufactured by Monarch. Monarch had inventory of the white autumn labels with the red leaf, so they used those first before changing to the new golden yellow labels. Depending on the print company used by the different pressing plants that were contracted to press Autumn label singles, the golden yellow labels vary in color.
Once that radio edit / short version became a hit, Monarch replaced the stamper with the long version and substituted the shorter early fade out version. I'm sure variants have incorrect times on the promo singles, quite common in those days. The rush to promote a song that started to generate airplay was the important factor, not accuracy.

As for discogs vs 45cat: the latter isn't designed to make money, it is a purely a go-to reference resource. With nearly a million 45s logged, it is far, FAR more trustworthy to research any given 45pm single - at least for the older 45s, I can't vouch for more recent ones. Also, as the moderators are not ego-maniacs, they do yield to contributors' suggestions and input for the most part. From what i hear of discogs, contributions are checked and can be vetoed by someone regardless of whether or not the information submitted is accurate. That is just plain stupid and reeks of ego.

As for the selling records aspect - the website design is dull and clumsy, the layout is worse, the search options are limited and seem to be geared to LPs over 45s, and most annoying, people place their overpriced, over-graded records on it, making it time consuming to have to weed out all of the dreck. Asking prices for some items are far beyond absurd (check out some of the garage 45s). Some moronic clown from overseas selling 60's garage & psych 45s makes Tom Funk's ebay listed prices look like fire-sale bargains. I have bought a few things from discogs sellers, but I'd rather use ebay to buy and sell anyday.

 

[CollectorScum]

Thanks for the info on the Autumn labels.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree on discogs vs 45cat. I'm completely not bothered by people listing things at high prices -- they are easy enough to ignore, and make my fair prices look even better. I see plenty of it on eBay and in real life as well. If 45cat added a commerce function, you'd see the same thing there too.