company sleeves

hmv5.jpg

impact.jpg

parlo.jpg

fest12.jpg

columbia.jpg

linda.jpg

wg3.jpg


the Columbia shown above is most likely from the late '50s. So it doesn't fit the Vacant Lot, but looks cool anyway.
 
Looks like you are right about the Hit sleeve. The clincher for me is the "Holiday Hits" label which has the santa sleeve, at the bottom of the 45 sleeves site. That one is definitely a Hit label sleeve, so all the others must be as well.

Also, the use of the word "compatible" on both the sleeve and the record, makes it a certainty, really.
I submitted a yellow sleeve which they added # 3 i . Sent in other scans too which they added.
 
I love this thread - keep them coming! I have a good number of the US ones shown, but I love seeing all of the super cool Canadian, Australian, etc. ones. This past summer I hit a junk shop where several large boxes of 60s/70s country promo 45s had been dumped. One additional two-foot long cardboard box was just empty sleeves, and for $3 I got hundreds of pristine company sleeves from the mid-60s through the early 70s for all the major labels (each in quantity, most with multiple variations), as well as lots of oddball ones and a healthy dose of white ones. Still matching them with 45s, but they are great to have on hand to 'dress up' discs that used to be hanging out in plain-jane attire.
 
I came across this sleeve that the 45-sleeve webstie could not find, so maybe someone here could help. Does anyone know about this sleeve?research craft records sleeve a.jpg
 
I came across this sleeve that the 45-sleeve webstie could not find, so maybe someone here could help. Does anyone know about this sleeve?View attachment 718
They were an L.A.-based pressing plant. While the majority of their work was slipped into Capitol, Bethlehem and Riverside sleeves, they seem to have done a little national distribution themselves. I suspect somebody bought them out at the tail end of the fifties.

Regardless, that's a cool sleeve.
 
They were an L.A.-based pressing plant. While the majority of their work was slipped into Capitol, Bethlehem and Riverside sleeves, they seem to have done a little national distribution themselves. I suspect somebody bought them out at the tail end of the fifties.

Regardless, that's a cool sleeve.
Thanks Dominic. Could it be possible that test pressing or acetates used in this sleeve?
 
Ok, I said that because the guy taking scans of sleeve/records on that site thought it could be for that purpose. Billboard Magazine is a good source for info.
 
It's interesting to observe how many of these old sleeves boast "Truest Fidelity", "World's Highest Quality Sound" etc. Quality of sound was an important aspect of record production in those days, unlike now. In those days, studios and labels were actively pushing the boundaries of recorded sound quality, in fierce competition with other labels. Hence the amazing results achieved by labels like UK Decca in the mid '60s. For example the Rolling Stones "Satanic Majesties" LP.
These days, the public has been brainwashed to believe that every modern CD is inherently endowed with "perfect sound forever", and the emphasis on quality and innovation has largely been abandoned.
Doubling the sample rate does not necessarily constitute an improvement in sound quality.
 
Here's how both my Mojo 45s are wrapped. However, I'm not sure if this is a generic '60s Australian sleeve, or an actual sleeve used by the Mojo label

mojo.jpg
 
Still rather cute though and the blues do match. Mine was actually in a Finky Pink Parlophone sleeve when I found it at a record fair in my hometown in the UK. Along with 2 Purple Hearts and Black by The Throb The seller was colour coordinating his Australian 45's. He knew not what he had, 3 or 4 quid each.
 
It's interesting to observe how many of these old sleeves boast "Truest Fidelity", "World's Highest Quality Sound" etc. Quality of sound was an important aspect of record production in those days, unlike now. In those days, studios and labels were actively pushing the boundaries of recorded sound quality, in fierce competition with other labels. Hence the amazing results achieved by labels like UK Decca in the mid '60s. For example the Rolling Stones "Satanic Majesties" LP.
These days, the public has been brainwashed to believe that every modern CD is inherently endowed with "perfect sound forever", and the emphasis on quality and innovation has largely been abandoned.
Doubling the sample rate does not necessarily constitute an improvement in sound quality.

Most people don't understand about the inferior sound of mp3's and many CD's dueto compression. Anytime I mention that word, I have to give a long detailed explanation of what compression is and its effect on sound quality.
Similar to the doubling the sample rate concept is the new video technology with filming at 48 frames per second rather than the standard 24, again supposedly improvingthe visual quality.
The biggest criticism I've read about the film is due to this factor. Namely, that the human eye/mind cannot handle all the extra information with the result of a loss of realistic look. I'd guess that would be similar to the effect produced by the overuse of CGI. (Though it was pointed out that most theaters aren't set up for the 48 FPS version, so have to show it in the normal 24.)

Unfortunately, too many people are fooled into thinking that technological progress is always for the better.
 
Most people don't understand about the inferior sound of mp3's and many CD's dueto compression. Anytime I mention that word, I have to give a long detailed explanation of what compression is and its effect on sound quality.
Similar to the doubling the sample rate concept is the new video technology with filming at 48 frames per second rather than the standard 24, again supposedly improvingthe visual quality.
The biggest criticism I've read about the film is due to this factor. Namely, that the human eye/mind cannot handle all the extra information with the result of a loss of realistic look. I'd guess that would be similar to the effect produced by the overuse of CGI. (Though it was pointed out that most theaters aren't set up for the 48 FPS version, so have to show it in the normal 24.)

Unfortunately, too many people are fooled into thinking that technological progress is always for the better.

Being a pretentious technophobe for a long time, playing 60's 45's only on 60's equipment, I was surprised when transferring music to digital and silencing the clicks and pops on the waveform map, rather than using the click removal option, the ear (or my ear) can not hear a silence of <0.01 seconds. The eye is the same. Actually, the brain is the filter. If we had big digibrains zzzt zzzt maybe increased sample rates would be a factor but we ain't yet. Anyone blind here? Would be interesting to see if a blind persons hearing would notice.

Anyone noticed how these moving cartoons are so freaking jerky. No the brain joins it up and makes sense of it somehow. Remember those flick books? Very smooth visuals.