Music/Artone / Funckler / Tamla Motown / Motown20 messages

Hi dear fellow collectors.
I want to start a forum item here about the famous Artone label.
I am in the process of importing singles from the Artone catalog of the Motown label first released in the Netherlands on the Artone label. I first started to put the Item Pete Felleman on Wikipedia, for years from 1962 to 1978 the big man behind Motown Netherlands and Europe.
The start of Motown releases in the Netherlands was a single on Fontana van de Marvelletts.
After that, Artone took over.
There are now a number of items entered by me, of which I have the photo cover or records myself. Others have also entered items. I think it would be useful to bring unity into it. That is very interesting but also a lot of work. The aim is a complete overview on Catawiki of the Artone editions between 1962 and 1969.
My question? who helps.
With information or own scans of your own photo sleeves.
I have a decent archive of old release lists, old music magazines, etc.
Warm Sounds, the magazine, is also a source of information. I hope this will become a long running and interesting Catawiki item.
PS I recently became co-manager of the vinyl department.

the netherlands and europe & gt; & gt; & gt; to update it should say

I disagree, there is only one label. Society.

The person who issues the pressings is in business if you want to display this, a new field should be added, has nothing to do with the label

Parlophone in the Netherlands is also not a Bovema, although it does the pressing and distribution

Mitsubishi is not a DAF although it is manufactured / produced there.

Dear Dick and other forum readers

About DAF Dick is right. DAF stays DAF wherever it is made. This has to do with the strong brand name. But things sometimes go differently in the record industry. I think the Beatles have released a lot of work under the name Capitol as well. Another example: the well-known Charly re-issue abel. This has released a whole series of compilation albums of old Sun recordings. We do not call the label Sun in our catalog, but Charly. I have not yet seen any links with Sun in the Catawiki catalog. For example, there are probably more examples in which the DAF no DAF remained but was renamed.
There are also many legendary records that change labels immediately upon release and then appear in the lists under that new label name.
But that's not my main argument. There will always be discussion about it.
I want to look at it from the perspective of the Catawiki user.
I am a real Googler, and if my field of interest is Dutch publications Motown, I type both Motown and Artone on Ebay. Then I get to see everything neatly arranged. Only there is no line in it and over time it has disappeared.
I think you make the Catalog Catawiki attractive to interested parties if it is possible that with ONE click you can see the entire publications of Catalog Artone. As with Tintin / linen spine.
Then you click through to your own interest field eg Motown, Chess etc.
I do not want to plead for this everywhere to be applied, but I do want to apply to special and historically important labels. Another label that comes to mind is, for example, the London label from England. This was a label that was the first to launch R & amp; B and Rock and Roll released classics from various labels such as Sun, Atlantic, Chess, Jamie etc. In collectors circles the label is legendary.

joe

Solution I think is a separate field for distribution company. I agree with Dick that in the catalog you have to re-enact what's on the label / cover. These are data that you can then check. and this is important to be able to identify items.
I agree with Joe that you should get as much data together as possible.
Either way, the data must be correct.
Joe's idea is good, but we shouldn't forget that there are also a lot of other collectors within Catawiki who don't (want to) go that far. Catawiki is also intended for them. That is really a group to take into account. So it must be and and.

I think the solution proposed by Frans misses the mark. Then you have to do complicated things. You can already go through the link Tamla-Motown & gt; Artone very easily visualize the part that you want to see or investigate. First Tamla-Motown then you see everything up to Lional Richie etc, then Artone with which you see the whole series up to 1969. If you search the other way through Artone, you will see the entire Artone series including Dutch and all others. No extra effort at all. I would say don't be difficult and work with what is already there. How you turn or reverse the Dutch Artone slash Motown is a household name in collectors circles worldwide. let's stay pragmatic and not fight on principle. By the way, I see that Dick uses two terms / fields, namely Motown and then Tamla. That is not correct. The late covers clearly say Tamla-Motown. Motown does belong in the Netherlands because early work has been released here under that heading, but not by Tamla. If you do the latter, you should also use the US sub-labels Gordy, Soul, etc. Don't do it yet. For the time being, I propose to only use Tamla-Motown + Artone when it comes to the GO series. Furthermore, I do not think the comment about the simple collector is correct. He wants to know whether he has something special or something very ordinary. We as experts must have the ambition to be as complete as possible within the possibilities. Ultimately, this also benefits the average collector. How often have you come across people who think they have gold, a worn out original beatle single or Tintin album, but that is not worth any shit in that state? Only for them, of course. For those people, the site is correct too. I myself have already indicated that I want to put that catalog in order. So what's the problem?

@ jpehillouis I don't pretend to be an expert.

But the single I adapted with Tamla also says it like that on the label.
so take it literally about Platen firm, I will stick with it if another company wants to take care of the pressings etc.
Then let's ask for an extra field, I can imagine that it can be set up in such a way that you can select both fields at the same time.
We have always worked within Catawiki to mention the name on the label and also the production country (not the recording country)

but in your opinion this is Apple / Philips
catawiki “ 493341 ”

I don't think combination Tamla Motown Artone applies

any more than I think Parlophone + EMI is just plain nonsense

Let's get back to Capitol and The Beatles

albums released on Capitol are listed separately in the catalog.
And actually it should also be mentioned here which press shop they come from can be very decisive for the price. “ 481831 ” see also “ 240929 ”
There are some that have a Capitol cover but label is Apple
eg cata “ 235789 ” so label Apple

and unfortunately we cannot name the cover yet.

Regarding putting in order, a number of people have been working on it for a long time and any help is welcome but according to the rules and adjustments will certainly be needed in the future.

But the single I adapted with Tamla also says it like that on the label.
so take it literally about Platen firm, I will stick with it if another company wants to take care of the pressings etc.

This above is your text dick
I get a bit tired of it, but let's go, piece by piece. So I think I am an expert, I do not put on false modesty. Even if (they) may not think this is socially correct.

An example
Catawiki number: 176797
Stevie wonder there I changed Tamla to Tamla Motown, because it was released in the Netherlands.
If you look at the cover, it says Artone in the middle of the cover, so prominent.
Below left Tamla-Motown
below the Artone number GO 25455
and indeed below it
Tamla 54136
But! that last number refers to the american edition and that is more common. However, this was not true here. Now I have changed the catalog from Tamla, which is not correct, to Tamla Motown
In history I see that it has now been changed by you and approved by French.
This is how we keep going! The Tamla field is part of the America catalog, but not in the Netherlands !!
Look it seems like a silly discussion and that is how I feel now, but I think it is essential to arrive at a good catalog.
And now I quit.
I think we should get together soon.

joe

I am not going to fight whether you have filled it in clearly from the cover, indeed!

But we still mention the data of the carrier and Tamla Motown as a label record company is emphatically present there.

So we agree.
So my proposal for the time being Tamla Motown is not separate but attached to each other. If you add Tamla separately yourself, I do not think that is correct for reasons I gave. I'm fine with you if you do if it's on the label. I hope you add Artone because it is about this special series.
joe

So I changed the label again from 176797 . The label on the record is clearly Tamla-Motown and not both separately. If you want to do it very correctly, then you should only put Motown there, because it is a trademark (Trademark) of Motown. However, we do not assume the current owners, but the labels that were on them at the time and that is indeed Tamla-Motown.

If you want to know more about the first Tamla-Motown records at Artone, you should talk to Harry Knapschild: http://www.harryknipschild.nl/asp/invado.asp?t=show&id=1410 He has a very interesting site about the record world and focuses on Artone in particular, but hits Tamla-Motown not over.

If you have read that link, you will see that Artone was more of a shop / distributor and they cannot 'yet' be placed in a separate field. Artone is not on the record, so Dick is right again that it should not be placed at the label field.

Furthermore, the release numbers Joe mentions from Go and Tamla have been placed as links to comics. I don't think that's the point.

If you do not put the numbers on the letters, the forum program will think they are Catawiki numbers and a link will be created.

Is that new? That can be very useful. Then you no longer have to fiddle around with copying the link (at least I always argue with that (or he does not want to include the text color (becomes white instead of black)), or he copies the entire link or only the text ).

The problem then only arises if you just want to mention a number that the forum will link to.

The agreement is, and I did not agree with that at the time, that labels should be separated. So Tamla separately and Motown separately. That is why I took them apart.

If you want to do it very correctly, you just have to put Motown there

And that is not entirely true. Berry Gordy had multiple labels in the US. The best known are Tamla and Motown. He used Tamla for solo artists, as you can see beautifully on the cover of Blowin 'in the wind. There is the original Tamla release number at the bottom. The Motown label was used for groups.

When the artists from Gordy's stable were very successful, he also wanted to conquer the European market. For that export he came up with a new label and that became TamlaMotown together. The Artone firm pressed and distributed it under license. Hence the own Go-release number.

The annoying thing is that Artone was not only a distributor, but also released records under Artone's own label. Just like EMI.

The difference between a distributor and a (record) publisher is therefore in a very shadowy area. Phonogram also released singles imported under its own Philips label.

That's why I think it's fine to mention Artone in addition to Tamla and Motown.

To respond to my own quote, I'm just saying Tamla-Motown was a Motown Records label. That is because it is on the records with that label. So by that way I mean that Motown is the overarching label and maybe predominates (??).

I also agree that Tamla and Motown should not be listed separately. After all, they are not 2 separate companies and stick that Tamla-Motown label on all records dating from that period. That's like not splitting RCA-Victor (which is in the instructions, but is a similar case). After all, we want to keep track of the time period and only see the records from that time with that label? Furthermore, splitting also keeps confusion and duplication in hand, because if you can't find something, you post it again.

If Artone also released their own records, you can certainly mention that to the label. I also think that there should also be a field for the distributor.

Shady areas will therefore always wander back and forth, because some think so and others don't. So we are dealing with floating items within CataWiki .

Het zijn immers geen 2 aparte bedrijven en plakken op alle uit die periode stammende platen dat Tamla-Motown label.

Het zijn helemaal geen bedrijven, maar labels die allebei eigendom waren van Berry Gordy. De periode waarin ze verschenen heeft er weinig mee te maken. Ook hier in Nederland zijn er platen verschenen met alleen Motown-label. Zie CW 2100169.

In de Verenigde Staten zijn er toen geen platen uitgebracht op het TamaMotown label. Die zijn alleen in Europa verschenen.

RCA-Victor is inderdaad eenzelfde verhaal, evenals bv RCA-Camden. en zo zijn er wel meer. Meestal een budget-label (Camden). EMI had bv Regal als budgetlabel.

Er is best wel wat voor de splitsing te zeggen. Wat mij betreft graag zelfs, maar dan moet je wel op de combinatie kunnen zoeken en selecteren. En dat is dus niet. Marco en René hebben daar al eens naar gekeken en het is dus erg ingewikkeld om te programmeren.

We willen toch immers de tijdperiode bijhouden en alleen de platen uit die tijd met dat label zien?

Volgens mij is er geen sprake van het bijhouden van een tijdperiode.

Verder houdt splitsing ook verwarring en doublering in de hand, want als men iets niet kan vinden, dan plaatst men het nog een keer.

Nee hoor. Een splitsing levert geen doublering op. Er staat gewoon Tamla Motown. Alleen staat het onder elkaar en niet op een regel. Doublering krijg je als mensen niet goed zoeken, kijken en vergelijken.

Als Artone ook eigen platen uitbracht, dan mag je dat zeker vermelden bij het label.

Wat mij betreft is dat geen kwestie van mogen, maar van moeten :-)

After all, they are not 2 separate companies and stick to all records from that period that Tamla-Motown label.

They are not companies at all, but labels that were both owned by Berry Gordy. The period in which they appeared has little to do with it. Also here in the Netherlands records have been released with only the Motown label. See CW 2100169 .

In the United States, no records were released on the TamaMotown label at that time. They only appeared in Europe.

RCA-Victor is indeed the same story, as is RCA-Camden for example. and so there are more. Usually a budget label (Camden). EMI had eg Regal as budget label.

There is quite a bit to be said for the split. As far as I'm concerned, even, but then you have to be able to search and select on the combination. And so that is not. Marco and René have already looked at this and it is therefore very complicated to program.

After all, we want to keep track of the time period and only see the records from that time with that label?

I don't think there is any time period tracking.

Furthermore, splitting also leads to confusion and duplication, because if something cannot be found, it is placed again.

Oh, no. A split does not result in a duplication. It just says Tamla Motown. It's just that it's below each other and not on a line. You get duplication when people don't search, look and compare properly.

If Artone also released their own records, you can certainly mention that to the label.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not a question of being allowed, but of having to :-)

No, it is not. A split does not result in duplication. It just says Tamla Motown.

This is only possible if you have entered the Tamla Motown label for the record in question. Otherwise, you should look at Tamla and then filter for Motown. I don't think that is possible and it would also be easier to do that in one go, hence the Tamla Motown label as a choice to enter?

I don't know how you enter records, but I look, initially search either by artist or by title. Never on label.

But if you only search for Tamla or Motown, you will find all items that have both labels. And of course also the items with only Tamla (American editions).

The problem is not in not being able to find TamlaMotown items, but in the selection. I would like to limit the selection to only TamlaMotown, so you can see which records have been released on that label only in Europe or the Netherlands. And that is not possible now. You could if you thought of TamlaMotown as a label. But unfortunately there is an agreement to separate duplicate labels.

We are indeed in the process of updating the rubric. In the first instance, and this is now being tested by us, there will be separate tracks with associated information. For example artist, time, composer, etc.

It seems logical to me that afterwards the search module will also be adjusted, because what we really want is search and select by track.