Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 3, 2016 at 2:33am

generally speaking I think that signed albums are still the more desirable items, it all depends on how they look though of course.

The normal wisdom is of course that anything signed from 1965 is rarer however signed pictures from 1965 do seem to turn up quite often as they were signed a lot during the period of the film 'Help!' Particularly this shot.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on April 3, 2016 at 5:22am

id rather have the photo

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bruce Juice on April 3, 2016 at 9:41am

Many of the "Help" photos are not nearly as nice as the one you posted. I'd rather have that one than a "Please Please Me" LP but if the photo had slightly faded sigs I'd take the LP with the sharper pen sigs. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 3, 2016 at 9:46am

Sure Bruce, I just posted that to show the picture from 1965 that you see signed the most often, not usually as nicely as this one as you say.

Without pictures of specific pieces it is hard to make the choice.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan on April 3, 2016 at 9:51am

This is the reason I brought this up. Normally an LP would be the easy choice but what's a better investment? One of 75 PPM LPs or one of 25 Help photos (being in near mint condition probably more like 1 of 5 or so). Both extremely expensive but do people value format or condition more?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 3, 2016 at 9:56am

I think it goes down to specific qualities of the pieces involved rather than rarity in this case (I think you've chosen two good examples in terms of desirability). Visual impact would play a big role in any decision that I made.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on April 3, 2016 at 11:37am

I always thought the sages of this hobby regarded LPs as the holy grail of Beatles autographs. Like a painter signing his canvas.

I don't buy into this argument. For one thing a musician creates music, which cannot be signed as such (except the original score or perhaps the sheet music). An author signing a book seems more like a painter signing his canvas but obviously books are usually mass produced and nowadays often signed in large numbers too.

Usually signed LPs are pretty ugly. I remember a horrible red felt tip Revolver going for tons of money at Sotheby's a few years back. Very rare but ugly. The same goes for the only known Abbey Road examples.

As for PPM, nearly all of these look a mess because they are signed on top of, or around, printed text. To me that means low visual appeal. There is another one coming up in the UK soon by the way. Pretty aggressive £18k - 25k+ estimate. See the attached...

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• PPM 6 April 2016.jpg, 65 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 3, 2016 at 11:16pm

I love the look of that autographed PPM. What I really like is that it's an earlier style of autograph than would have been signed even a month or two later. Truly one of the earliest ever albums autographed by The Beatles.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul on April 4, 2016 at 12:36am

Just buy whatever is pleasing to you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on April 4, 2016 at 2:07am

In reply to Karl's message the auction listing does not specify a date but to those who know about such things the following is no doubt relevant:

The Beatles Please Please Me album, fully signed verso by John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and George Harrison, addressed to Pam Love from the Beatles, first pressing with Angus Mcbean status, under the second S in songs, mono, no groove, Matrix XEX421/1N and XEX422/1N. Provenance: The Vendor was given the album from a friend whose father worked at a hotel where The Beatles where performing in 1963, they signed two copies of the album, one for the vendor and one for her friend and the next lot.

Here is the link, which I presume will disappear with the passage of time:

http://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/golding-young-...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on April 8, 2016 at 10:45pm

Unsurprisingly perhaps, the PPM didn't sell - it was a hefty estimate.

On the other hand a sister item without a genuine Paul went for £1,800. Pretty good result although it is an attractive early card with wonderfully clear signatures. I've attached scans...

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• Lot 17 - 1.jpg, 200 KB
• Lot 17.jpg, 266 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 11, 2016 at 2:25pm

I compared the signatures on that PPM album and I'd say it was signed in April 1963. Paul is using a pretty short lived version of his signature with the extended vertical stroke of the 'P' and George is also using a short lived version of his signature with a jagged backstroke on the 'G'. Their signatures changed an awful lot during 1963 and I think this is one of the earliest ever signed Beatle albums, quite possibly with a month of it's release (March 22nd 1963).

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page