I don´t know if we have already had this discussion, sorry if yes.
There was signing session before a gig in 1968 in switzerland:
One of this lovley pieces was sold in ebay in November, but unfortunatly I missed it, I would have bought it for that price...
If there is interest I can try to translate the website essentially in the next days.
This looks like "S.B..." to me. I never said it reads "Syd Barrett" or anything beyond "S.B....", I am merely saying it is a pretty odd combination of letters to have in this context. Obviously it is highly suggestive from your response. Such a peice of this date needs to be examined carefully - like the "1954 Elvis" - it asks for it. Such questions should not be a problem. But Gilmour might have signed for Waters, Mason might have added the "S.B..."? Many questions here to me.
These 2 definitely stand out as authentic
Amazing sale prices
This is a fun thread.
I have no problem with Roger Waters. I have a problem with the "S.B." which is NOT how Syd signed.
I in no way meant to imply that the SB was authentic Syd signed. I meant that it could have been put there by a band member as a tribute to him.
But closer looks reveal that it's not S Barrett at all.
Aren't the mystery name/initials purely that of the owner?
There is no way to know that. It could be. I can't imagine signing the front of an LP signed by all Floyd but back then it was not worth what it would be today. It is an auspicious date. It has been suggested those may be the owners initials - but what about the other name? It is also an odd combination so close to the Gilmour. What worries me though are those matching loops and that no one has seen a Waters like that at all. It has been suggested Dave signed for Waters. I don't know but something seems odd - those loops should not interact in that manner. Especially with one slightly larger than the other. The size relations of the names seems odd to me compared to others signed that day. All food for thought.
Recently there was a 1954 "Elvis" that was not real IMO and that was 1954 - an auspicious date - and it had the word "Sun" written under the signature. Not "Sun Studios", just "Sun". Some people leapt to the conclusion that the "Sun" must mean "Sun Records" and that "proved" it was real. But that is why the forger placed it there. It was highly suggestive and did work on some. I don't say this LP is a forgery - I say it needs looking at. It is quite different than the others.
I agree with you that the Waters stands out a mile.
Those two are from my own collection and were signed by the band in Zurich 1968. The Waters on the example that is being discussed here looks strange to me too, but the seller is a 100% reliable collector. Maybe one of the other signed for Roger, this could be, but we'll never know. Here is a GREAT 8 X 10" of Floyd signed at the same occasion, on November 17th 1968 at Hazyland Zurich. For more infos etc. check www.sams-collection.ch