CD Album - David Bowie - The Best Of David Bowie 1969/1974 - EMI

CD Album

Artist:	David Bowie
Title:	The Best Of David Bowie 1969/1974
Label:	EMI
Country:	Europe
Date:	Oct 1997
Catalogue:	7243 8 21849 2 8 / 821 8492
Barcode:	724382184928
Format:	CD Album
Collection:	I Own It I Want It
Community:	16 Own
Price Guide:	Valuation Page
» Search eBay #AD » Search Amazon #AD This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated.

PRICE GUIDE

Add Valuation

Track	Artist	Title	Composer	Rating
01	David Bowie	The Jean Genie	David Bowie	9.8 Rate
02	David Bowie	Space Oddity	David Bowie	9.5 Rate
03	David Bowie	Starman	David Bowie	9.3 Rate
04	David Bowie	Ziggy Stardust	David Bowie	9.5 Rate
05	David Bowie	John, I'm Only Dancing	David Bowie	9.0 Rate
06	David Bowie	Rebel Rebel	David Bowie	9.3 Rate
07	David Bowie	Let's Spend The Night Together	Jagger, Richards	8.8 Rate
08	David Bowie	Suffragette City	David Bowie	9.0 Rate
09	David Bowie	Oh! You Pretty Things	David Bowie	9.5 Rate
10	David Bowie	Velvet Goldmine	David Bowie	6.3 Rate
11	David Bowie	Drive-In Saturday	David Bowie	9.8 Rate
12	David Bowie	Diamond Dogs	David Bowie	9.0 Rate
13	David Bowie	Changes	David Bowie	9.8 Rate
14	David Bowie	Sorrow	Feldman, Goldstein, Gottehrer	9.0 Rate
15	David Bowie	The Prettiest Star	David Bowie	9.5 Rate
16	David Bowie	Life On Mars?	David Bowie	9.8 Rate
17	David Bowie	Aladdin Sane	David Bowie	8.8 Rate
18	David Bowie	The Man Who Sold The World	David Bowie	9.0 Rate
19	David Bowie	Rock 'N' Roll Suicide	David Bowie	9.8 Rate
20	David Bowie	All The Young Dudes	David Bowie	7.8 Rate

Notes

Compilation
Standard CD case with fold out booklet
Made in Holland

Images

Number: 737109 THUMBNAIL Uploaded By: Bodston SUBS Description: Cover	Number: 737110 Uploaded By: Bodston SUBS Description: Booklet Rear	Number: 737111 Uploaded By: Bodston SUBS Description: Behind Tray	Number: 737113 Uploaded By: Bodston SUBS Description: Back and Spines
Number: 737114 Uploaded By: Bodston SUBS Description: Disc

Comments and Reviews


Apollo59 9th Apr 2017		Hi PhilMH, Well, yes, I'm aware of that having bought a few thousand here and there and I think I've previously indicated that. But I do not agree with your analogy of what exactly designates a true International release. Because many discs are made for that very sales purpose and are International. However, just because a title gets shipped to an external territory to that of its original intended market zone, does not automatically give it such concrete status. It could be that It was an unexpected hot seller. There's been hundreds of examples of records selling very well down under yet hardly troubling the top 40 in UK, and vice versa. So if a company is switched on enough to make the most of that point in time by getting extra over from wherever, that action actually concedes that it is a temporary measure and not a planned marketing strategy encompassing multiple territories. There is a difference. And particularly where there exists evidence of a local coding and stocks of manufacture that may well have sold out their initial run. Because it strikes me as kind of odd, as Lee explained below, that he's got copies of the same reissue series from both domestic and Euro. Why would that be? I just think the category is being misused to some extent. And I'll ask this - since when was a Japanese import selling for double the price in a UK store ever considered "International"? Never. They remain Japanese, always were, always will be. Is there one rule for one lot and another for others? Seems to me there is. I also disagree with your belief that the size of a country's market is irrelevant. That market size dictates and determines everything - the whole manufacturing process is geared towards market forces, hence why they operate pre-sales quotas to give a clearer indication of sales ratios. No company is going to manufacture 100 of something that they only expect to sell 20 of. No company is going to ship 20 of something that they hope to sell 100 of etc. Simplification at base level here, I realise, but that's basically how it is approached. Whilst this particular angle isn't the point in hand, it's indicative of why they need to shift stuff, which brings it back to what exactly is an International. So if I sent Lee Wrecker over a copy of my neighbour's wee private press CD of him singing sea shanties, would that qualify as an International - just because it left these shores? Anyway, If you've got the tech-how on how to fix, great, I'm all ears.



Apollo59 9th Apr 2017		Hi Lee Wrecker, I agree with you and said so before with previous comments. OK, so I didn't know that about that particular Bowie title. I'm just going by memory when I used to scour the shops in Sydney and was seeing loads of stuff made Euro/UK. But you know what I'm saying. And it's interesting to know that they do slightly alter the code in Oz, which can only be as a ready reckoner and therefore imho firmly establishes that as a separate entity - because of that coding rearrangement. I said previously that we are in danger of classifying too much as US/UK/EU and that has to be avoided if the system permits. Trouble is - and it occurred to me straight off and looms ever larger now, what if - and it has happened - the original poster made a mistake with the digit codes, some reconfigure the spacing, or leave a digit off the front and end, for only reasons they'll know. And if there's no photocopy stuff it's harder to judge. People have made mention of Discogs as a secondary reference zone, but it's rife with mistakes itself. Another thing - there's way fewer CD press plants operating these days and have been dwindling since the advent of the mp3, which seems to be the preference of the casual people. Which therefore means that more and more discs will be getting shipped around across the world from fewer sources, where a very large percentage could/would be classified as International, right? But that doesn't solve the immediate issue at hand here. I really don't think it matters in which particular country anybody bought a CD in, it's the gubbins printed on it that counts - because we know stuff is moving around, so no surprises there. The sooner we lose this 1960's mentality of the thrills of an "import" or an "export" as something to behold, the better. CDs are nothing like the days of vinyl 45's and LP's, but the system is geared towards that and doesn't work quite as well as it could. No, I haven't read that book you mentioned, but I'll make a point of getting hold of it.



PhilMH 9th Apr 2017		Apollo59, discs manufacured in Europe, USA, and Japan have been distributed right around the world by the subsidiaries or licensees of the major record companies, especially in the early years of CDs. The size of any country's market is irrelevant - if EMI in Australia (or anywhere else) imported a disc from one of their overseas branches for local release, then it was an Australian, etc release as well as a European one, hence the "International" designation. I can imagine that many South American, African and Asian countries received product from overseas before their own factories were established, and probably still do to some extent, as does Australia for reissues or more marginal releases where a local manufacturing run isn't justifiable. I have suggested previously on this site that perhaps the country field be modified to accept multiple country inputs, as RYM allows. In the absence of that, we could use the existing "Add Tag" feature, which is repeatable, to enter the applicable country name in the first "Add Tag" field, then in the optional "Tag Type" field enter "Release Country".



Lee Wrecker 9th Apr 2017		Hi Apollo59, "The Best Of David Bowie 1969 / 1974" was released and manufactured in Australia with mostly the same details. The only difference (see pics here) being the secondary UK cat# 821 8492 being shortened to 8218492 (no UK or space between the 1 and the 8) which is a peculiar habit of EMI in Australia and happens very often across a variety of releases. You are right that Australia is a tiny market but this is a global site and any systems for entry we use should work anywhere not just the UK, Europe and USA. You also mentioned that it's "not too difficult just to ship 50,000 copies over to Oz" and this is true but this also causes problems. As many US and European CD releases land in our stores as regular releases for our market which technically according to 45 Worlds rules makes them international. This is not a good fit and very difficult to prove from our end but the 1999 EMI Bowie back catalogue releases are a good example. I own 6 or 7 of these half of them are European releases and half are Australian pressings or at least printed here on European glass. The only difference once again with these releases is the sec. cat# as I outlined above. Australia is a major problem when it comes to the data entry system we use on this site. The real issue of the majors shipping small quantities of CDs to Australia is that it internationalises them in terms of how we should enter them on this site. Personally, I don't do it - I'm quite happy to list my European Stax, Warner Archives, and US Chess (MCA), Instant and the like as from where they're made and don't want to argue the toss. You said "Australia is a tiny market and should not be considered as any kind of indicator" but this site has to work for all of us and procedures need to be clear of unintended consequences. Unfortunately the way the Australian CD market operates could be a big problem as it has the potential to make nearly everything in CD World international the way things stand at the moment. Anyway enough of that I've read Heylin's "The Great White Wonders" and enjoyed it immensely. Have you read "Cowboys and Indies: The Epic History of the Record Industry" by Gareth Murphy? I thought it was an entertaining romp through the history of the industry. You might like if haven't already read it.



Apollo59 9th Apr 2017		Hi Lee Wrecker, I'd like to add to a couple of points should be mentioned here. Firstly, if every same title release, albeit with same catalogue numbers isn't separated by country/region of manufacture - what happens to the archive data list? Why can't there be a separate entry for the disc made in Holland and that made in UK? Isn't that the whole point of the exercise - to ascertain exactly what's out there. The very reason that I happen to own the UK manufactured version as opposed to the Holland, is because I bought it on the day of release (or pretty much). Those owning the made in Holland version although having bought it in UK, would have purchased much later after the UK stocks depleted and extra stock as required were moved in from the Euro depots. This happens all the time, or at least since the advent of data storage technology, as opposed to back in the 70's with vinyl, where large stocks would be languishing in some warehouse in Germany, with not a copy to be found on a shelf in UK. Basically, one would not have been able to get hold of a made in Holland edition in the UK upon this disc's release - and vice versa were one buying in Holland, but you might not know that living in Australia. Secondly, honestly, Australia is a tiny market and should not be considered as any kind of indicator. Considering this was the 3rd time around as a CD pressing, I think it's safe to say that EMI were smart enough to know that sales numbers wouldn't be that high as to warrant separate manufacture in both the EU and Australia. It's not too difficult just to ship 50,000 copies over to Oz, as that's about all it would have sold. However, I'm with you all the way with everything else you stated. I'm beginning to think, correction, I know I know a hell of a lot more about Bowie's releases - and a whole load of other artists, too, than the casual fan and probably the Moderators - if they were honest. I have a data info list of my Bowie collection which runs to 94 A4 pages. Technically this CD is a European release and not an International. Anything can be international - all one needs to do is order them from one territory to another. I used to do this with Italian bootlegs and ship them over to Singapore and Jakarta - that was my "weekend" hobby job. I could also have organised an account with any distributor and imported their discs, too, but I wasn't interested in mainstream stuff, just top end quality bootlegs. You might have bought some of my Italian stuff down your way as I also sold on to shops in Sydney and Melbourne. Also if you've ever been in Dubai or the Gulf region, you will see that all USA, UK, European (and anywhere else for that matter) CD's have a sticker placed on the front sleeve (under the casing) stating "For Sale In Gulf States Only", basically meaning that they cannot be exported back out again. These CD's may have been made in Holland, for example, but had never originally been intended for distribution to the Gulf, and only have been because of a few entrepreneurial individuals (usually from the Indian community) who have opened up retail CD shops and selling to the local ex-pat community. Another point I'd like to make - the entry facility data proforma for bootlegs. Now any major dude will tell you (yes, I am one, t-shirt, anorak, the lot) that most major artists (not those "majors" recording now, obviously!) will have a ratio of around a minimum of approximately 50 bootlegs available for every one of their official albums. In some cases it's at extremity levels, for example, Jimi Hendrix (of which I own every single recorded second of music that he recorded) with some 830 bootlegs out there (plus several hundred private collectors tapes not in general circulation). How is an entry under "Bootleg" ever going to achieve anything here? Is the country of manufacture just an off-the-cuff semi-interesting by-note? Did they realise that bootleg manufacturing started in western European territories, moved to Eastern following the shut down cull when the record companies eventually smartened up their act and ended up in Israel? Or is nobody interested? The naivety of the proforma planning is remarkable, obviously designed by the guy with pipe and slippers who bought his records from Woolworths and Boots The Chemist, all being Greatest Hits and Best Of's etc. Don't they understand the plethora of duplicate titles employed in this domain, or at least very similar? Did they actually ever realise the magnitude of releases. They obviously never read Clinton Heylin's "The Great White Wonders" history of bootlegs book. Or cast their eyes on "Strangers And Prophets Vols 1 & 2", with full pictorial and written analysis of the first 200 Bob Dylan CD bootlegs, published 1990 & 1991, at only 999 printed copies each. That's 200 silver disc factory pressed bootlegs manufactured from 1988 to 1990. Just the first 200... This is the world that I inhabit - detail, Detail, DETAIL.



Lee Wrecker 8th Apr 2017		Well, here we go, the fact that this was released in more than two jurisdictions UK and Europe (I know one exists within the other) technically means that this is an international release and both versions should be listed on one international entry. Further to the international category being right in this case according to current 45World policy is the fact that the Australian release also has the same cat# and barcode. However, if this is the correct approach (according to the guidelines it is) all these CDs lose their identity altogether and are stored in our database in a fictional category of our own creation that bears no direct link to the product at hand for the site user. Or do we use the other criteria for international in use on 45Worlds of "identical" and get all trainspottery and parochial about secondary cat#s and places of manufacture? A classic example of why the "what's on the tin" method should take preference to the Frankenstein we have created with the international category. How is any site user with a UK, EU, Australian or Canadian (same cat#) copy of this in hand going to know it should be listed as international according to our guidelines? The answer is, they won't and indeed shouldn't be expected to know and herein lies the problem. We are creating a category that doesn't already exist according to the data at hand during the CD entry phase. Personally, I feel that after having put in the hard yards to put in an entry only to find it has been changed to international for some vague reason is demoralising for site users. It certainly is when it happens to me. Particularly when the CD is clearly made for a specific market regardless of its identifying #s matching another release elsewhere. The inconsistency around this on the site laughable here are two of my entries where on both occasions I was wrong but used the both of two methods of entry described above. This album I listed as international based on evidence from Discogs but it was changed to an Australian release. On the other hand this album I entered as an Australian release due to place of manufacture and marketing details only to find that it was later changed to international. Either way you can't win and it paralyses users at the first question on the entry page. I know the theory is to bang 'em in and sort them out later but people don't like being wrong all the time no matter what approach they take and this makes for a very frustrating experience on 45 Worlds. Discuss



Apollo59 8th Apr 2017		Also with exact same catalogue number with CD made in UK and Printed in UK

Add a Comment or Review about this CD

Linked Releases

Argentina - EMI - 1997