data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a37a/6a37a2433fc8f7f83b44caace8a98357c117029b" alt="No Avatar" | chang4pian4
Korean 45 blog: http://koreanvinyl.wordpress.com/ Member since Feb 2013 7 Points | I'd like to add some quick thoughts to this. I tend to gravitate towards country of manufacture with an Export Issue notation.
Although I don't have any release examples immediately at hand, the South Korea/Japan relationship is a case to consider. During the Japanese colonial period in South Korea a large percentage of the 78s released in SK (called Standard Play discs here) consisted of Korean music on discs manufactured in Japan. Although they were never intended for release into the Japanese market they were essentially Japanese products, on Japanese labels, usually with the Japanese cat. #'s, recorded in Japan using Japanese based artists/musicians, produced by Japanese music industry players, etc.
Personally, I tend to take the position that listing Export Releases in their release country, especially those with text such as Made in Country X actually printed on the label, rather than their actual country of origin distorts the reading of the history of music industry of the time in both countries.
South East Asia may also be problematic in this sense.
I agree that pressing location is less important than release location, however if the pressing is also one done for a label which is based in that country, with the recording instigated by that label, then essentially the record is a product of that country IMO, regardless of where it ends up in the distribution process.
Please take this thought into consideration.
|