Handsome --- just saw this..never before on vinyl

[cactusbot]

I don't know about royalties because I don't know the specifics of the licensing deal but I can guarantee 6131 will make sure the band gets copies of the LP. Whereas I know that won't happen with SRC since they haven't even talked to the band.

[thievesdont]

I will say that I know Quicksand got copies of the SRC reissues. 

[thievesdont]

And thanks for the info cactusbot. 

[thievesdont]

So does anyone know any more information regarding 6131's pressing? They haven't released anything about the mastering/sourcing. Really hope its not sourced from the CD.

 

And why are they making fun of people wanting a refund? Feelings towards SRC aside, can you blame someone for wanting the better (if it is) overall product?

[Willow_Tree_Records]

I won't pretend that I know the behind the scenes happenings, but I will be buying an SRC copy too.

[serum7]

I'm just here for the argument, nothing invested in this whatsoever.

 

Both sides are right really, it's whether you want to look at it with your head or your heart. Technically, it's all legal, not "shady" at all. They aren't sneaking around making bootlegs. They contacted the people that owned the rights, and went through the process, just like 6131. Contacting the band was a formality. Good that 6131 did it, but SRC did nothing wrong by not contacting them. 

 

Is it crappy that things can be carried out this way? Sure, but that's why it's the music business. I love that there's labels out there like 6131, Broken Circles, Animal Style, RFC, Tiny Engines, and so on, that do the things they do for the love of music and the respect they have for the artists making it. Unfortunately there's the other side of it too where people see an opportunity to cash in on something because they can.

 

I hate to see that 6131 isn't issuing refunds though, that's kind of immature of them even if the position they've been put in sucks. 

[chiefwahoo]

I'm just here for the argument, nothing invested in this whatsoever.

 

Both sides are right really, it's whether you want to look at it with your head or your heart. Technically, it's all legal, not "shady" at all. They aren't sneaking around making bootlegs. They contacted the people that owned the rights, and went through the process, just like 6131. Contacting the band was a formality. Good that 6131 did it, but SRC did nothing wrong by not contacting them. 

 

Is it crappy that things can be carried out this way? Sure, but that's why it's the music business. I love that there's labels out there like 6131, Broken Circles, Animal Style, RFC, Tiny Engines, and so on, that do the things they do for the love of music and the respect they have for the artists making it. Unfortunately there's the other side of it too where people see an opportunity to cash in on something because they can.

 

I hate to see that 6131 isn't issuing refunds though, that's kind of immature of them even if the position they've been put in sucks. 

 

I generally agree with you. This is what can happen when you sign a contract with unfavorable terms.

 

But I found it very interesting when the guy from Hum said RCA (I think) was actually in violation of their contract by licensing their LP to SRC. Granted, nobody knows if that's completely true without seeing the contract but that's when I absolutely feel for these bands. Because you know they don't have the money to do shit about it. So it has made me start to think twice when something doesn't have a band's approval.

[cactusbot]

Just for the record, shady does not automatically equal illegal.

Shady - of questionable taste or morality; lacking respectability in character or behavior or appearance.

Sounds pretty accurate to me.

[dethrock]

On Instagram yesterday 6131 posted a text message from someone calling the SRC Handsome reissue a bootleg. 6131 only sent out about half of their 2011 subscription and ripped a bunch of people off, so they can go fuck themselves. I guess what I'm getting at is that 6131 can complain all they want, they're just as shady.

[jerseydave77]

Chased 6131 for 8 months about an order. Haven't ordered from them since and passed on the Handsome PO accordingly despite loving this album. 

 

This is a shitty situation however that's developed. 6131 is unreliable and I'm not a fan of reissues being surprises to the bands involved. 

I'll probably just wait for someone to sell a copy used in six months and avoid dealing with either entity entirely. 

[thievesdont]

On Instagram yesterday 6131 posted a text message from someone calling the SRC Handsome reissue a bootleg. 6131 only sent out about half of their 2011 subscription and ripped a bunch of people off, so they can go fuck themselves. I guess what I'm getting at is that 6131 can complain all they want, they're just as shady.

 

 

 

-Yo bro, can I cancel and get a refund for my Handsome LP so I can get the SRC bootleg that costs more?

 Sincerely,

I don't care about the bands

 

-Haha this makes me laugh.

 

 

Thats what it said. No Sleep emailed a friend of mine the same thing - 6131 will NOT be accepting any cancellations for the Handsome LP.

 

I mean, if you really wanted to you could call your credit card company (and possibly Paypal) to cancel due to the fact that it was a posted/charged preorder and not just an authorization charge.

[somethingvinyl]

Or just get it and flip it on ebay when all the controversy surrounding the release will make everyone want it and pay you lots of money for it.

[sabukweli]

This whole thing is fucked. If only I had used my credit card instead of PayPal funds, I could get out of this horse shit. While overall I can understand them being pissed at SRC, 6131 should be thankful that SRC didn't put this up within the 45-day window from 6131's preorder date. The "fuck you" tone of the communication from 6131 on this is downright shameful. Dude must be a fucking baby. Given that and what happened with the 2011 subscription of theirs, I really hope as many people get refunds through their credit card or bank as possible and that this buries 6131 for good. #GFY6131.

 

If anyone would be willing to buy my gray/400 at cost from me ($20 shipped), I'll eat the cost to ship it to you. Unless somebody can show me proof that the band is getting paid by 6131, I'd much rather have the (almost undoubtedly) superior product from SRC (and I can't justify owning both when there are already 10 records I've had to deny myself this year because I've been living off savings for the past year while an unemployed full-time student). Otherwise, what does the band supposedly endorsing 6131's pressing even mean? Why should 6131 have any more right to press it than SRC?

[thievesdont]

Jesus shit Christ, No Sleep and 6131 are getting into it with people on Twitter over this.

 

FWIW, I reached out to Peter Mengede regarding the SRC/6131 fiasco and hope to hear back from him in a bit.

[museummouth]

No Sleep is calling SRC's a bootleg hahahahahaha

[Guest]

$RC's gonna $RC

[zachblows]

its so funny how worked up people get about this shit, both of these labels most likely got the same licensing and lol at people that think bands really make much money if any off reissues like this! 

[bigbruise]

I'm kind of at a loss. I don't care about this release, I'm just curious why so many people want to support SRC all of the sudden?

[dantheriver]

I'm kind of at a loss. I don't care about this release, I'm just curious why so many people want to support SRC all of the sudden?

 

I also don't care about this release, however it seems like SRC is offering a superior product regardless of whose blessing they have (gatefold, extra 7", remastered for vinyl).  And on top of that plenty of people got screwed over by 6131's sub, and now they won't let people cancel a not fulfilled order (I'm sure they aren't the only label/company that does this, but I've never run into it personally).

[amnstypls]

If anyone decides they'd rather have the SRC than the clear 6131, hit me up. I'll buy it.

[bigbruise]

I also don't care about this release, however it seems like SRC is offering a superior product regardless of whose blessing they have (gatefold, extra 7", remastered for vinyl). And on top of that plenty of people got screwed over by 6131's sub, and now they won't let people cancel a not fulfilled order (I'm sure they aren't the only label/company that does this, but I've never run into it personally).

Ok I got it. It's all very entertaining. And regardless I see joey from 6131 being a dick about it all.

[thievesdont]

Asked Sean from 6131 about it and he said this:

 

 

 

The band has no input on who gets a license. Diff is they knew before hand we were doing it. The other they heard with everyone. they were excited and supportive of ours and we are doing things (like shirts) with their blessing that benefits them.

[sabukweli]

Just talked to Capital One because I had to dispute a charge from Soul Temple Records (the Mightier Than Sword of hip-hop) for a Ghostface record I never got, and I threw this scenario at the lady just to see if I could've gotten my money back if I had used my credit card via PayPal rather than using my funds. She said the only way 6131/No Sleep would have the right to deny cancelling an unfulfilled order is if they included a "no cancellation" policy in the original order terms. Of course there was no such thing, so I would encourage those of you who used your credit card or bank account to dispute the charge if you don't want to pay for it. "This aggression will not stand, man."

 

And FWIW, I really don't care about the gatefold; it's the 7" and the sound quality that I know SRC will deliver on. I can't vouch for any of their other releases, but the Hum, Quicksand, Staring Back, and Park records I have bought from them are flawless in terms of quality, from the sound to the packaging. I wish 6131 would address what their sourcing/mastering details are instead of the twitter circus that's apparently going on. And why the fuck didn't they and/or the band think to put those bonus tracks on a 7"? Fuckin' amateurs.

[thievesdont]

They (SRC) probably had to shell out more for those two tracks, as they were originally only released/distributed overseas when the CD first came out. With that response above, it seems like the band doesn't have any involvement with 6131's pressing outside of them being aware that they would be pressing it.

[sabukweli]

Right. Thanks for posting that. So in essence, it would either be $16 of my money going toward an inferior product from a "shady" label who rips off their customers or $24 of my money going toward a superior product from a "shady" company who doesn't engage in the high moral practice of asking bands whether it's OK to (re-)press their stuff. I'll take the latter (errrr, I would if I could). And once again for the record, I'm not saying SRC's business practices are commendable. I'm just saying that in this situation I'd much rather have their product, and as a customer I should have the right to cancel an unfulfilled order and make the choice I want to make with my money.