133-1669 - Westwego "Golden" Anniversary (no #) - Roberta Sherwood - Lazy River
133-1669 - Westwego "Golden" Anniversary (no #) - Sidney Arodin - High Society

This 45 has the same code in the deadwax on both sides (actually 133-1669-1). The deadwax also contains W-101 and W-102 for A and B side, plus the Dover account number 86. The font on the label is also typical for Cosimo 45s.

I don't know what Golden Anniversary this refers to. Sidney Arodin (1901-1948) was born in Westwego and wrote "Lazy River". He started playing clarinet at 15, so maybe that was the Golden Anniversary in 1966?

Added to 45cat:
http://www.45cat.com/record/nc325080us

Peter and everybody:

This one kind of presents a conundrum -

There are several links on the web to a pamphlet (or something) that's in the University of New Orleans Library:



Which would seem to indicate that the actual release date of this 45 was around the time the booklet was published...

There's no question that the '133-1669' is a Cosimo Code - but it appears to be three years off - which kind of leads to another un-addressed issue; the addition of the '1' to certain codes. As 1669 was indeed already issued in 1966 (on ACE 672), does the added number somehow mean it's out of sequence, or a reprint from an old 'mother'?

There is a 'i' added, for instance, to the code on the copy of White Cliffs 200 that is front and center on the home page video link, but we omit it on the 1964 page. As, I imagine, this Mardi Gras fave was pressed every year, does the '1' mean it was issued later?

SO - there you have it. Although I'm certainly willing to put this one on the 1966 page, with an appropriate caveat, the 1969 release date kind of drags our whole consecutive code assignation premise into question...

Your thoughts, mighty Codists?

-red

This would be my vote. But it's only a postulation.

It was indeed almost certainly released in 1969, and the anniversary was probably because Westwego was founded 100 years ago, see http://www.cityofwestwego.com/history.asp.

With the extra "1" it could indeed be a reissue from an old master, but then it's still odd that both sides have the same code.

It could also be a code they made up for the occasion, representing a date (1669 for January 6 1969).

BRILLIANT!!

I'd say you are right on the money - like those look-alike Sax Kari codes we talked about...

http://cosimocode.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=279

Thanks!

Yet both sides represent the first re-press in a corporate sense.

The invented 1/6/69 number is honestly a solid premise, but it's a bit whimsical, I guess. Considering how erratic the assigned client codes are, though, I'm not dissuaded by whimsy alone.

In that vein, has anyone ever gotten a grasp of why the client codes are so disparate/non-consecutive - and in some cases - 133 - potentially overlapping multiple accounts?

Pardon my ignorance if I am currently displaying it.

In a word: No.