Re: Rolling Stones - Aftermath Album Review
In the UK back in that time the record companies wouldn't place singles on albums in a lot of cases, however in the US they would usually end up on a album due to various reasons like licenses. This was quite common from the mid '60's to the early '70's.
The Stones' label in the UK was Decca but in NA it was London which was owned by Decca. Decca formed the London label in the US after the ownership was split between the US and UK ownership thus Decca couldn't release UK albums in the US so they formed London to release albums in the US.
Does that make sense?
There is quite a history of conglomerations, divisions, and take overs of record labels, license aquisitions and subsidary labels. Really, there should be a university course offered.
BTW, great review.
In the UK back in that time the record companies wouldn't place singles on albums in a lot of cases, however in the US they would usually end up on a album due to various reasons like licenses. This was quite common from the mid '60's to the early '70's.
The Stones' label in the UK was Decca but in NA it was London which was owned by Decca. Decca formed the London label in the US after the ownership was split between the US and UK ownership thus Decca couldn't release UK albums in the US so they formed London to release albums in the US.
Does that make sense?
There is quite a history of conglomerations, divisions, and take overs of record labels, license aquisitions and subsidary labels. Really, there should be a university course offered.
BTW, great review.