This is how “bad” it has become. When you enter “Dittolino Discs” into Google you get 20 hits ** every single one of them pointing back at this blog**!! How can I do research this way? OK, there may only have been less than 50 people since the invention of the internet and search engines to enter that label name but that is beside the point. Well, here we go then, adding THE Dittolini Disc master posts then.
floydboots.com have always maintained that: “Whilst together Dub & Ken also released albums on…. Dittolino Discs”
Where it gets really interesting when you look up the entries for the sole Dittolino Pink Floyd title – LIVE :
and the one it is based on, according to them: TMOQ’s ‘missing in Hot Wacks’ double, LIVE (2804):
floydboots.com then writes: “ANOTHER ODDITY IS THAT TMOQ WERE ALSO CERTAINLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DITTOLINO RECORD LABEL AND THIS TITLE WAS RELEASED ON DITTOLINO DISCS AS PINK FLOYD ‘LIVE’, BUT DIFFERENT PRESSING PLATES WERE USED (D2 A/D)…
“THIS TITLE WAS NOT LISTED IN THE ‘OFFICIAL’ TMOQ CATALOGUE WHICH WAS IN FACT PRODUCED SOLELY BY ‘DUB’ AFTER THE SPLIT, SO IT IS REASONABLE REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT THIS ALBUM IS ENTIRELY THE WORK OF ‘KEN’ ON HIS OWN. “
[In regards to the finding that two sources exist for this Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, 23 October 1970, recording, the experts do seem to be in agreement that what can be found on the vinyl bootlegs ‘TMOQ 2804’ and LIVE (Dittolino) and the 1980s reissue CYMBALINE (TMOQ) all came from the same source tape – see http://roio.prv.pl/Pink%20Floyd%20Solo.html]
So, if we decide to follow the logic that ‘2804’ was Ken’s work, could we then also infer that Dittolini Discs was all Ken? This label was pressed in the Southern California as well, I would venture a guess, so that is another link.
What speaks against this is that Ken has never mentioned having been behind the Dittolino titles (not that there were that many). Any opinions on this?