I don't know how I never found this out before, but apparently it exists and you can listen to it. Located here, it's a version of Drunken Hearted Man. You can clearly see it's RJ and that it's not the recording we all know - the quality is way worse, suggesting really a test pressing. Did everyone knew about this and didn't tell me?

Pedro, Great find! Another note worth mentioning - in my trip to Clarksdale, there is an old retired Danish dude who owns his own "museum". This is really just a show case of his (massive) private collection. In that collection he has several - yes several - test pressings of both RJ and Charlie Patton. So I know those things are out there, but I had never heard one before. What a great find though - the ability to listen to it! Nice!

I was quite surprised to see that also. Souds like a worthy collection! Do we have information on those test pressings? Does every song he recorded also has a test pressing of it? Maybe even (excuse my huge speculations here) a song he recorded on test pressing which the recorders didn't approve, so it never was recorded commercially. Did he make those tests with H.C. Speir as you speculated on a post?

Well, I think the test pressings are a bit different than what you think. To my knowledge, they would record an artist in a session, and those created the original masters. They often recorded two versions of the song - one the way the artist intended, and one with feedback from the producer, etc. Those originals would be sent back to the main office. From there, test pressings were made - but they were more like test pressings of the records to be sold. Therefore, there wouldn't be a hidden song or anything that was tested and not released. If a song was considered not good enough to be sold, a test pressing would not have been made. At least that is my understanding of it. There may have been test pressings of songs that were never sold, but I doubt there are any songs recorded/tested that we dont know about. HC Speir was present at a number of recording sessions, but usually he had the artists make a "demo" so he could send along the recordings of the music. This wasnt needed though, as the record company's often took his word on who was good and who wasnt. I am sure that tests were made of Patton, Brown, and a few others, but have no idea if they exist today.

http://piggyblues.free.fr/temp/Bothtracks.mp3 Sorry, newbie doesn't understand how to enter links here, but this sample I've just recorded combines the officially released alternate take (left channel) and the "test pressing", altered with Audacity so as to match its speed, pitch, and length (right channel). I told Pedro (one some other forum) that it was a fake, I think this is clear evidence - with the advantage that anyone can redo the test to make sure.

Welcome to the forum! I gave a listen to your recordings. And I do have to say that to me, it does indeed sound like the same take of the same song, one just doctored up slightly. However, we do know that test pressings were made....

Sure, did anyone say that none ever were?

Wow! I wasn't trying to be smart... I was just saying - ya know - that this recording is not a test pressing, but that test pressings do exist! I am not trying to put words in your mouth.. We are in agreement here. I am not trying to argue.

Well everyone, let's get friendly in here. Jrewald, I think you misunderstood Patrice. He wasn't picking on you, we all agree that Robert Johnson and various other artists did in fact record a test pressing. On the other hand, we have inevitable evidence that this recording I found is fake as it could get. Let's try to stay clear of argumenting and fights

I am trying to be friendly. I apologize if I have offended anyone. I only want the same thing we all do - to learn more about the blues! I was not trying to insinuate that Patrice was saying demos were never made. I was merely commenting on it so others would know we are not disputing their existence Like I said, we are on the same page here. The one found online is obviously not real. I just thought it was cool - at least to me - that there are test pressings out there! that's all I am saying. Again, I apologize if I came off the wrong way. I think we are all on the same page with this test pressing stuff...

No offense intended, or felt, from any part, I thought... Maybe it would be a good thing on (most) forums if abrupt comments weren't mistaken for personal hints or blames - we're supposed to be primarily there for the pleasure of sharing, aren't we? I was so much confused by that test pressing scoop, trying to solve it in a hurry, that I jumped in without a word of introduction, sorry. Not much to say, BTW... French guy, over 60, not quite on the "common page" since my introduction to the blues was not rock, but Son House's 1964 LP. One test pressing I haven't heard yet is Tommy Johnson's, which I read was a cover of a Jimmie Rodgers song - maybe this explains that But more generally, there were several legendary takes which even the experts believed to exist, and later proved to be figments of some singers' (or folklorists') imaginations. The mysterious test called See That My Grave is Kept Clean, for which you provided explanations on another section here, Skip James' Throw me Down (which does exist, but is not Skip James), or Big Bill's 1926 sides.

Patrice, I agree whole heartily - and welcome to the forum! Great way to be introduced to the blues, by the way... Yeah, the whole test pressing thing is crazy. There were also "demos" made back then. In several interviews, H.C. Speir has said that he had a little recorder upstairs from his store, where he would record demos of artists. We know that most of the time demos weren't needed if they had H.C.'s recommendation, but none-the-less, demos were made. To me, a "test pressing" is not this demo, but the first "tests" the record company made after recording the artist. Would you agree? it's the first pressing from the master? I just want to clarify. Maybe I am mistaken... Again, welcome aboard!

Am I some kind of a hair-splitter (might be ) or did I get something wrong myself? It seems to me that all recordings which B&GR list as test-pressings are what you call demos, takes which systematically differ from the originals - when there are - and in a usually bad condition, because they were directly cut onto the acetates instead of being pressed from a matrix. AFAIK, Speir's equipment did not allow him to produce any commercialized disk himself, and none of the recordings made in Jackson came out of Speir's shop (see http://www.bluesworld.com/SpierOne.html ) Thinking about it, the term "pressing" itself is incorrect, it has nothing to do with the "white disks" made before putting LP's into production.

Nobody ever claimed they recorded comercially with Speir - just demos, to send to the actual companies which would record them, comercially.

Pedro, I was replying to jrewarld who correctly defined what a test-pressing should be. The initial topic introduced a confusion, which I ignored, since I was priviledging your statement about this sample being a different take, as were all (demo) "tests". Now, did test-pressings (similar to white disks) ever exist for 78's, I have no idea, and if you think it is important I'll gladly question Howard Rye. But if we except collectors who would probably love to possess such physical disks, I do not see the interest of getting a digitized sample of some damaged "first pressing" while a clean version of the same take is available.