I know there are a lot more records out there that are worth more, a lot more, but I just noticed my beloved vinyl copy of Johnny Cash American IV (The Man Comes Around) is getting pretty darned valuable. Some are asking over $200 now. I didn't buy this to make a profit, I just love the music, esp on vinyl, but I feel like I shouldn't be playing it. At the rate it keeps going up it may put my kids through college! I know I shouldn't feel this way, but do you guys ever get this feeling? I bought it to enjoy and will continue to do so!
I agree Ken. I have records in my own collection which are valued at up to around $600 but I still play them. Of course, I look after them and only play them with a good stylus, but for me it is all about the music and if a record can't be played I don't see any point in having it.
Shouldn't music be the first & foremost reason as to why anyone would want to collect records?
Well, there are some people who actually do collect records just to own the object, and they aren't audiophiles either. I have always thought this to be something that has never made any sense to me, although to some collectors of the object it might! Glenn is right; why own a record if you aren't going to use it?
In your case Ken, you are a music lover, so the audiophile case may as well prove to be true here! As long as you care for any valuable record the same as your common records, they will probably outlast your human lifespan, if it is already in near mint condition! If you are really that anal about your more valuable near mint condition originals, then try to look for a vinyl reissue?!?! If not, then you have nothing to be worried about, unless of course you play that same record everyday without giving it a rest.
Yeah, I didn't buy them as an investment, but to enjoy. I wish I could by a reissue, but no such animal. I just always feel a little guilty playing it, so I just make sure I am really wanting it!
Hi Ken. I say play your record and don't feel guilty for a second. I'm sure you're very careful. And that's more respect than most people would afford (or would have afforded) their records (even back in the day).
I think records are very generational. I don't think future generations will give a fig about the baby boomer artists. I'm an 80s kid and I think they're awful. I donated my entire uncle's 60s collection to the Humane Society Thrift Shop when he passed (Beatles, Doors - all the "Dad Rock"). They auctioned it off and made a load of money for charity, because there are so many retired boomers in western countries. They're a huge demographic and they're artificially driving up the demand.
Once the boomers pass on, the demand will drop significantly - just like it did for 78rpms and silent films, etc. The Rihanna generation won't want The Stones. Most of my generation doesn't even want them.
It's your generation's music. It's a big part of who you are. Turn it up loud, and be proud!
OK... how many people have two copies of a record?
One to play... and one save for best?
Nothing to do with value... I know I have several copies of certain titles in my personal collection... if I find something I like and it seems to be obscure, I will try buy up several copies that are available... aiming for the best quality on all, and then, one will be plastic sleeved and put on a shelf as my prized one, another will designated my player, and another copy will be for "if people come round"... a copy I can hand over to them so they can have a good look without fear of my prized copy becoming mauled, or my player getting any marks.
It maybe over the top... but I am sure others buy for similar reasons. Especially if you are collecting all the different sleeve variations... do you need to play them?
If I had paid out £5000 for a black gold label stereo Beatles "Please Please Me"... I know I would probably give it a couple of listens, maybe record it... so I can compare it to other copies and versions... but I wouldn't put it my play stack.
It is about the music... but it's also about the preservation of the music and the artefact.
Originally Posted By : OK... how many people have two copies of a record?
One to play... and one save for best?
Nothing to do with value... I know I have several copies of certain titles in my personal collection... if I find something I like and it seems to be obscure, I will try buy up several copies that are available... aiming for the best quality on all, and then, one will be plastic sleeved and put on a shelf as my prized one, another will designated my player, and another copy will be for "if people come round"... a copy I can hand over to them so they can have a good look without fear of my prized copy becoming mauled, or my player getting any marks.
It maybe over the top... but I am sure others buy for similar reasons. Especially if you are collecting all the different sleeve variations... do you need to play them?
If I had paid out £5000 for a black gold label stereo Beatles "Please Please Me"... I know I would probably give it a couple of listens, maybe record it... so I can compare it to other copies and versions... but I wouldn't put it my play stack.
It is about the music... but it's also about the preservation of the music and the artefact.
Funny you should mention buying multiple copies. I bought the very last copy anyone had in stock, from Acoustic Sounds, and it was defective! They told me they would be getting more in so I returned it and they never did. The price had started going up here in the states already approaching $100 so I was searching frantically to get a copy cheap. Finally found one in Europe cheap and grabbed it up just before the price went through the roof. I wish I had the chance, I would buy 3 or 4 copies at the original price (even if the price stayed flat). On his last release (American VI) I did buy multiple copies keeping one sealed. If it was as good as IV I would buy a couple of more.
Okay, I would say I am more of a nomadic record collector, as I cannot seem to stay in one spot for too long. If you purchase a record, buy it once in the most Mint condition shape you can find it, then move on to the next record.......
For me, too many copies of the same record, when you can use your money to purchase other records, whether it be an obscurity or not, makes not much sense to me, not to mention they take up too much usable shelf space. If I were to do that, I would basically be running circles repetitiously. I say purchase one copy of a record, then if you spot another copy of the same record, then sell it, so that way you can flip it for profit, then purchase the records you are really looking for. After all, there are always going to be other records you are going to need for your record collection. Honestly, when you consider how much money you spent on multiple copies of just one record, you could have saved quite a bit of money! I call that an obsessive compulsive record collector.
My views on reissues...........
Reissues are basically good for extreme rarities that are so hard to find, that even if you were to go seeking them out, the chances in finding a copy is downright unlikely. In cases of where a record is worth over $200.00, only 100 pressings total exist, or whatever it is your budget will allow, reissues if they are done right, aren't so bad of an investment after all. In fact, there are some out of print reissues on vinyl that actually at times compete with the originals as far as value is concerned!
Just a little extra of my 2 cents on this.........
Obsesive compulsive record collecting disorder... I think that sums it up!
:-)
I collect some records for the music... but I also collect for being a collector... similar to most other avenues of collecting, it's not always about the using of the object but owning it.
So... some of my collecting is on certain labels... sometimes they produced rubbish, but I need it to fill the gaps... but always hunting for the more ellusive items. Now I'm like Mel Gibson in "Conspiracy Theory", I don't feel right a week goes by without me buying a record on this label... and with most running to less than 100 copies... it's not easy... however... as an indication of how 'sad' I am... I have approximately 280 different records on the label, and one of the records in the collection I now have 47 copies of. I know I need to go out more and get a life... but when I do... I go past record shops, thrift sales, car boot sales, hunting for more copies.
Originally Posted By DeeDee: Hi Ken. I say play your record and don't feel guilty for a second. I'm sure you're very careful. And that's more respect than most people would afford (or would have afforded) their records (even back in the day).
I think records are very generational. I don't think future generations will give a fig about the baby boomer artists. I'm an 80s kid and I think they're awful. I donated my entire uncle's 60s collection to the Humane Society Thrift Shop when he passed (Beatles, Doors - all the "Dad Rock"). They auctioned it off and made a load of money for charity, because there are so many retired boomers in western countries. They're a huge demographic and they're artificially driving up the demand.
Once the boomers pass on, the demand will drop significantly - just like it did for 78rpms and silent films, etc. The Rihanna generation won't want The Stones. Most of my generation doesn't even want them.
It's your generation's music. It's a big part of who you are. Turn it up loud, and be proud!
DeeDee, I just happened to catch your comment here rather a bit late, and I would like to make a response to what you are mentioning here..........
I beg to differ on your comment that records are generational. I am 36 and I may not be from the baby boomer generation, but I still find joy listening to music from the 60's-70's, regardless if this is music that came from my parents generation or not. Music, if it is good, knows no boundaries of age, regardless of when it was made! If the music stands up through the test of time, then it is good, despite it's vintage date! In fact, most music from the 20th. century is still quite as relevant today as it was then! Why, you might ask? Because much of that music from the 50's-70's shaped much of what became today's rock or pop, and so with that said, it is still relevant. There are a lot of people your age DeeDee that still appreciate & listen to the classic rock & pop from the 60's-70's. Blues 78 RPM's are still quite highly revered and collectible. Just look at Jack White from the White Stripes or the Raconteurs, he still listens to Blues music, and has a large collection of those records, and he isn't a baby boomer..........
As far as vinyl is concerned, well, I find it rather interesting when I see people who are younger than me at the age of 20 going into record shops & purchasing vinyl! Actually, you might even be surprised to find out how old some of the people are who purchase vinyl on Ebay or MusicStack for that matter. Is it predominantly an older age group? Yes, but there has seemingly been an uprising of younger people purchasing vinyl too nowadays for like the last couple of years! And what are the good percentage of what kids are looking for in vinyl? Classic rock albums from the 60's-70's. So, is it really generational? No, absolutely not from my personal experience of this. Is it a matter of musical taste or preference? Yes, let's just that it is. I think stating a general remark such as it being a "generational thing" comes off as a bit stereotypical, which is the same as saying that all people that are African American listen to Rap & Hip Hop. Wasn't Jimi Hendrix a Psychedelic Blues Rocker?
As far as Rihanna is concerned? Well, let's just see how much musical staying power she has after 30 or so years when she is no longer popular. After all, Justin Bieber is already looking for other things to do at this point because his music career(if he ever did really have one)is going down the gutter, and he is no longer the rage. THAT IS the problem with much of today's mainstream music DeeDee; the people you hear of today making music have much shorter careers nowadays than they did years ago. Heck, at least with the Rolling Stones, they still remain a great concert draw, and still have a following. This isn't just relegated to older people either! Young and older people alike are still listening to the Rolling Stones and this is almost more than 50 years since they started! If all of the Beatles were still alive today for a reunion, they would be fondly remembered, whereas if like 50 years from now you you were to witness a Rihanna concert reunion, would people will be like: Huh, who is that?
Again, when it comes to music, it is all about the staying power and how the artists keep their music as vital & fresh as it was years ago to keep them in the collective consciousness of public memory!
This again, is just my 2 cents on the matter..........
Anyone else in here who listens to modern music agree with what I am saying or if not, I am curious to get anyone's views. Besides, this would make for a good discussion. It's dead in MusicStack lately, and it would be nice to have more involvement.
I do listen to modern music, but mainly it is Indie artists, and not stuff on commercial radio.
I made an account on this website to specifically respond to DeeDee. Well, no not really. I'm planning on selling off half of the record collection we inherited. But I have to reply to DeeDee.
My wife and I are only 27 & 28 but we both love old music. We listen to the Beatles almost every day (we'd happily sell our souls to the devil for concert tickets if all the Beatles were alive and touring, V J). We also love the Doors, the Yardbirds, Dylan, Hendrix, the Who, Elvis, the Stones, there's just too many to list.
Music today doesn't even begin to compare with the craftmanship of music several decades ago. Most people won't care about popular music from today because it's mass produced for mass consumption, while artistry is often ignored. The musicians that do follow in the footsteps of the great musicians from the past are often neglected by labels.
I digress, but the point is, people from younger generations can still enjoy classic rock, and should be exposed to it as often as possible. :)
Originally Posted By Grays: I made an account on this website to specifically respond to DeeDee. Well, no not really. I'm planning on selling off half of the record collection we inherited. But I have to reply to DeeDee.
My wife and I are only 27 & 28 but we both love old music. We listen to the Beatles almost every day (we'd happily sell our souls to the devil for concert tickets if all the Beatles were alive and touring, V J). We also love the Doors, the Yardbirds, Dylan, Hendrix, the Who, Elvis, the Stones, there's just too many to list.
Music today doesn't even begin to compare with the craftmanship of music several decades ago. Most people won't care about popular music from today because it's mass produced for mass consumption, while artistry is often ignored. The musicians that do follow in the footsteps of the great musicians from the past are often neglected by labels.
I digress, but the point is, people from younger generations can still enjoy classic rock, and should be exposed to it as often as possible. :)
My point exactly Mr. Gray! We need more people like you with a voice to speak their minds about quality music, no matter what time frame it comes from. Again, good music knows no boundaries of time if it stands up well.
So, I beg to ask this question: Does it really matter if the music comes from the 60's, 70's, 80's or 90's? If the music holds up well, despite it's age, and sounds good, then I say the age doesn't matter then.........
Also, don't forget that besides all of the classic rock radio staples from the 60's & 70's, there are also many more other obscure or underground artists that never received the attention on the radio that they deserved, and some of these artists are equally as good as the artists that did get exposure! There are many great treasures waiting for you to discover, so the key is to continue to keep unearthing those special pieces when you come across them. We are living in a much better age now more than ever to rediscover these obscure underground musical treasures from the 60's & 70's. With tools such as certain books, and of course the internet, there is a wealth of information of this stuff out there that almost makes the possibilities of discovery endless!
Disclaimer: The words and opinions expressed on this website are those of the author(s) of the postings and do not necessarily state or reflect the views of MusicStack and/or its employees. Publication on this website should not be considered an endorsement. MusicStack and/or its employees do not express or imply any warranty or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information on this website. MusicStack and/or its employees will not be held liable for any direct or indirect loss or damage arising under this disclaimer or in connection with our website. By using our website, you accept this disclaimer in full.
