Discogs

[Pr33t]

I had thought of this, and I do remember the hand-written ads. I forgot to mention it when I posted what I posted, and was going to bring it up had the conversation continued. That line of discussion seems to have ended, though.

I'll take some of the heat for arguing in the other direction, though I did weigh in about the EX designation It seems the other posters were interested in more of the crushing specifics of other aspects of the discussion. One in which I too have made my point and will back out of.

[ashratom]

I'll take some of the heat for arguing in the other direction, though I did weigh in about the EX designation It seems the other posters were interested in more of the crushing specifics of other aspects of the discussion. One in which I too have made my point and will back out of.

I saw your comments about sealed/mint records and completely agree. Many of these guys came up in the modern era and don't realize that original LP pressings were often very poorly done. Especially in the late 70s and early 80s - and from all over the world. While it's not the only reason, it certainly played a major role in the rise of the CD in the 80s. When I see a record that has obviously never been touched, I'm listing it as New/Mint. And if someone complains that I over graded it, then they're being ridiculous.

As you know, I do play grade many of the records we sell. I use headphones, and it's a quick spot check (less than 2 minutes) - and usually over the areas that look the worst - and the quiet spots (for background noise). Obviously I don't have time for full listens. So I may miss a stick or a skip, which may not even be that visible. It's rare but it can happen.

As a buyer, I'm definitely lenient. Unless someone just really botched the grading, or it was a high priced album that deserved more scrutiny, I'm usually willing to give the seller a bit of slack. In general, I think many sellers actually under grade, which has allowed me to score some great deals over the years.

[ashratom]

LOL. So, I'm not the only one to have been softly harassed by Mr. Freeman for not adding the superfluous details he deems necessary The most ridiculous instance was when he accused me of listing the wrong label for a rare record. I had to remind him that it was me who burned a CDR of that record to his brother Alan many years ago, which is how it made its way to the CD-ROM edition of their book, and he can go and find that CDR on their own shelf to make sure the label was correct. Then I also wrote:

Believe it or not, he only commented on one of my entries since, asking to upload album art, which is something I normally do anyway, but the sleeve of that particular record in my collection had quite a lot of ugly felt pen writing, so I explained the situation and told him that in this particular case I'd rather have someone else upload scans from their copy. Otherwise he's been very quiet and stopped bombarding me with demands that I list every credit for every song. Just to make it clear, I have nothing but respect for the Freemans' work, and they opened my ears to a lot of wonderful music via many years of swapping discs, but their online presence leaves a lot to be desired (especially Steve's on Discogs, though Alan's policing of Krautrock group on Facebook, which involves dogmatically telling people what belongs to the genre and what does not, is more of the same).

Haha! Just reading this thread, tells me these guys have been harassing everyone then. Which means they probably have received some ferocious blowback. Perhaps they might be getting the message? It's clear they lack self-awareness. In any case, as I also mentioned before, I do appreciate the Freeman's enthusiasm of all things Krautrock.

One recent Discogs Freeman funny. I was reviewing the entry for the Eela Craig (1971) on Amber Soundroom. That's the LP version I personally own and I noticed the bonus tracks were completely wrong. So I looked at who edited it. Here, let me just cut and paste it:

"ultimathulerecords
Edit Release
Had a copy of this LP in at Ultima Thule many years ago, above info was wrong , only 2 bonus tracks not 4, corrected track order & added more info."


It's always the loudest mouths that don't follow the rules

I have since corrected the record so to speak.

[moecurlythanu]

I saw your comments about sealed/mint records and completely agree. Many of these guys came up in the modern era and don't realize that original LP pressings were often very poorly done. Especially in the late 70s and early 80s - and from all over the world. While it's not the only reason, it certainly played a major role in the rise of the CD in the 80s.

Not to mention that many 70s Private Pressings were not of the highest quality. Some have little pits or bubbles which are obvious, but are not a defect that occurred over time. They were there when new, so the guy who is arguing that Mint is an absolute grade is just wrong, imo. For me, Mint means "As New, and unplayed, to the best of my knowledge."

In general, I think many sellers actually under grade, which has allowed me to score some great deals over the years.

Yep. I always like to find the ebayer who is obviously not experienced in selling records, but is moving their uncle's collection or somesuch, and describes a record as "very good." Many bidders take that as a grade and steer clear. However, it's a description, and is being used in "real world" terms. I've ended up with some real bargains in those instances.

[Pr33t]

Not to mention that many 70s Private Pressings were not of the highest quality. Some have little pits or bubbles which are obvious, but are not a defect that occurred over time. They were there when new, so the guy who is arguing that Mint is an absolute grade is just wrong, imo. For me, Mint means "As New, and unplayed, to the best of my knowledge."

That guy's opinion is absolute as well, so I'm not going to bother to waste my breath anymore. But I will bring it back to this thread, as I'm curious what others here think. As Tom mentioned above, there is a whole new set of record collectors and buyers out there (and sellers for that matter), and we've seen the traditional standards of grading being thrown out the window. Any time I read something like the Goldmine grading descriptions, I laugh. They don't reflect the reality of how records are actually being graded and sold these days. If I see something graded as VG++ or lower, I'm going to expect some surface noise and probably some other degradation of the sound. Something that is completely listenable, but clearly it's not going to sound like a CD. Is anyone else here expecting these grades to produce near flawless sound like Goldmine describes? I wish there was more room for common sense.

Yep. I always like to find the ebayer who is obviously not experienced in selling records, but is moving their uncle's collection or somesuch, and describes a record as "very good." Many bidders take that as a grade and steer clear. However, it's a description, and is being used in "real world" terms. I've ended up with some real bargains in those instances.

Hah. This is a big strategy for me. I've gotten some great stuff at a fraction of the price by willing to take the risk. I'm sure you've probably beaten me to more of it

This is never going to change, but it does belie the inherent problem in the chosen nomenclature for grading records. Using real world terminology like "Very Good" and "Good" to describe records at the lower end of the quality scale is counter intuitive to many, and also leads to problems with those trying to literally apply it. Using a system of numbers, or more descriptive terms such as "Acceptable" would probably be better.

[spacefreak]

Haha! Just reading this thread, tells me these guys have been harassing everyone then. .

Plus that these guys that want proof for everything keep on supporting the biggest krautrock myth of all times; the Pyramid scam.

[ashratom]

Plus that these guys that want proof for everything keep on supporting the biggest krautrock myth of all times; the Pyramid scam.

. Yes, that. I've called them on the carpet too about that. My comments on the Discogs entry for the Psi-Fi label:

"People believe in Big Foot too. They could just swear they saw him! And yet, 43 years later, not a single LP has surfaced. For 6 albums. 100 copies each you say? So, how many 99-only releases from the UK have been found? Plenty of them! I would even be willing to believe some (not all) of these Pyramid recordings could have come from 1972 and spliced in for authenticity. But they were never actually released on vinyl, that's insulting! But since they went with the ruse of being sold in "art museums" (sure they were - which ones exactly?), then I have no choice but to believe they were recorded in 1996 in the Acme Studios. Most certainly many of you remember the Prescription Drug Series that was to be mail order 100 copies only (another lie - they pressed more than that - but at least they exist!). Anyway, those were strictly recorded with all analog equipment. Anyone who's heard Ohr Musik or Quad will have difficulty placing the sounds beyond the 1970s. And most of the "Pyramid label" albums sounds more modern than they do! Of the 6, Cozmic Corridors, Golem, and Pyramid sound reasonably like the early 70s. The other 3 don't sound anything like 70s music.

If actual hard data comes forth (oh you know - like an actual LP!), then I can retract these statements. I'll sniff a modern repro a mile away, so don't even try that trick.

No other argument is worth hearing, so don't come back with more arguments to the contrary. There are supposedly 600 of them total. What a laugh. Show us the original LPs. Otherwise it's just a fuzzy photo of the Loch Ness Monster.

---

Regarding: http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=2503409

And yet, not one LP has YET TO SURFACE. When does one give up the ruse? My goodness! Come up with ONE ORIGINAL LP of the 6 (SIX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) albums, and we'll withdraw the claims of hoax. "Self-Styled experts". Shudd-up, ya wankers. PROVE IT."

[Levgan]

Had a copy of this LP in at Ultima Thule many years ago

LOL! Alan also always claims he has seen those Pyramid LPs in the record store in Germany. When did it happen? Many years ago, of course!

[Levgan]

Yep. I always like to find the ebayer who is obviously not experienced in selling records, but is moving their uncle's collection or somesuch, and describes a record as "very good." Many bidders take that as a grade and steer clear. However, it's a description, and is being used in "real world" terms. I've ended up with some real bargains in those instances.

Hah. This is a big strategy for me. I've gotten some great stuff at a fraction of the price by willing to take the risk.

Not a mint freak by all means, so been doing this for many years. Works wonders, especially with German sellers. If they write "Gut" (literally meaning "good"), chances are high the record will be EX or maybe even NM.

[ashratom]

Yep. I always like to find the ebayer who is obviously not experienced in selling records, but is moving their uncle's collection or somesuch, and describes a record as "very good." Many bidders take that as a grade and steer clear. However, it's a description, and is being used in "real world" terms. I've ended up with some real bargains in those instances.

Hah. This is a big strategy for me. I've gotten some great stuff at a fraction of the price by willing to take the risk. I'm sure you've probably beaten me to more of it

Not a mint freak by all means, so been doing this for many years. Works wonders, especially with German sellers. If they write "Gut" (literally meaning "good"), chances are high the record will be EX or maybe even NM.

Ah-ha! Now I see who's been outbidding me all of these years

That guy's opinion is absolute as well, so I'm not going to bother to waste my breath anymore. But I will bring it back to this thread, as I'm curious what others here think. As Tom mentioned above, there is a whole new set of record collectors and buyers out there (and sellers for that matter), and we've seen the traditional standards of grading being thrown out the window. Any time I read something like the Goldmine grading descriptions, I laugh. They don't reflect the reality of how records are actually being graded and sold these days. If I see something graded as VG++ or lower, I'm going to expect some surface noise and probably some other degradation of the sound. Something that is completely listenable, but clearly it's not going to sound like a CD. Is anyone else here expecting these grades to produce near flawless sound like Goldmine describes? I wish there was more room for common sense.

This is never going to change, but it does belie the inherent problem in the chosen nomenclature for grading records. Using real world terminology like "Very Good" and "Good" to describe records at the lower end of the quality scale is counter intuitive to many, and also leads to problems with those trying to literally apply it. Using a system of numbers, or more descriptive terms such as "Acceptable" would probably be better.

I agree - that would be much better. I suspect the record grading rules were following along the lines of established collectables like stamps, ball cards, and coins, and then shoehorned in for records. I've seen some guys do just what you suggest regarding other nomenclatures. Personally, I read a description very carefully, and review a seller's background, as to determine how they may grade something over or under what I would expect. It's an art more than science, that's for sure.

[Nijinsky Hind]

Buying used vinyl off the internet is always a risky proposition, that said i've used discogs and have had mostly good luck, things that haven't been so good were either low enough cost it didn't matter or had a good return policy.

Yes you can get a VG anything for pretty cheap there which is a good thing when it comes to rarities you might need.

[moecurlythanu]

I get email alerts when the database is updated on any of the items in my collection. Last night I received one saying that "pressing plant details" had been added.

Seriously? Wtf?

[JeffCarney]

I get email alerts when the database is updated on any of the items in my collection. Last night I received one saying that "pressing plant details" had been added.

Seriously? Wtf?

I get those emails and it only pertains to items I have for sale, since I currently maintain no database of my own collection on their site.

I delete those emails without reading them, because I get so many of them and it's complete overkill.

[Nijinsky Hind]

I get email alerts when the database is updated on any of the items in my collection. Last night I received one saying that "pressing plant details" had been added.

Seriously? Wtf?

Hardcore Beatle LP collectors need to know if it was pressed in Scranton Pa. Or Los Angeles, Lol. Can change value by hundreds of dollars. Some pressings from L.A. Have tiny grey spots in the vinyl.... Seems that John Voight used to work the graveyard shift at the presser and was at the time a heavy smoker... He Used to flick ashes into the melted vinyl. If you find a Beatle record pressed in L.A. With tiny grey spots you can practically retire... The record is said to sound much better than regular pressings and smells different too.

[moecurlythanu]

I get those emails and it only pertains to items I have for sale, since I currently maintain no database of my own collection on their site.

I delete those emails without reading them, because I get so many of them and it's complete overkill.

You can turn off those notifications in your account settings.

[Pr33t]

I get email alerts when the database is updated on any of the items in my collection. Last night I received one saying that "pressing plant details" had been added.

It's one of those things that reminds you that the original purpose of the site was as a discography database I delete them all the time too, but I at least like that people are willing to keep adding information, even if it may be minutiae overkill. There are still so many listings of the stuff we collect that even lacks the basics.

[Nijinsky Hind]

It's one of those things that reminds you that the original purpose of the site was as a discography database I delete them all the time too, but I at least like that people are willing to keep adding information, even if it may be minutiae overkill. There are still so many listings of the stuff we collect that even lacks the basics.

The minutiae is a very important part of record collecting. For example punk rock 45 collectors know how to tell a first posh boy records pressing from the mid to late 70s, from an almost exact re-release from the 90s by just one hardly noticeable difference printed on the label... An almost 200 dollar difference in value and rarity. Those minutiae make a difference, I research my collection as a hobby and it can be fun. Porky prime cut on a zeppelin, 2 uncensored words in a Jefferson airplane track, an added track on One of Dylans first pressings, matrix numbers, even typos like "The Beattles" on a 45. Like stamp collecting its all about little details and oddities.

[JeffCarney]

You can turn off those notifications in your account settings.

Yeah, I know.

[Calabasas_Trafalgar]

The minutiae is a very important part of record collecting.

only if you're selling...

[rottersclub]

I love this stuff:

"Edit Release: Correcting variant 2 matrix, as depicted in the both the image on this sub and the copy I have in hand. If OS of variant 2 velove would like to validate on their copy that would be helpful."

[strawberrybrick]

I recently added an item to discogs, the documentary about Magma's tour of China,NIHAO HAMTAÏ. Some a&&hole decided it didn't belong on Discogs and voted "yes" to have it removed about a dozen times.

Bizarre

[ChrisXymphonia]

only if you're selling...

No, its not. I hardly sell stuff on Discogs but am in the process of going through my entire cd collection and adding as much detail as possible to the versions I have. It satisfies certain autistic / OCD tendencies I have. I really love doing it and I have learned a lot about stuff in my collection, discovering connections between artists which I didn't know of before. Besides that I am also doing little projects where I borrow cd's from a local library (which is actually the second largest music library in the country) which aren't in the database yet. Right now adding cd releases by the Nieuw Sinfonietta Amsterdam / Amsterdam Sinfonietta, which is a superb classical chamber orchestra.

[Oreb]

No, its not. I hardly sell stuff on Discogs but am in the process of going through my entire cd collection and adding as much detail as possible to the versions I have. It satisfies certain autistic / OCD tendencies I have. I really love doing it and I have learned a lot about stuff in my collection, discovering connections between artists which I didn't know of before.

Very much my experience as well. Personally I have no problem with an insistence on documented verification. A database that will attribute vinyl transfer status on the basis of what someone says they can hear is not useful.

[JeffCarney]

Very much my experience as well. Personally I have no problem with an insistence on documented verification. A database that will attribute vinyl transfer status on the basis of what someone says they can hear is not useful.

Give me a break.

The point would be to use reliable people (2-3 if need be) to help further develop what we can compile about sourcing.

Vinyl sourcing on CD is obvious in nearly every case. In those very rare cases where it is not, it can be picked up utilizing waveform analysis. Even if Discogs wanted to hold that type of thing to very high standards of proof, to pretend like we can't know that something like the Ash Ra Tempel albums on Spalax weren't from vinyl is just wasting everybody's time. And it does a disservice to those who don't know and might purchase such CDs under the guise that they are obtaining a tape-sourced product.

But then, I'd guesstimate that maybe half of all prog CDs are sourced from vinyl anyway, so I can only imagine what a project it would be JUST for prog.

All I suggested in the end is that the double-standard be removed. Noting that Germanofon CDs are vinyl sourced but being reluctant to notate that on some of the other obvious examples isn't consistent. However, it appears my pointing this out was taken to heart, as the reference to Germanofon CDs being vinyl sourced was removed. I'm fine with this.

[rcarlberg]

But then, I'd guesstimate that maybe half of all prog CDs are sourced from vinyl anyway, so I can only imagine what a project it would be JUST for prog.

Maybe for obscure Italian or Bulgarian releases where the master tapes cannot be located. But that's not common.

I'm curious though, you say "Vinyl sourcing on CD is obvious in nearly every case" -- what's the giveaway? And is it a GOOD thing or a BAD thing?