|
|
Post by SPENCER on Jul 20, 2016 12:07:24 GMT
I'm no Jimmy Smith fan. I find his organ playing more exhibitionist than intriguing. Though I must confess I love the covers of his BN albums. Once I discovered Larry Young Jimmy Smith became boring to me. While Smith popularized the organ, Larry Young endowed it with an intellectual refinement. Just listen to Unity and compare it to anything from Jimmy Smith and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 20, 2016 12:19:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 20, 2016 13:27:41 GMT
800. Second pressing and a lot of wear on the front of the cover but a rare, in-demand record nonetheless. Plus the seller offers returns (a no-brainer in this case where the seller isn't experienced at grading) and they posted an audio clip (which I haven't listened to yet...might change my guess once I have). |
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 20, 2016 14:48:25 GMT
800. Second pressing and a lot of wear on the front of the cover but a rare, in-demand record nonetheless. Plus the seller offers returns (a no-brainer in this case where the seller isn't experienced at grading) and they posted an audio clip (which I haven't listened to yet...might change my guess once I have). I will be shocked if we reach $500. $800 will be most impressive |
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 20, 2016 16:55:10 GMT
I just listened to the audio clip...the record sounds pretty darn good to me (based on a recording of a speaker with an iPhone), and the seller used a ballad for the clip so I'm gonna stand by my guess.
EDIT: That turntable looks like a heavy tracker though so it might be subduing surface noise more than a modern lighter tracking cart.
|
|
|
|
Post by gst on Jul 20, 2016 17:36:46 GMT
Also seems odd to me that the seller is a "REAL EXPERIENCED AT USING THE GRADING SYSTEM," but knows the record has the "ear" mark (although they claim not to know the significance) and appears to have a record player. Put me down for $467.50 |
|
|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 21, 2016 2:54:01 GMT
Spencer,
Yeah, that is the other side of the coin. I know few people lukewarm on Jimmy Smith. I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with Larry Young but I do have an original of his "Lawrence of Newark" that I like very much. I got it for one dollar at a rummage sale. I had no idea it was collectible at the time. I just had heard it online and liked it. I think that Smith and Young are really apples and oranges, except for playing the same instrument, but I can definitely see why his playing turns some people off. He has a "HOLY SHIT LOOK AT ME" approach that can be off-putting. I read an interview with him in a jazz history anthology and he comes off as a total asshole, but dammit I love his records.
That Lee Morgan seller knows exactly what he is doing, and he definitely knows how to grade. He is posting the clip so you can decide for yourself, and he is claiming ignorance so you can't claim "not as described". A little slimy in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 21, 2016 3:54:43 GMT
Spencer, Yeah, that is the other side of the coin. I know few people lukewarm on Jimmy Smith. I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with Larry Young but I do have an original of his "Lawrence of Newark" that I like very much. I got it for one dollar at a rummage sale. I had no idea it was collectible at the time. I just had heard it online and liked it. I think that Smith and Young are really apples and oranges, except for playing the same instrument, but I can definitely see why his playing turns some people off. He has a "HOLY SHIT LOOK AT ME" approach that can be off-putting. I read an interview with him in a jazz history anthology and he comes off as a total asshole, but dammit I love his records. That Lee Morgan seller knows exactly what he is doing, and he definitely knows how to grade. He is posting the clip so you can decide for yourself, and he is claiming ignorance so you can't claim "not as described". A little slimy in my opinion. I plead the 5th. |
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 21, 2016 3:59:25 GMT
Also seems odd to me that the seller is a "REAL EXPERIENCED AT USING THE GRADING SYSTEM," but knows the record has the "ear" mark (although they claim not to know the significance) and appears to have a record player. Put me down for $467.50 Precisely why I think the price might not get as high |
|
|
|
Post by Jos1 on Jul 21, 2016 8:28:29 GMT
@ Rich,
sorry, this is very much of topic, apologies to the O.P. but I couldn't reach you via Private mail.
I did register, but don't seem to receive the activation code (email is correct and nothing in the spambox)
Glitch in The System or did I fail scrutiny ?
Don't mind posting as a guest. It's good to "prove that you are human" from time to time. Sort of an inverted Turingtest :-)
If you have a minute...I promise to behave.
Thanks,
Jos
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 21, 2016 14:32:36 GMT
I just listened to the audio clip...the record sounds pretty darn good to me (based on a recording of a speaker with an iPhone), and the seller used a ballad for the clip so I'm gonna stand by my guess. EDIT: That turntable looks like a heavy tracker though so it might be subduing surface noise more than a modern lighter tracking cart. All good points you bring up, Rich. |
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 21, 2016 17:42:38 GMT
That Lee Morgan seller knows exactly what he is doing, and he definitely knows how to grade. He is posting the clip so you can decide for yourself, and he is claiming ignorance so you can't claim "not as described". A little slimy in my opinion. You guys are tough on dealers! Between this discussion and the one about the Jutta Hipp cover, I can see that you're even more wary of them than me! The seller seems to deal in all sorts of thrift store finds so I wouldn't expect them to be expert record graders. (I did, however, just notice that they described the record as 'original' in the title, which is a bit bold considering they claim to know nothing about this type of record.) But they took lots of photos, they offer returns, they even went so far as to provide an audio clip. That pretty much perfectly checks my list of what a legitimate seller would do in this case where they didn't know much about the item. And if they have a Califone laying around from a thrift store find, that hardly suggests to me that they are a serious record seller nor collector. So are you guys hung up on the fact that they're referring to it as an 'original' when it's not the NY23 label? |
|
|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 21, 2016 18:37:24 GMT
here are my main concerns: if you own a record player and play records on it, you know a little about how grading works and could easily try. he mentions the ear, and the only way to mention it is to realize its there, which means he knows what it is and its significance, especially since he called it the "ear", which I doubt anyone would do by random chance. yet he didn't make any attempt to justify his claim of original. if he had, he would know he had a second press. part of selling a record is grading it, and he knows condition is important. he just doesn't want to be wrong, which in my mind means he shouldn't be selling records.
perhaps i am being harsh, but i am very tired of buying "VG+" records that then have all sorts of marks and scuffs and even skips due to clearly visible crap in the grooves that the seller just claims 'sorry, visual' about. so when someone offers up a highly desirable record, i think they owe it to the potential buyer to do their homework, especially if they want several hundo for it. but i admit i am in a grumpy mood today. haha.
like, i'm actually about to sell my car, and i don't know anything about 'grading' the car, but i don't expect anyone to buy it unseen after a 'visual' inspection.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 22, 2016 11:48:50 GMT
That Lee Morgan seller knows exactly what he is doing, and he definitely knows how to grade. He is posting the clip so you can decide for yourself, and he is claiming ignorance so you can't claim "not as described". A little slimy in my opinion. You guys are tough on dealers! Between this discussion and the one about the Jutta Hipp cover, I can see that you're even more wary of them than me! The seller seems to deal in all sorts of thrift store finds so I wouldn't expect them to be expert record graders. (I did, however, just notice that they described the record as 'original' in the title, which is a bit bold considering they claim to know nothing about this type of record.) But they took lots of photos, they offer returns, they even went so far as to provide an audio clip. That pretty much perfectly checks my list of what a legitimate seller would do in this case where they didn't know much about the item. And if they have a Califone laying around from a thrift store find, that hardly suggests to me that they are a serious record seller nor collector. So are you guys hung up on the fact that they're referring to it as an 'original' when it's not the NY23 label? I'm looking at it from the point of view that claiming to know nothing about record grading is a clever ploy to lure buyers in. It's a bait that says come take advantage of me I don't know what I'm doing when that is not clearly the case. I don't feel the phrase "original" is misleading I just assumed it means the item is not a recent reissue. But Gregory's comment about the "ear" is right on. You don't just pick a Blue Note and immediately realize the significance of the Plastylite logo on it. Clearly this seller knows the "ear" is a buzz word among collectors and he or she started the auction at $300 which means they must know this is not just an ordinary record find. I don't feel the seller is doing anything shady. I was just pointing out that he or she is one clever seller and were I interested in this item I would not bid more than $400 |
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 22, 2016 14:57:59 GMT
You guys are tough on dealers! Between this discussion and the one about the Jutta Hipp cover, I can see that you're even more wary of them than me! The seller seems to deal in all sorts of thrift store finds so I wouldn't expect them to be expert record graders. (I did, however, just notice that they described the record as 'original' in the title, which is a bit bold considering they claim to know nothing about this type of record.) But they took lots of photos, they offer returns, they even went so far as to provide an audio clip. That pretty much perfectly checks my list of what a legitimate seller would do in this case where they didn't know much about the item. And if they have a Califone laying around from a thrift store find, that hardly suggests to me that they are a serious record seller nor collector. So are you guys hung up on the fact that they're referring to it as an 'original' when it's not the NY23 label? I'm looking at it from the point of view that claiming to know nothing about record grading is a clever ploy to lure buyers in. It's a bait that says come take advantage of me I don't know what I'm doing when that is not clearly the case. I don't feel the phrase "original" is misleading I just assumed it means the item is not a recent reissue. But Gregory's comment about the "ear" is right on. You don't just pick a Blue Note and immediately realize the significance of the Plastylite logo on it. Clearly this seller knows the "ear" is a buzz word among collectors and he or she started the auction at $300 which means they must know this is not just an ordinary record find. I don't feel the seller is doing anything shady. I was just pointing out that he or she is one clever seller and were I interested in this item I would not bid more than $400 Okay. All good points. 1. On eBay, no one is going to take advantage of anybody when it comes to Blue Note originals. We collectors are bloodthirsty sharks when it comes to this stuff and records like this will reach their approximate value (perhaps merely on the strength of photos so long as the seller offers returns) regardless of what the description says. 2. Fellas, in this day and age, who isn't going to type "original Blue Note record" into a Google search bar and take two minutes to read about deep grooves and the "P"? That doesn't mean they do this all the time and that they're an expert. I still don't see any contradiction in the way the seller is presenting the item and what I believe them to actually know about the record. |
|
