|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 22, 2016 15:04:04 GMT
my main point is that if he knows to start the auction at a high price, and about the ear, and such, regardless of how he found out, then he surely knows a little about grading records. and i think he is being disingenuous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 22, 2016 15:14:26 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. If someone who didn't know anything about Blue Note records quickly did a search for ended listings on eBay, they would quickly learn about addresses, deep grooves, and the "P". Come on guys--that does not mean that the seller is 'hiding the fact that they know all about these records'. So the seller sees that the record is potentially worth over $1,000. So set the starting bid reasonably low--because you know nothing about this kind of record--provide as much information as you can, even include an audio clip, and let the experts duke it out to figure out how much the record is really worth. Greg, the car analogy isn't fair. No serious collector is going to know how the record sounds until they play it on their own turntable. The most the seller can do in this situation is offer returns. |
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 22, 2016 15:20:44 GMT
And Greg, if you're tired of getting burned on VG+ records, don't buy them. I stopped buying VG+ records for that very reason. If I take a chance on one, I make sure the seller offers returns, and even if they do I'll only return it if it's absolute dog sh!t. I've found that the VG+ of eBay sellers is usually not the VG+ of the Goldmine price guide.
|
|
|
|
Post by bkphoto on Jul 25, 2016 0:28:33 GMT
Hey Guys, first post...This is my only original first press Blue Note....My collection is a mix of King, Toshiba, Music Matters 33's, Classic Records, and 75th Ann. presses.... I can't get enough.....!  |
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 25, 2016 1:23:30 GMT
Hey Guys, first post...This is my only original first press Blue Note....My collection is a mix of King, Toshiba, Music Matters 33's, Classic Records, and 75th Ann. presses.... I can't get enough.....! Welcome, bkphoto...that is a very clean label indeed! I need to give Freddie Roach a listen, I'm a pretty big fan of Jimmy Smith and John Patton...I've also been meaning to check out Baby Face Willette. |
|
|
|
Post by gregorythefish on Jul 25, 2016 14:19:56 GMT
welcome, bkphoto! i keep missing out on copies of "mo' greens please". how is this one?
and rich, i don't think the key is to stop buying VG+ records. sellers know what VG+ should mean, and it is up to them to respresent appropriately. i don't return records very often. i've done it twice and in both cases the records weren't even the versions advertised, so i don't think i'm unreasonable, but grade inflation, coupled with any hint of tomfoolery, really bugs me.
although i will say, having read your posts, you make some fair points. and i suppose it doesn't matter. it's out of my price range anyway, pragmatically.
|
|
|
|
Post by bkphoto on Jul 25, 2016 20:27:27 GMT
Thanks,
I heard good things about this record and "mo greens..." this was on eBay and I figured it was going to go out of my price range but apparently not many people were watching eBay on memorial day...
|
|
|
|
Post by bkphoto on Jul 25, 2016 23:21:59 GMT
by the way, great album...!
|
|
Evan
Junior Member
Posts: 99 
|
Post by Evan on Jul 26, 2016 0:20:45 GMT
Any reason for such a short list, Rich? Yes. For any title I'm remotely interested in from the period 1955-1965, a near-mint original is more or less expensive. There's probably well over 100 hard bop albums I am happy to own on CD but I can't justify shelling out x dollars for a near-mint original pressing of all of them. So I've spent a lot of time narrowing down my wish list of near-mint originals so it only includes my most favorite albums. As it is, the 40-50 titles on this list will cost thousands of dollars in total, and working in education, I'm not and probably never will be anywhere near what might be considered wealthy. So obtaining these records is going to involve budgeting, saving, discipline, and patience. Very fair points. I admire your discipline and patience. The one potential worry I see with that is the shapeshifting nature of want lists. A couple of years ago the top of my want list would have been populated with Lee Morgan records, now not so much. The way it's always been for me is that any record I want from that era, I want as original. I don't think I could ever narrow it down to 50, so I cast the net wider and buy clean originals as they come my way (haven't bought any in ages though, saving atm). It tends towards quantity over rarity but that's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by gst on Jul 26, 2016 14:47:52 GMT
Thanks, I heard good things about this record and "mo greens..." this was on eBay and I figured it was going to go out of my price range but apparently not many people were watching eBay on memorial day... Welcome bkphoto. Your post motivated me to put on "Mo' Greens Please" last night. It's a nice record and can be found at very reasonable prices which is always nice. I particular like the more upbeat numbers (e.g. Googa Mooga which apparently means, "Expression of surprise or exasperation. Similar to "Goodness gracious." Never a popular saying, but was used sparsely in the 1950's and 1960's"). The liner notes on the back even say his last record was for "listening" and this one was meant for the dance halls.    |
|
|
|
Post by bkphoto on Jul 26, 2016 14:53:56 GMT
its on the list...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 26, 2016 19:29:34 GMT
So that copy of City Lights sold for $632.99. Interestingly enough, gst's guess was $165.49 under and mine was $167.01 over! Funny how it ended up right in the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Jul 26, 2016 20:02:28 GMT
So that copy of City Lights sold for $632.99. Interestingly enough, gst's guess was $165.49 under and mine was $167.01 over! Funny how it ended up right in the middle. would have never guessed it |
|
|
|
Post by bkphoto on Jul 26, 2016 20:30:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jul 26, 2016 20:48:13 GMT
welcome, bkphoto! i keep missing out on copies of "mo' greens please". how is this one? and rich, i don't think the key is to stop buying VG+ records. sellers know what VG+ should mean, and it is up to them to respresent appropriately. i don't return records very often. i've done it twice and in both cases the records weren't even the versions advertised, so i don't think i'm unreasonable, but grade inflation, coupled with any hint of tomfoolery, really bugs me. although i will say, having read your posts, you make some fair points. and i suppose it doesn't matter. it's out of my price range anyway, pragmatically. I don't think you're unreasonable either, I just don't think the seller of the Morgan comes across as shady. I do take chances on VG+ records from time to time but I am very discriminating. |
|
