The sky's the limit on this one!!!

[Clipped and Shorn]

its contagious, and knowing someone else spent that high somehow paves the way. I've never paid that much, but I have bid more a few times only to be severely outbid. I have sold LPs for nearly $600 a couple of times, but never paid more than about $100 range for anything, no I take that back I once did, only to return it to the seller (in exchange for about 3 items instead after I found the $200 record at Rhino for $20 shortly after thinking I would never see it. And now I have since acquired about 3 other bargain copies of that title and it recently came out on CD sounding way better than the old vinyl, so it goes.

The CD of another LP I sold for $600 had also just come out and it they did such a great job on the CD that I immediately put the vinyl up for auction. Some vinyl collectors simply must have the old original, but when the CD sounds better to me and I can unload the vinyl at that kind of premium I go for it. I never miss it.

The olther LP that sold for $600 (bought for $6 from a mailing list dealer) was really rare and I knew a certain collector who was highly motivated so I made a very nice CD of it for myself then sold the LP. That same rare LP eventually came up again on eBay and someone paid over $800, probably because the collector who bought it from me had established a price. I recently found another rare LP for $20 by this same artist, but have not yet inquired about what collectors would pay. I do not mention names and titles because I am talking about very obscure Latin/ Cuban/ latin jazz LPs by artists no one around here would have ever heard of.

As far as I can tell there are less than a dozen collectors world wide who recognize this kind of value for these items (growing all the time though), with a few in Japan and UK and a few in US one of whom is a movie star with deep pockets and others who are just fanatical long time collectors/dealers/traders. The top collectors now will not sell, only trade.

-c7s

[lynnm]

I bet that it will hit 2K+

[Strabo]

----------------

So, everyone chirp in here and tell us: What's the most you've ever paid for an LP?

Me? $300. Twice.

First one: Duke Jordan-- "Flight to Jordan" Blue Note 4046

(MINT cond.-- the only one I've ever seen--had to buy it!)

Second one: Art Pepper-- "The Return of Art Pepper" JazzWest JLP-10

(MINT virtually "unplayed" copy)

Foolish? Sure. Regrets? None. ----------------

Paid $250 for a sealed Mofi stones set from a store. Listened to it a couple of times and think it's time to sell.

$90 on a sealed Mofi Revolver. Still have it sealed. I don't have the heart to open it. Another one that might go soon.

$55 for a sealed St. Pepper. Had to pour myself a glass of wine, dim the lights, and listen, ahhh....

[Clipped and Shorn]

Collectible value aside, Alan mentions something which is very true, namely that the older vintage vinyl sounds better and this is certainly a factor in determining the value that these original pressings command.

I am sitting here reviewing a number of older pressings and comparing them to later issues and I am amazed how consistently true this observation is. With every successive reissue the sound quality seems to suffer along with the imagery of the covers. Of course, sometimes, the covers are completely changed, and always for the worst. But even when the original artwork is retained, one notices that it is not quite as sharp as the earlier pressings (kind of like a photograph of a photograph rather than from the original negative). And the sound, which is more important is likewise "less sharp" in the successive pressings. In spite of increased amounts of surface noise in the older pressings, the sonic quality which can be extracted is still much better than the "less sharp" reissue recordings which on the surface seem "cleaner" because they are usually newer with less surface wear.

I am having to sort some of these LPs for business reasons and I find myself deciding to keep the older pressings with the surface noise and better sound integrity over the later pressing which are Near Mint and have less surface noise and newer (less sharp) covers. The bottom line is that sound experience which can be extracted from the older pressings is simply "better", the older recordings just have more definition and guts. Originals sound like originals and reissues sound like reissues. Reissues are slightly more fuzzy somehow. And often the old mono records have more punch than the later stereos.

What is curious is that this inverse development should be the case in spite of the supposed "progress" of the technologies. It seems that with successive generations of gizmos and recording engineering techniques some older integrity is lost. This is true of many aspects of our hobby and is why some of us are obsessed with tubes etc. and vintage gear among other retro attitudes. Why should it be that later pressings are not as good when the technology supposedly had progressed? Its not just Geezerismo here either.

This same analysis is at the base of the CD versus Vinyl argument. When the questing listening ear reaches out in search of the essence in the ongoing sound experience it comes up a little short with the CD compared to the original Vinyl much the same way as when it is listening to a reissue rather than an original pressing. I am not sure it has to be this way, but that is what the technology seems to be giving us and I am not sure why this is the case.

-c7s

I realize this has all been discussed before but this was some kind of new ephiphany for me tonight when I had to actually decide to trade my newer cleaner copies of some recordings for older more beat up versions because the bottom line is the deep sound contained in the older grooves simply is more captivating than the later pressings.

A strange Pavlovian phenomenon takes place. The presence of surface noise is thus associated with a better sound experience. Strange.

This little rant might inform some of you new vinyl collectors. Look for that look - the older issues with the heavier vinyl, clearer artwork, and generally the look of "original" rather than the more mass produced look of later pressings. After awhile you will be able to spot the good old stuff in the midst of all that other junk in those thrift store shelves or used record store bins.

Second, you will have to convince your ears that there can be bigger and better sound in spite of more surface noise.

Now you can better understand why someone might want to spend $960+ for some Mint copy of an old original! Maybe.....

[Chris Robinson]

Well, I watched this one out of morbid curiosity ...US $1,852.00.

Personally, I'd prefer an optimal SET amp sitting in my living room, but this is a great country!

Hugs.

[Clipped and Shorn]

$1852.oo and it didn't reach the reserve. OK, that is the technique of letting the market place determine the value. I will bet that the seller took the $1852.00 offline, without paying the eBay charges.

SONNY CLARK! if he had only lived longer......great player.....liked "latin jazz" as well......

-c&s

[Clipped and Shorn]

oops...

[jazman]

I'll bet Sonny seldom, if ever, got $1,852 for a gig when he was alive.

Klipsch out