Can I Have My Money Back?

Andrew Earles' Vice story is part of an ongoing series. Here's the first part.

Bravo Michael.

I am so happy to read that you have seen fit to reasses your feelings and response to the the wired article.

It takes a big man to do so in such a public forum.

I agree that the piece had some flaws but I also read into it a lot of truths. I for one have been growing a bit tired of the unending rereleases of Kind of blue and other such classics. All these OTT boxed sets do nothing to add to the music or its intent. They do seem to be praying on the needs and gullibility of many of the vinyl collectors/investors out there.Even worse are the so called analog remasters that are in fact digital copies of dubious provenance.

But thanks to you and your research much of this chaff can be separated from the wheat before spending the big bucks on less than stellar reissues.

Just like the collector car business, vinyl is now becoming an investment commodity where the well healed play to the detriment of the true hobbyist. It's a sad situation but what you gonna do about it!

Thank you for your stewardship of this wonderful hobby. I for one would be less informed and more burdened with crap recordings if it were not for you.

Aloha!

So reselling LPs is bad behavior?  Meaning that the folks selling OOP Classic Record titles on eBay for lots more than they cost when they were in print are terrible people?  I don't get it - no one's forcing anyone to buy them.

I have noticed for a long time that the vinyl buying and collecting public is split into (at least) 3 very different camps.

Audiophiles

DJs

a 3rd group which I struggle to define. Let's just call them hipsters, even though this is not an all encompassing term, nor is it the correct one. It's late, I'm tired, and can't come up with anything better at the moment. Let's just get over that before I get flamed for the poor word choice and move on. This group is basically people into new popular and independant music and new pressings moreso than vintage. They may have a decent turntable, they may not. They are in it mainly for the music, or at least a love and appreciation for the music, but not necesserally it's sound. 

All of these groups are blissfully unaware of what goes on within the other. Common practices and customs. New releases. Major events or common knowledge within each community. All are wildly segregated within their own communities. This is down to age differences, taste differences, even regional differences. The segregation can run so deep that each can have labels, mastering engineers and facilities, even vinyl pressing lants that are generally not known by the other "groups"

Flipping has long been a huge problem within the "hipster" crowd.

If the album is not being presed by a major label, and you don't purchase it right away, you simply are not going to be able to purchase a copy.

I guarantee you will not have any trouble finding a copy of the new Justin Timberlake record in 5 years time. Meanwhile, there are plenty of records that came out less than a year ago which can't be had for less than $100.

Raising prices is not the answer, and pressing more isn't the answer either. There really is no easy way to combat the problem.

My comment isn't about this though. Just wanted to share something interesting I've found over the past few years. I think I'm a rare breed that somehow manages to have musical interests varied enough to find myself a part of all three, or at least knowledgable in regards to them. It does surprise me that you haven't heard of the flipping problem Michael, but not entirely. The amount of truly new recordings you review shows where your musical interests lay, and that of course is fine. Just please realize that remasterings of the Young Rascals hits comps, or $60 audiophile reissues aren't exactly the type of release this happens to. While this phenomena is sickening, it isn't likely to affect your listening habits anytime soon.

Don't blame the flipper, blame the labels releasing limited edition things, which they know they could sell large quantities of. (Jack White, are you listening? Of course not.)

Sometimes small labels have no idea ahead of time that a particular record will be popular and in demand. So they press limited quanitites, of course. Can't blame them. But then there are the others, Jack White's Third Man Records is an easy example, but there are others.

Why are they doing this? Economics 101 involves supply& demand...why press 300 of a record, when you know you can sell 10,000?  The labels aren't making the big bucks... once the 300 are sold, they get no more money. But the flippers rake in the big bucks. It doesn't have to be this way. This isn't rocket science...

In the end, the fans of these bands lose.

And there's another way to combat this. RE-PRESS some of these records! It should become obvious to the labels when something is out of print, and in demand... unless they are completely out of touch with their fan base.

I haven't seen this one yet. But this is kinda intriguing though. I will watch this if i have time. - Casa Sandoval

This really was my point when i defended part of the baseball card analogy article from wire. It is the release of limited editions that is going to sour people.

The dave matthews band vinyl release on record store day was extremely limited even knowing there would be a HUGE demand for it by fans and the very same day listings for $150 to $500 could be found on ebay.

Really annoying.