by Record-changer »
Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:26 pm
Unfortunately, phonograph records are not like wine. The do not get more valuable with age, but with scarcity. A best-seller is never going to be valuable, because there are millions of copies around.
The notion that old records become more valuable comes from the late 1940sa and early 1950s, when people were rebuilding their record collections after World War II. The following conditions combined to cause a shortage of recordings.
1. Japan invaded the major areas where shellac is produced.
2. Shellac was needed for the war effort.
3. Rationing rules required anyone wanting to buy a new record to turn in a used record made before 1939.
4. Many record collections in England and Europe were destroyed by the war.
5. Some record companies donated old metal masters to the scrap metal drives. Thus, they couldn't make any more of their earlier releases.
6. A couple of companies went out of business, and the winners in bankruptcy court wanted their money, not assets. The masters and shellac were sold as materials, not recordings.
After the war ended, many people were trying to replace their record collections. Many titles were in short supply, because people sacrificed the records they played least. Some titles from before 1920 sold for more than $100. This is the cause of the myth that old records are worth a lot of money. They were - then.
But after the LP took off, most record companies re-issued most of their catalog on LP. This took the pressure off the prices on most old records. Classical albums on LP from the early 1950s are actually worth more than the multiple-disc 78 copies of the same album.
The only records which are worth a lot are the ones which are scarce. The rationing turn-in caused many copies of the same record to be turned in. If the masters are gone, the remaining records are scarce, and will sell for a great price.
The most I ever paid for a record was $40 in 2003. It was a European LP release from the 1970s which I really wanted, and won on eBay. But the record itself was really $10. The rest of the money was spent getting it here (packaging, postage, and customs). And then the record company released that album on a CD worldwide in 2004.
There was another record I paid $35 for, because that was the going price on eBay. I later found out that the people bidding that much didn't want the record, but the photo of a scantily-clad female on the cover. I wanted the music, because my copy of that record got broken in a move. My original 1953 cover was a record-club release with no photos.
There was an improvement over my original record, because the record club disc was filled vinylite, but the replacement I got was pure vinyl. The replacement record won't break, and the sound quality is better.