My Two Cents About "Collectable" Records

Your rubber ring stain reminded me of another rubber ring stain I used to see.

People using the V-M Tri-O-Matic and Stere-O-Matic changers with the 9.5" turntables, the Admiral 3-speed changers, or the RCA RP197, RP205, RP-211, or RP215 series noticed a ring on 10" and 12" records about 5" from the spindle hole. This was caused by the rubber rising feeler touching the rotating record during the change cycle.

The V-M changers with the 11.5" turntable didn't have this problem, because the rising feeler was plastic and rotated with the turntable.

When I first started collecting records, back in the late '80's, they could be found at every yard sale and junk store for cheap. That was back when CD's were starting to take off and everyone thought records were obsolete junk that needed to be gotten out of the way.

Now, many people think that ANY record, regardless of condition, is worth big money. At the local flea market, the cheapest LP's there are priced at $3/each and many are priced in the $10+ range. They even want $2 to $5 each for old beat up 45's. And, these records just sit there, month after month, year after year.

Even dealing with people directly is getting to be a pain. I often hear things like "The price guide says it's worth $xx.xx" (OK, you've had a price guide book for a week; so, now you're an "expert") or "There's one that just sold on ebay for $xx.xx". I've gotten so I tell these people to either sell their item to "the book" or to go ahead and list it on ebay, since it's so valuable there. And, all these TV shows (American Pickers, Antiques Roadshow, etc.) are not doing us any favors. After watching these shows, people think that any kind of rusted garbage is worth big money, just because it's OLD!

I also collect old radios and record players; and, I often see the same type of idiotic pricing on those. What's really funny are all those CL sellers who think a '70's Electrophonic particleboard and plastic cased console stereo is worth hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars. I used to try to "educate" these idiots; but, usually all it does is get them PO'ed and I end up getting a royal butt chewing. Instead of seeing me as being helpful, they likely see me as some sort of shyster dealer who is trying to beat them out of their priceless treasure so that I can flip it for a huge profit.

And, another thing that really ticks me off is when a seller bases their price on "sentimental value". Um, I don't care that you have fond memories of your Grandmother playing Guy Lombardo records on this stereo. If it means that much to you; then, keep it. I'm not buying your memories.

I always buy into the one about "wanting to see it go to a good home." Not true, I tell them it ain't a dog or cat. No telling what I may do to it either. I may part it out and completely destroy that "piece of furniture" that mom loved so much. And so the dog and cat folks can think about something, you don't or won't always know how your true loving pet will be treated when YOU let it go.

I've got 2,000+ records, many Classical, but hundreds were given to me by some old coots that used to party back in the day. I mean Beatlles 1st and 2nd albums, Elvis Pressley, Big Band, Motown, British groups, Crooners, Country...I mean the whole gammet.

I haven't gone through everything yet. Records stached in at least 9 consoles plus a a huge entertainment center, records stacked up against the walls in several rooms. I just gotta take a week off and sit down on the floor and spread these things out to catgegorize them.

It's sorta nice having such a "library", but I don't plan on selling any unless I lose my job by killing someone at work and the house approaches foreclosure...LOL. If I ever get to the selling stage, it won't be the outrageous prices that some of these Jerks/Predators command on Craigs List or other sites. They say a sucker is born every minute.

I would sell them mainly just to get rid of them and free up some space in the house...money/profit is not a big issue here. If and I mean IF, you were to buy my Beatles albums for $5/$10, and you turn around and sell them for $1,000...Good for you, I won't be mad. They're not for sale at present...LOL.

Do you think I could get $100 for the Van Cliburn album that was cut in New York (1957?) after he won that piano competition in Russia playing Tchaikovsky's 1st ? Political relations were a little scary back then for awarding a tall, lanky Texan for winning that competition. They had a big ticker-tape parade for him when he returned, and he did a repeat performance in New York. A lot of history behind that and it could be worth some money. I think I paid about $7 when I joined Columbia House in 1968, but the extra copies were bought at thrift stores for less than 50 cents, in good condition.


Bobby Basham
Tucson, Arizona

It got so bad around here, to the point where I added the following line to my "wanted" ad's: "I pay UP TO $1.00/ea. for LP's and UP TO fifty cents/ea. for 45's". Of course, there are certain records that I'd make an exception to the $1 rule; but, they have to be something I really want and they have to be clean. The main purpose for that statement was to cut down on all the flakes who thought their Reader's Digest Herb Alpert box set was worth $1000 or a beat up copy of "Thriller" was worth hundreds of dollars.

Once, a lady called me to see if I'd buy her records. I told her over the phone that I didn't pay over $1/ea. for LP's. She said that was fine and that she just needed to get them out of the house. When I got to her house, she said, "Since these are in such good shape; I'm going to have to charge $1.50 for them". I reminded her that $1.50 was not our agreement over the phone and that I would only pay what we agreed upon. Trying to be nice, I looked through the records (about 75) and about 1/4 of them were '50's/'60's rock and country. The rest were the typical budget label "no name" instrumental records that never sell. I broke down and told her that I'd pay her price for the records I wanted and she let me know that I either bought all of them, at $1.50 each, or none. I told her that the only way I'd take all of them would be if she sold them to me for a cheaper price; which, she would not do. I left empty handed and I think she knew I was PO'ed as I was leaving. I wasn't that upset at what she wanted for her records. I was more upset because we had already agreed to a price over the phone. Then, I wasted my time and gas going over there, only to have her raise the price. She probably thought that if she got me over there, I'd pay whatever she wanted. I shouldn't have even looked at the records once she raised the price. As soon as she said that she had to get $1.50 after we had agreed on $1, I should have left at that very moment. About a year later, I saw where the old woman had passed away. I'm sure the records were still in her house at the time of her death and they probably ended up at one of the thrift stores.

And, one of my thrift stores often has "10 cent" sales. You buy a boxed set with 12 albumns, you pay $1.20. I've bought many Classical boxed sets at those sales, many still wrapped in their original plastic. Who knows, you my find her very LP's in the thrift stores cheap.

I've got so much music on 8-track, Reel-to-Reel, Lp's, Cassettes, 78's, 45's, CD's, I'm not desparate for music. I think these sellers and buyers should do their homework. --BB

Bobby Basham
Tucson, Arizona

A lot of records that some people think are Collectable, are just that. They are worthy of being put out at the curb for the trash man to collect.

Well I hate record collectors. It's your fault "Mellon collie and the infinite sadness" by the smashing pumpkins costs 500 dollars on vinyl. If you don't listen to it then sell it. Vinyl isn't meant to be cherished, The music is.

If the music is what you want, buy the CD for now. This will most likely be reissued on LP in the next year or two. Due to the demand for it. Remember, most 1990's bands on LP were pressed in very small numbers to start with. Due to limited demand then. But with the vinyl revival, you have good odds to see a vinyl reissue.

2agray wrote: 45's vs. 78's in sound? Yes, the 1950's 78's really do sound better after about 1953 or 54. They had FINALLY figured out how to record on them to get superior sound. The early 45's were very low in quality. The output of the music was low and tinny sounding. Compare a 78 of the exact same record to the 45 and you'll be astounded at the difference. That's why so many people collect the 78's from the mid to late 50's.

The problem here was not the quality of the record, but that the recording curves were not standardized. Different companies were using different recording curves before 1957, when the last of the American companies finally adopted the standard RIAA curve. Most of the companies were on the bandwagon by 1955, but there were some holdouts. MacGregor Records, maker of square dance calling records, continued using the old 78 curves into the 1960s, because the square dance calling systems still played the old curve.

78s and microgroove records were recorded with vastly different curves. The choice of the recording curve was based on playing time, noise reduction, and how the record would sound on the company's own phonographs. But if you can discern the recording curve used, you can equalize the playback for that curve. I have been doing this since the mid 1970s.

For 78s, there were a few common curves.

- Acoustic records came in many varieties, because each company's equipment was different.

- The early electrical recordings rolled off the bass at about 200 or 250 Hz to increase playing time.

- In 1937, English Decca (London) started boosting the treble by 6 dB at 10KHz in the ffrr curve.

- American companies added this boost, but in a different way, to form the American 78 curve. This led to the introduction of tone controls on phonographs.

- Columbia went even farther after World War II, boosting the treble by 16dB at 10 KHz and rolling off the bass at 300 Hz. These were the best sounding 78s, if your equipment could track them.

When the LP and the 45 appeared, a group of new curves appeared for the lower speed, vinyl recording medium, and finer grooves:

- Many manufacturers adopted the NAB broadcasting transcription curve for 33 rpm. It cut the bass starting at 500 Hz and boosted the treble by 16 dB at 10 KHz (all of these boosts and cuts except ffrr were 6 dB per octave).

- Columbia adopted the NAB transcription curve, but stopped the bass rolloff in the 50 Hz rumble region by more than NAB did, up to 20 dB. This became the Columbia LP curve.

Many consumer players could not track these records, so more curves appeared with less treble boost:

- The Audio Engineering Society (AES) produced a curve with a 400 Hz bass cut and a 12 dB boost at 10 KHz. These are easier on the playback equipment, but are more susceptible to noise.

- Various companies abandoned the NAB curve, coming up with various combinations of bass cut, treble boost, and rumble shelf filters. RCA developed the "New Orthophonic" curve in 1953. it became the RIAA curve. It is a compromise between the Columbia LP curve and the AES curve.

- European companies used less bass cut and treble boost than US companies. Europe did not standardize on the IEC (RIAA) curve until 1964. A couple of companies continued to use 78 curves for 33 and 45 records. One Soviet Union company was still using the 78 curves until 1975.

- English Decca (London in the US) created an ffrr curve for 33 rpm records that was the Columbia LP curve, but with a treble boost of only 10.5 dB.

- Most children's 78s continued to use 78 curves until they stopped making them.

- Most US companies switched over to RIAA for all three speeds by 1957, with 78s made of vinyl. The 78s made of shellac were still recorded using the American 78 or Columbia 78 curve, since it works better for shellac.

By the way, the 78 rpm speed was also a compromise, made necessary by electric motor driven players and the demands of the broadcast industry. It was a compromise of the 76 rpm used by Victor and the 80 rpm used by Columbia.