advertisement


Discogs

I buy loads on Discogs including expensive collectable stuff and always ask for photos explaining what I want to see images of. If the seller is elusive or cannot be bothered then I move on. There have been a few records which have been clearly overgraded and when challenged, the seller reduces their grading on Discogs. If I hadn't request pics then those transactions would have been in dispute.

I haven't experienced any problems by taking the time to request photos and getting a feel for the trustworthiness of the seller and don't have an issue spending well into three figures if the seller cooperates.
 
For an old album I would rather buy an old good copy than a brand new one. In recent months I have bought about 10 albums on Discogs and by the time I've ditched everything that isn't near mint or VG+, is missing inners and have paid the postage the cost is often £25 each even for quite commonly available records. I too have had iffy experiences like the OP (while none of my purchases have had bloody great scratches, in some cases there have been rather too many snaps and crackles or beaten up covers that I'd never categorise as VG+). Most of the sellers have 100% or 99% ratings and as a relatively inexperienced buyer of used disks I'm not yet in a position where I can trust my own judgement on grading against that of the sellers. I've even had brand new (literally mint) albums that don't meet expectations (odd crackles and pops here and there) so it's difficult to know what standards are reasonable and what constitutes being an awkward bugger. One of the key difficulties seems to be whether an album is VG+ (or some suppliers use EX, VG++, NM etc) full stop, or whether it's VG+ for its age - a first pressing thing from the 70s is getting on for 50 years old now but that's scant consolation when you're waiting for the pops etc you know are coming.
 
My last few inteactions with Discogs have been a dissapointment. Two had been miss-graded; fair enough that the sellers sent me a message to tell me so. One LP that was listed as NM had a sleeve that was a total write off! As it happened, I was only trying to upgrade my copy, because the LP had a scratch, whereas, the sleeve was perfect, so I said to the seller that as long as the LP was as listed, to send it anyway (it was only a fiver). The other one, again, was wrongly graded to quote:

When I graded this vinyl I missed a few marks on Tracks 4,5 and 6 on Side 2 and a couple of hairlines on Side 1. I would consequently grade it as VG. I have test played the tracks mentioned and it plays through with some background noise but not enough to spoil the listening. There are no skips or misses. If you are still interested I am happy to sell at £2.40

But again, I already had a copy that I would have graded as VG and was hoping to upgrade it.

This week, I ordered Elvis Costello's Green shirt on 12". I received the invoice and paid it straight away. I got a message from the seller to say that he thought it was a 7" (huh?) and didn't invoice enough pp; tough, put a bit more effort into it then!

I still like Discogs though and I find it a very useful resource, even apart from buying records.
 
I bought two Blue Nile records from a seller on here (never see him post anymore) who I’m convinced was a dealer anyway both records were described as ‘Mint’ one of them was in a terrible state but he justified the grading because of the age of the record.

I’d have graded it G at best however I still bought it.

I picked them up personally but wasn’t until I got hone I realised how bad the record was, I did contact the seller but as I said he went on about the age of the record which is pretty rare and wanted it but it wasn’t cheap, £35 I think I paid.

I subsequently sold it to a guy in Ireland via Discogs last month at a loss but he bought the other record too so I gave him a decent price on the wrecked record but he was made fully aware of its condition.
 
I browsed your discogs for sale, you seem a very fair seller. My only thing is why people buy when the condition is poor.

PS: Promo and white labels are crackers imo
 
blossomchris said:
I browsed your discogs for sale, you seem a very fair seller. My only thing is why people buy when the condition is poor.

PS: Promo and white labels are crackers imo
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris, in my case I’d bought A Walk Across The Rooftops when it was released then like an idiot I sold off most of my records for buttons when we moved house back in 2005 and then spent years buying them back so these two records came up for sale one was a red jimmy pressing & meant to be the best pressing and the other one,Hats, is as rare as hens teeth on vinyl so I bought both of them.

The thing is I would have still bought the wrecked one if it had been accurately described anyway but the guy was at it.
 
wylton said:
Yes, I've never understood the VG grading; VG effectively means trash!
Click to expand...

I occasionally buy VG copies of rare records if the price is right - often they've not been reissued and I would never be able to afford a minty copy. I can live with a bit of surface noise and the odd click.

I'd also take a slightly rough mono original over a modern reissue for most of the music I like.

I guess the problem is there's a big gap between VG and NM- so VG+ has to cover a lot of ground.
 
Woodface said:
I can’t see the pleasure of listening to a rough record, I’d rather put a CD on.
Click to expand...

With both the records I bought above, Hats was absolutely mint and sounded fantastic, the other one AWATR, sounded great despite it being wrecked but it wasn't unlistenable it was just in a right state with multiple surface marks and scratches and about as far from 'mint' as it's possible to be.
 
twotone said:
With both the records I bought above, Hats was absolutely mint and sounded fantastic, the other one AWATR, sounded great despite it being wrecked but it wasn't unlistenable it was just in a right state with multiple surface marks and scratches and about as far from 'mint' as it's possible to be.
Click to expand...
I think appearance alone is misleading, I have some rough looking records that sound great & vice versa.
 
wylton said:
Yes, I've never understood the VG grading; VG effectively means trash!
Click to expand...

VG: "Groove wear will start to be noticeable, as with light scratches (deep enough to feel with a fingernail) that will affect the sound."

I have a little shudder when I think of people jabbing their fingernails into the middle of side 1 of a record to see if a light scratch is 'deep enough to feel with a fingernail'. I've seen it reported afterwards so I assume some people actually do this...
 
I sold a Can album for £60 recently on Discogs.

Graded VG/VG

There was some surface noise in quiet passages, frequent surface marks, but nothing deep.
Looked poor, played very well.
The sleeve had storage wear and looked tired.

It wasn't VG+/VG+ but it played through very well both sides.

The buyer was very happy with it.

It depends on the seller as to how closely they interpret the grading guidelines.
 
I always under grade I mean we’re talking about 60 year old records in some cases so unless that record has been bought and put in a drawer when new it can never in a million years be described as mint as far as I’m concerned mint means new and unplayed.

If you are honest about the record condition then that’s all you can do.

I have a copy of Abbey Road which was bought on release by my sister it’s been played regularly for the last 50 years and whilst it’s in good condition it is a 51 year old record that was bought and played for pleasure.
 
I do wonder whether condition is often graded purely on appearance.

I have a few records which have too much surface noise & I either buy a more recent re-release or get it on CD.
 
I try to add to my discogs collection as I play records, but sometimes forget.

Playing Made In The Shade (Rolling Stones) from 1975.

I can't find my issue listed, the only difference is the Tongue & Lips logo on the hip (front cover) is bright red on my copy.
The image for what looks like my release appears to be black.

The matrix variant isn't listed (A3 B1) it does have Rolling Stones Records stamped.

It seems a small thing, but I don't know if this requires a new listing?

My copy doesn't have the large blue hype sticker either.

It does have a small price tag. = £2.89 (it is an old Boots the chemist label)

The same as this but for the red logo.

Rolling Stones* ‎– Made In The Shade
Label:
Rolling Stones Records ‎– COC 59104
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Compilation
Country:
UK
Released:
1975
Genre:
Rock
Style:
Blues Rock, Rock & Roll
 
Although I've never bought from the Discogs platform IME buying secondhand records can be a bit hit or miss, I've bought secondhand LPs at record fairs that looked pristine but sounded far from it when played. More times than enough this has been done to unacceptable and intrusive surface noise, just because it looks clean and scratch free does not mean it was played to death on a sub standard record player with a penny on the headshell.
I do wonder how many people actually listen to the whole LP and give an accurate description of the records condition or if the grading is based on visual appearance.
Most reissues I've bought have been either fine or in some cases particularly good, of course not having a mint OG first pressing to compare it too means I accept it for what it is.
Fwiw in general I'd rather buy a new sealed copy regardless of when it was released, pressed, reissued or remastered though sometimes this is not possible, sometimes it just a matter of waiting until a re-release or reissue is made available.
 
Darren L said:
I do wonder how many people actually listen to the whole LP and give an accurate description of the records condition
Click to expand...

I listen to everything I sell, both sides, all the way through, with a pen and paper to make notes as I listen.

I like to accurately grade records


exception is sealed records.
 
Big Tabs said:
I listen to everything I sell, both sides, all the way through, with a pen and paper to make notes as I listen.

I like to accurately grade records
Click to expand...

That's good, but your one in how many sellers on Discogs? I'm sure there's plenty of good LPs available, I'm not convinced of others ratings though. For me it's either mint/as new or not and I'm only mean the records condition, not the sleeve or packaging.

New records can be a bit disappointing too it seems, a friend recently bought four new expensive Mobile fidelity pressings of classic Dire Straits LPs , I think they'd just been re-released buy Mofi on a limited run, one of them was very badly off centre, the start of the first track right on the very edge of the record.
There's another chap on Instagram with a very very large record collection has put up videos of various Mofi pressings that are badly off centre. These records are about 2-3 times the price they should be, you think they'd manage to get the pressing centred correctly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top