Been checking the used bins latley as my dad bought my a record player for Xmas and need some vinyl. Is it me or are vinyl records expensive. What's a decent range that I should keep in mind? I checked one store yesterday and he had a ton of what I would have liked to get, but they were all either $20 or $30. They were all in bad condition in my opinion, you could see water stains on the bottom of a bunch of them. Just not looking to spend a fortune on used records. The $20-$30 range is what I used to buy records for when I was younger and they were new
That's way overpriced, I guess depending on the release. My local has used between a few dollars to about $20 for a well known album. I can usually find used stuff I like for around $10. Lots of stores are just taking advantage of the vinyl resurgence and I think that is one of the reasons these brick and mortar stores are closing. Going online and purchasing records are much cheaper. If you don't mind using online resources, Discogs is a great resource and you can find really good deals.
I don't really find online the best place for used records unless they are hard to find (or the store is ripping you off, as MedozK said). Once the shipping cost is factored in you don't save money compared to used bins at the record store. But BLACK35, some used albums cost a lot because of rarity. Best method IMO is to look up the album you're looking at in the store on discogs using your phone. Comparison shop so you can determine if the used record in the store is overpriced or reasonably priced. Just remember to factor in shipping with the online price, be (unless the store is use that could cost even more than the record itself.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Been checking the used bins latley as my dad bought my a record player for Xmas and need some vinyl. Is it me or are vinyl records expensive. What's a decent range that I should keep in mind? I checked one store yesterday and he had a ton of what I would have liked to get, but they were all either $20 or $30. They were all in bad condition in my opinion, you could see water stains on the bottom of a bunch of them. Just not looking to spend a fortune on used records. The $20-$30 range is what I used to buy records for when I was younger and they were new
That's way overpriced, I guess depending on the release. My local has used between a few dollars to about $20 for a well known album. I can usually find used stuff I like for around $10. Lots of stores are just taking advantage of the vinyl resurgence and I think that is one of the reasons these brick and mortar stores are closing. Going online and purchasing records are much cheaper. If you don't mind using online resources, Discogs is a great resource and you can find really good deals.
I don't really find online the best place for used records unless they are hard to find (or the store is ripping you off, as MedozK said). Once the shipping cost is factored in you don't save money compared to used bins at the record store.
Lots of sellers on Discogs combine shipping on lots, the key is to look for shipping terms and save big. I just bought a lot of records this weekend; I listed them a few pages back. I paid $4 in shipping TOTAL, not to mention I didn't pay tax.
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
Are you saying you think there is surface noise on an OG in perfect condition? Or surface noise because it's often damaged after 30 years? Just wondering your take, since I don't hear any surface noise on my OG.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
Are you saying you think there is surface noise on an OG in perfect condition? Or surface noise because it's often damaged after 30 years? Just wondering your take, since I don't hear any surface noise on my OG.
I think it's a little noisy as a record. It's just got that vinyl sound that I feel like I hear on any record from the 70's and 80's, just that tiny little static that you hear. It's never dead quiet. And mine is at least a VG+. Some people really like that sound. I'm fine with it, but I prefer dead quiet. But even if you get past that and maybe my record could be a little nosier than yours, there is definitely a fuller sound on the reissue. I also compared it to my CD FLAC rip and to a 24/96 vinyl rip and it's not even close there.
Been checking the used bins latley as my dad bought my a record player for Xmas and need some vinyl. Is it me or are vinyl records expensive. What's a decent range that I should keep in mind? I checked one store yesterday and he had a ton of what I would have liked to get, but they were all either $20 or $30. They were all in bad condition in my opinion, you could see water stains on the bottom of a bunch of them. Just not looking to spend a fortune on used records. The $20-$30 range is what I used to buy records for when I was younger and they were new
That's way overpriced, I guess depending on the release. My local has used between a few dollars to about $20 for a well known album. I can usually find used stuff I like for around $10. Lots of stores are just taking advantage of the vinyl resurgence and I think that is one of the reasons these brick and mortar stores are closing. Going online and purchasing records are much cheaper. If you don't mind using online resources, Discogs is a great resource and you can find really good deals.
I don't really find online the best place for used records unless they are hard to find (or the store is ripping you off, as MedozK said). Once the shipping cost is factored in you don't save money compared to used bins at the record store. But BLACK35, some used albums cost a lot because of rarity. Best method IMO is to look up the album you're looking at in the store on discogs using your phone. Comparison shop so you can determine if the used record in the store is overpriced or reasonably priced. Just remember to factor in shipping with the online price, be (unless the store is use that could cost even more than the record itself.
Thanks for the advise, will keep that in mind
2005 - London
2009 - Toronto
2010 - Buffalo
2011 - Toronto 1&2
2013 - London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
2014 - Cincinnati, St. Louis, Detroit
2016 - Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, Ottawa, Toronto 1 2018 - Fenway 1&2 2022 - Hamilton, Toronto 2023 - Chicago 1&2
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
Are you saying you think there is surface noise on an OG in perfect condition? Or surface noise because it's often damaged after 30 years? Just wondering your take, since I don't hear any surface noise on my OG.
I think it's a little noisy as a record. It's just got that vinyl sound that I feel like I hear on any record from the 70's and 80's, just that tiny little static that you hear. It's never dead quiet. And mine is at least a VG+. Some people really like that sound. I'm fine with it, but I prefer dead quiet. But even if you get past that and maybe my record could be a little nosier than yours, there is definitely a fuller sound on the reissue. I also compared it to my CD FLAC rip and to a 24/96 vinyl rip and it's not even close there.
That isn't my experience with older records in perfect condition... but interesting outlook. I doubt I'll even need the reissue of Joshua Tree, since I'm very happy with my OG, but nice to know U2 is paying attention to sound quality on the reissues in general.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
2000- Atlanta, GA: New Orleans, LA: Memphis, TN: Nashville, TN
2003- Raleigh, NC: Charlotte, NC: Atlanta, GA
2004- Asheville, NC (hometown show)
2006- Cincinnati, OH
2008- Columbia, SC
2009- Chicago, IL x 2 / Ed Vedder- Atlanta, GA x 2
2010- Bristow, VA
2011- Alpine Valley, WI (PJ20) x 2 / Ed Vedder- Chicago, IL
2012- Atlanta, GA
2013- Charlotte, NC
2014- Cincinnati, OH
2015- New York, NY
2016- Greenville, SC: Hampton, VA:: Columbia, SC: Raleigh, NC : Lexington, KY: Philly, PA 2: (Wrigley) Chicago, IL x 2 (holy shit): Temple of the Dog- Philly, PA
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
Are you saying you think there is surface noise on an OG in perfect condition? Or surface noise because it's often damaged after 30 years? Just wondering your take, since I don't hear any surface noise on my OG.
I think it's a little noisy as a record. It's just got that vinyl sound that I feel like I hear on any record from the 70's and 80's, just that tiny little static that you hear. It's never dead quiet. And mine is at least a VG+. Some people really like that sound. I'm fine with it, but I prefer dead quiet. But even if you get past that and maybe my record could be a little nosier than yours, there is definitely a fuller sound on the reissue. I also compared it to my CD FLAC rip and to a 24/96 vinyl rip and it's not even close there.
That isn't my experience with older records in perfect condition... but interesting outlook. I doubt I'll even need the reissue of Joshua Tree, since I'm very happy with my OG, but nice to know U2 is paying attention to sound quality on the reissues in general.
They really need to remaster WAR. I love that album but it sounds so distant...
2000- Atlanta, GA: New Orleans, LA: Memphis, TN: Nashville, TN
2003- Raleigh, NC: Charlotte, NC: Atlanta, GA
2004- Asheville, NC (hometown show)
2006- Cincinnati, OH
2008- Columbia, SC
2009- Chicago, IL x 2 / Ed Vedder- Atlanta, GA x 2
2010- Bristow, VA
2011- Alpine Valley, WI (PJ20) x 2 / Ed Vedder- Chicago, IL
2012- Atlanta, GA
2013- Charlotte, NC
2014- Cincinnati, OH
2015- New York, NY
2016- Greenville, SC: Hampton, VA:: Columbia, SC: Raleigh, NC : Lexington, KY: Philly, PA 2: (Wrigley) Chicago, IL x 2 (holy shit): Temple of the Dog- Philly, PA
I think if you want classic albums in your collection, you need The Unforgettable Fire through Achtung.
Oh, I have them in the collection.. just Digital. Downloads (I have original UK pressing needle drops) and CDs... just wondering owning the actual vinyl is a must.
I think if you want classic albums in your collection, you need The Unforgettable Fire through Achtung.
Oh, I have them in the collection.. just Digital. Downloads (I have original UK pressing needle drops) and CDs... just wondering owning the actual vinyl is a must.
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
This is the one I have. I saw some remarks around that as well but the Hoffman commentary was very good as was the overall rating. My copy is clean..perfect. And I hear everything. I sent back lots of records people rave about.
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
This is the one I have. I saw some remarks around that as well but the Hoffman commentary was very good as was the overall rating. My copy is clean..perfect. And I hear everything. I sent back lots of records people rave about.
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
This is the one I have. I saw some remarks around that as well but the Hoffman commentary was very good as was the overall rating. My copy is clean..perfect. And I hear everything. I sent back lots of records people rave about.
Blind Melon- Soup (Reissue) happy to finally get to listen to this on wax.
Same here...the black vinyl sounds fantastic!
Pine Knob Music Theatre - Jul 31, 1992 Crisler Arena - Mar 20, 1994
Summerfest - Jul 09, 1995*Savage Hall - Sep 22, 1996The Palace of Auburn Hills-Aug 23, 1998 Breslin Center- Aug 18, 1998,The Palace of Auburn Hills-Oct 07, 2000 DTE Energy Theatre-Jun5,2003,DTE Energy Music Theatre - Jun 26, 2003Sports Arena - Oct 02, 2004 Van Andel Arena - May 19, 2006Palace of Auburn Hills-May 22, 2006 Quicken Loans Arena-May 09, 2010
10-16-2014 Detroit
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
I wouldn't go off the 'reviews' section on Discogs for individuals comments on certain pressings, I find them grossly misleading, one mans shit sounding record is another mans great pressing. Plus, no one ever seems to say what gear they're playing the records on and weather they've cleaned them properly before playing.
Also, of course there are anomalies within pressings (a warped record, scuff marks) and the people who have a bad one out of, say a batch of 5000, soon jump on Discogs and tell you how crap it is... Rediculous, tedious and very frustrating, it's vinyl, it's not meant to be perfect, never has been, never will be.
For Joshua Tree.. .definitely. The remaster is so much better than the original CD or the 2007 RE CD. If you have the OG pressing and don't love the album then it's good enough. But there is a stark difference between cd and vinyl on this one. IMO. Like I said above, I have some 24/96 vinyl rips too and they don't compare. I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
Yea, I like the needle drops. I have a few of the more collectable early CDs, but don't listen to those much. In regard to the 2007 vinyl reissue of Joshua Tree, I have just read bad things about the pressing (it being pressed at United).. read that non-fill and scuffs were bad. Do you happen to have a EU version? Is it pressed somewhere else?
I wouldn't go off the 'reviews' section on Discogs for individuals comments on certain pressings, I find them grossly misleading, one mans shit sounding record is another mans great pressing. Plus, no one ever seems to say what gear they're playing the records on and weather they've cleaned them properly before playing.
Also, of course there are anomalies within pressings (a warped record, scuff marks) and the people who have a bad one out of, say a batch of 5000, soon jump on Discogs and tell you how crap it is... Rediculous, tedious and very frustrating, it's vinyl, it's not meant to be perfect, never has been, never will be.
I find the Steve Hoffman discussions more helpful than discogs. But I do look at the review rating on the site. I hope they are evaluating the media quality not the music but I'm sure it's both.
Comments
But BLACK35, some used albums cost a lot because of rarity. Best method IMO is to look up the album you're looking at in the store on discogs using your phone. Comparison shop so you can determine if the used record in the store is overpriced or reasonably priced. Just remember to factor in shipping with the online price, be (unless the store is use that could cost even more than the record itself.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
I received the 2007 reissue in the mail yesterday and spun it last night. I have a very nice copy of the 1987 original Island. Here are my thoughts about it in comparison, in case you were debating this.
The reissue is definitely better, but by home much is debatable. I found the sound a little fuller than the original. The original is a very good press I think, for the 80's but it's a bit bright, not distant which is why it sounds very good. This reissue is both clear and 'lush', which is the best of both worlds. The big difference is how quiet the vinyl is. It does not have any of the surface noise as a record from 30 years ago will have so that's a plus. I would say that if this record is important to you and one of your favorites (it is for me) then it's worth spending the $30. If it isn't one that you listen to often, the OG is still pretty damn good.
But even if you get past that and maybe my record could be a little nosier than yours, there is definitely a fuller sound on the reissue. I also compared it to my CD FLAC rip and to a 24/96 vinyl rip and it's not even close there.
2009 - Toronto
2010 - Buffalo
2011 - Toronto 1&2
2013 - London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
2014 - Cincinnati, St. Louis, Detroit
2016 - Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, Ottawa, Toronto 1
2018 - Fenway 1&2
2022 - Hamilton, Toronto
2023 - Chicago 1&2
I doubt I'll even need the reissue of Joshua Tree, since I'm very happy with my OG, but nice to know U2 is paying attention to sound quality on the reissues in general.
happy to finally get to listen to this on wax.
livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=446
1995- New Orleans, LA : New Orleans, LA
1996- Charleston, SC
1998- Atlanta, GA: Birmingham, AL: Greenville, SC: Knoxville, TN
2000- Atlanta, GA: New Orleans, LA: Memphis, TN: Nashville, TN
2003- Raleigh, NC: Charlotte, NC: Atlanta, GA
2004- Asheville, NC (hometown show)
2006- Cincinnati, OH
2008- Columbia, SC
2009- Chicago, IL x 2 / Ed Vedder- Atlanta, GA x 2
2010- Bristow, VA
2011- Alpine Valley, WI (PJ20) x 2 / Ed Vedder- Chicago, IL
2012- Atlanta, GA
2013- Charlotte, NC
2014- Cincinnati, OH
2015- New York, NY
2016- Greenville, SC: Hampton, VA:: Columbia, SC: Raleigh, NC : Lexington, KY: Philly, PA 2: (Wrigley) Chicago, IL x 2 (holy shit): Temple of the Dog- Philly, PA
2017- ED VED- Louisville, KY
2018- Chicago, IL x2, Boston, MA x2
2020- Nashville, TN
2022- Smashville
2023- Austin, TX x2
2024- Baltimore
but I think they are only available as special editions.
livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=446
1995- New Orleans, LA : New Orleans, LA
1996- Charleston, SC
1998- Atlanta, GA: Birmingham, AL: Greenville, SC: Knoxville, TN
2000- Atlanta, GA: New Orleans, LA: Memphis, TN: Nashville, TN
2003- Raleigh, NC: Charlotte, NC: Atlanta, GA
2004- Asheville, NC (hometown show)
2006- Cincinnati, OH
2008- Columbia, SC
2009- Chicago, IL x 2 / Ed Vedder- Atlanta, GA x 2
2010- Bristow, VA
2011- Alpine Valley, WI (PJ20) x 2 / Ed Vedder- Chicago, IL
2012- Atlanta, GA
2013- Charlotte, NC
2014- Cincinnati, OH
2015- New York, NY
2016- Greenville, SC: Hampton, VA:: Columbia, SC: Raleigh, NC : Lexington, KY: Philly, PA 2: (Wrigley) Chicago, IL x 2 (holy shit): Temple of the Dog- Philly, PA
2017- ED VED- Louisville, KY
2018- Chicago, IL x2, Boston, MA x2
2020- Nashville, TN
2022- Smashville
2023- Austin, TX x2
2024- Baltimore
(Jeff Tweedy, Sydney 2007)
“Put yer good money on the sunrise”
(Tim Rogers)
I don't own any other as I stopped liking U2 after Achtung and the albums I really like are not that great on vinyl, from what I understand.
This is the one I have. I saw some remarks around that as well but the Hoffman commentary was very good as was the overall rating. My copy is clean..perfect. And I hear everything. I sent back lots of records people rave about.
Summerfest - Jul 09, 1995*Savage Hall - Sep 22, 1996The Palace of Auburn Hills-Aug 23, 1998 Breslin Center- Aug 18, 1998,The Palace of Auburn Hills-Oct 07, 2000 DTE Energy Theatre-Jun5,2003,DTE Energy Music Theatre - Jun 26, 2003Sports Arena - Oct 02, 2004 Van Andel Arena - May 19, 2006Palace of Auburn Hills-May 22, 2006 Quicken Loans Arena-May 09, 2010
10-16-2014 Detroit
Also, of course there are anomalies within pressings (a warped record, scuff marks) and the people who have a bad one out of, say a batch of 5000, soon jump on Discogs and tell you how crap it is... Rediculous, tedious and very frustrating, it's vinyl, it's not meant to be perfect, never has been, never will be.