SEVENS vinyls: thinner than ever...

bootlegger10

picola said:

@bootlegger10 : i collect PJ vinyls since the beginning. It has nothing to do with the multiple formats available. I think that you can understand that.

I understand the collecting. The point being that it shouldn't matter whether thick or thin vinyl since it is just a collectors items and valuable due to rarity and not condition. At least that is my opinion. I don't understand people buying this to listen to when they have a much more convenient 180g vinyl with all of the songs on one record.

picola

bootlegger10 said:

I don't understand people buying this to listen to when they have a much more convenient 180g vinyl with all of the songs on one record.

I understand.

but : because of that, 10C is allowed to provide really poor copies ?? or should they anyway make a great object, mainly if it's collectors ??

picola

We all have just to compare our Benaroya LP and this Sevens boxset.

same price, but one was really a true great gift to collectors and the other one is a poor record....

They write the same price on it. That says a lot.

whofeelslikeadrank

picola said:

We all have just to compare our Benaroya LP and this Sevens boxset.

same price, but one was really a true great gift to collectors and the other one is a poor record....

They write the same price on it. That says a lot.

sevens was more than benaroya hall

PJ_Soul

whofeelslikeadrank said:

picola said:

We all have just to compare our Benaroya LP and this Sevens boxset.

same price, but one was really a true great gift to collectors and the other one is a poor record....

They write the same price on it. That says a lot.

sevens was more than benaroya hall

Not if you take inflation into account.

MedozK

picola said:

one was really a true great gift to collectors and the other one is a poor record....

Are you saying the Sevens set is "poor", because It will degrade slightly quicker than a thicker vinyl? Are there more negatives associated to a thinner vinyl?

PJ_Soul

I don't even care. I will always buy every piece of vinyl that Pearl Jam puts out, and be 100% glad that I did. I am a collector of Pearl Jam vinyl. Of course I'm happy I have Sevens.

AndySlash

picola said:

We all have just to compare our Benaroya LP and this Sevens boxset.

same price, but one was really a true great gift to collectors and the other one is a poor record....

They write the same price on it. That says a lot.

pressing 7 records versus 4 is more expensive. demand for vinyl ten years ago also wasn't what it is today. demand = +$$$$. pressing plants charge more than they did ten years ago. that cost is passed on to us.

taking that into account, and considering how many were pressed and what 10c could have actually sold them for given the aftermarket prices we're seeing, i'll say it was a bargain we were able to buy sevens for "only" $55. if receiving thinner than normal records was a consequence of that, so be it.

jshin

Thin! So thin that four of them are transparent..

PJ_Soul

Just wondering why anyone cares if they are thin. I haven't seen anyone say they sound bad, so who gives a shit?

cp3iverson

This is honestly the same thickness as most of the 7" in my collection. It doesnt stand out to me as a flaw

AndySlash

cp3iverson said:

This is honestly the same thickness as most of the 7" in my collection. It doesnt stand out to me as a flaw

same here. it's not something i noticed until it was pointed out.

scurtis

When 10C puts out an item that is clearly for collectors/fan whether they play it or not, (I mean it's the same music repackaged) and only charge $55 I have a hard time finding anything to complain about. Some of you guys appear to putting your kids through school with PJ releases so don't bite the hand that feeds.

It could be like other bands of the same era who issue a record on RSD, make it limited, charge $40 for it and all it is is two records in two paper sleeves in a piece of cardboard with a picture on it.

I will take the packaging, the colored vinyl etc... of Sevens for $55 any day.

picola

PJ_Soul said:

Just wondering why anyone cares if they are thin. I haven't seen anyone say they sound bad, so who gives a shit?

If you don't play them on a turntable, you don't give a shit, ok...
If records are made to be played, well, take a look at them after a few spin...

picola

cp3iverson said:

This is honestly the same thickness as most of the 7" in my collection. It doesnt stand out to me as a flaw

If you have time to, and if you want to consider this, take a look at your Xmas from 91 to 2010...you'll see what I mean.
Take a look at other 7" from PJ , even the colored ones (ex: red Last Kiss vinyl) and you'll see.

PJ_Soul

picola said:

PJ_Soul said:

Just wondering why anyone cares if they are thin. I haven't seen anyone say they sound bad, so who gives a shit?

If you don't play them on a turntable, you don't give a shit, ok...
If records are made to be played, well, take a look at them after a few spin...

You think they are so thin that they'll wear out after a few spins?

picola

scurtis said:

When 10C puts out an item that is clearly for collectors/fan whether they play it or not, (I mean it's the same music repackaged) and only charge $55 I have a hard time finding anything to complain about. Some of you guys appear to putting your kids through school with PJ releases so don't bite the hand that feeds.

It could be like other bands of the same era who issue a record on RSD, make it limited, charge $40 for it and all it is is two records in two paper sleeves in a piece of cardboard with a picture on it.

I will take the packaging, the colored vinyl etc... of Sevens for $55 any day.

I understand.

But can you remind me the price of every single 7" vinyl on the market at a record store ? Even PJ ones ? 8 dollars perhaps ?? And most of them are "decent"
Here we have 7 records for 55 dollars so it's almost the same price.

picola

PJ_Soul said:

picola said:

PJ_Soul said:

Just wondering why anyone cares if they are thin. I haven't seen anyone say they sound bad, so who gives a shit?

If you don't play them on a turntable, you don't give a shit, ok...
If records are made to be played, well, take a look at them after a few spin...

You think they are so thin that they'll wear out after a few spins?

Well, when I read that, I can't believe you're a vinyl enthousiast...
Many poorly pressed records have defaults after a few spin due to the cartridge if they are not enough hard. (i don't know how to explain it properly in english, excuse that...)
If records are veru thin, it's worse.

PJ_Soul

picola said:

PJ_Soul said:

picola said:

PJ_Soul said:

Just wondering why anyone cares if they are thin. I haven't seen anyone say they sound bad, so who gives a shit?

If you don't play them on a turntable, you don't give a shit, ok...
If records are made to be played, well, take a look at them after a few spin...

You think they are so thin that they'll wear out after a few spins?

Well, when I read that, I can't believe you're a vinyl enthousiast...
Many poorly pressed records have defaults after a few spin due to the cartridge if they are not enough hard. (i don't know how to explain it properly in english, excuse that...)
If records are veru thin, it's worse.

I just haven't ever had any issues or come across any records that have had issues like this, and have never seen anyone talk about it before, as a vinyl enthusiast. This one's new to me!

picola

If there were no issues about that and if no one before me and no audiophile had never talked about that before, I never would have tell you about that.

I don't care about a 180g vinyl or not, if the structure is well made and if the grooves and holes are well made and are very sharp and hard. But if the record is very very thin, well, I'm a bit scared...