Spares - The Dilemma - Which To Keep & Which To Let Go?

[Premium Stuff]

Hi everyone

 

I have always collected to try and get the best condition copy and best format that I can of a record.

 

This means, like many of us I'm sure, I have a lot of "spares".

 

So, I think it is time to thin out my collection a bit and this raises the painful dilemma of which copies are the most and least desirable.

 

Sometimes it is clear - rare demo is best - or rare issue is best   

 

Other times, it is condition.

 

Sometimes it is harder - so what about a record which is signed by the artist? Is this more or less desirable than a clean copy? My hunch says clean is better, but I'm wavering  

 

Anyone got any thoughts on that one please, or any other aspect of what the heck to do when faced with lots of difficult decisions about which to keep and which to let go?

 

Cheers

 

Richard 

Edited September 16, 2013 by Premium Stuff

[Haydn]

Am in the same boat.

Foreign labels that look the dogs doo daas.

Where you bought the record and the memories that came with it.

It's sometimes better to just leave them there lol

[Little-stevie]

Its like selling a family member, it can hurt so bad....

 

Send us sneak preview of your sales please Richard , before you post it to the hawks....

[Cover-up]

Surely an autograph can only increase the value of a record? If it in any way decreased the value, you'd be daft NOT to keep the one with that extra bit of history and personality.

 

I'm usually really fussy about condition too. But some records I keep the scruffy looking one which plays fine and sell the pristine mint copy, knowing you'll get that extra bit of cash. Then again, sometimes I keep the mint one, knowing the scruffy one will go for not much less in value. I'm sure that's helped you, no end... 

[Windlesoul]

Novas Nine - Pain / Why listen - got the acetate, the national abc release and the local Heritage release. By coincidence last year I was interviewing one of the band members from NC just before I bought the Heritage release from a New York dealer. My copy has a handwritten note on the label by the same band member (and writer of both sides) to his girlfriend at the time. stirred up some old memories apparently! Bear in mind this was circa 1968...

Edited September 16, 2013 by Windlesoul

[purist]

I was never really bitten by the British label bug, so given the choice the USA one would stay and the UK one would go for me, but I understand for many it's the complete opposite.

Years back I had a pristine gold issue label copy of the Delegates of Soul as well as a " previously loved " white label copy ( which doesn't actually say promotional on it but I assume thats what it is) and when i needed funds for another purchase i asked my old mate Blue Max which one he'd keep and which one he'd sell. Immediately he said " well, that one has had a life, it's not been kept away from a stylus, makes it proper"

I sold the mint issue for £60 and the scruffy white one still oives with me and I couldnt be happier, we've been through some times together and i'm not afraid to handle it with a sweaty paw when I've played it out in the heat of a Niter...... but having said all that I still am happy to pay a premium, say up to 10% over the top for an unplayed copy of some wants.

Just doesn't make any sense does it, collecting Rare Soul

[Frankie Crocker]

Also in the same boat but remember Rule#1, Never Sell Your Record Collection... It's probably easier to be more selective over future purchases than to agonise over what to cull. Under extreme duress, I would move on styrene copies and keep the vinyl. I would keep any autographed records even if I had a pristine issue also. Much depends on whether you have catalogued your records - if they have been listed in a book or on the computer, it is a real pain to delete them. My suggestion would be to put up more shelving, dig a basement or move to a bigger house. In future, put the 'spares' into the sales box before adding them to the collection so their destiny is pretty much decided - I find this solution handy for the records I stupidly buy then discover another copy hidden in the collection.

[Ljblanken]

Surely an autograph can only increase the value of a record?

 

not always .... i have tons of records that have autographs...from the 14 yr old kid who originally bought it and wrote their name on it in huge black marker so they wouldn't lose it at a teen make-out party!

[Pete S]

not always .... i have tons of records that have autographs...from the 14 yr old kid who originally bought it and wrote their name on it in huge black marker so they wouldn't lose it at a teen make-out party!

 

Autographs rarely make any difference to the value of a records, in some cases they can devalue it.  I bought Matt Lucas' only copy of You Better Go Go off him and asked him to sign the sleeve - he signed the label not the sleeve, in silver pen.  Oh dear.  

[Windlesoul]

I agree, keep the autographs off the vinyl and on the sleeve

 

[Cover-up]

not always .... i have tons of records that have autographs...from the 14 yr old kid who originally bought it and wrote their name on it in huge black marker so they wouldn't lose it at a teen make-out party!

 

I think when someone describes a record as autographed, it's generally implied that it's signed by one of the people who MADE the record, not OWNED it. But, now that you mention it, looks like half my collection is now autographed!!!