Guest Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 (edited) People seem really pleased when they get there favorite rare mint record signed by the artist! Is this a good thing, or is it a rare record that is now not mint, because it has writing on the label? W.O.L.! Edited June 27, 2008 by Guest Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Dave Moore Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 W.O.L. - Plain and simple. That's why rekkids come in sleeves - so you can get them autographed. I'm sure a few close friends will chew my balls for that opinion. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Steve Edgar Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 People seem really pleased when they get there favorite rare mint record signed by the artist! Is this a good thing, or is it a rare record that is now not mint, because it has writing on the label? W.O.L.! Id say definately a bad thing! agree with Dave, get a sleeve signed. but I have no problem with having a demo that maybe has a radio station stamp or something on it coz it was at the time of release and kinda aunthentic. steve Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Soul-slider Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 (edited) Id say definately a bad thing! agree with Dave, get a sleeve signed. but I have no problem with having a demo that maybe has a radio station stamp or something on it coz it was at the time of release and kinda aunthentic. steve What if the autograph was at the same time(ish) of release, say, 1960's? I have an Island Ska 45 signed by Jimmy Cliff in the 1960's.....does this make it more acceptable? Also, surely if it's someone like Marvin Gaye or Bob Marley who are no longer with us (and legends) the record is even more valuable? Edited June 27, 2008 by Soul-Slider Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Steve Edgar Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 What if the autograph was at the same time(ish) of release, say, 1960's? I have an Island Ska 45 signed by Jimmy Cliff in the 1960's.....does this make it more acceptable? Ive got or had the odd thing that has writing on from either artist or producer, maybe as a token of thanx to someone and I find it all a part of an "at the time" thing. Think wot Stardom was on about was getting something signed 40 odd years later! steve Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Alan Pollard Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 People seem really pleased when they get there favorite rare mint record signed by the artist! Is this a good thing, or is it a rare record that is now not mint, because it has writing on the label? W.O.L.! I know there is going to be alot of people saying that the artist autographing direct on to the label de-values the record well I personally wouldn't have it any other way, I have got all my Harthon, Arctic, Argo and all the Dynodynamic records autographed by Weldon, Luther and Johnny directly on to the label, I also have many others like Hoagy Lands, Willie Tee, The Dells, Bobby Paris, Dean Courtney, Maxine Brown and Sidney Barnes some signed on the record and some on the sleeve, the truth is these records aren't going anywhere as I will never sell them and even if I did the autographs do not affect the playing of the record. So my vote goes with either signing the record or the sleeve but I can also see why some people will only have the sleeve signed. Regards Alan Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
45cellar Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Id say definately a bad thing! agree with Dave, get a sleeve signed. but I have no problem with having a demo that maybe has a radio station stamp or something on it coz it was at the time of release and kinda aunthentic. steve I always like my records as pristine as possible, However; DJ Graffitti as I call It, I know what you mean, (Authentic, of It's time & Part of the records History) If the Record Label was Autographed at the Time of release, all well & good. Even though It could be argued that Yesterday is part of a records History, the sleeve is the better place for Autographs I reckon, Doesn't seem right somehow to Deliberately write on the Label, whatever the reason. Similar goes for Stickers, some are to be expected, and of the Period. I would never dream of attempting to remove them. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Mark Bicknell Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Hard one to call this personally I'd rather have the records clean and in general good order, having said that I presented Lorraine Chandler with my three RCA Victor Demo's back at that legendary night at Stafford with Eddie Parker early 80's and she signed all three on the label which I still have to this day and treasure as it was such a real moment in Northern Soul history and pretty unique to have all three signed by the artist so I'm with Alan on the fact that as with his treasures mine ain't going anywhere, funny in other areas of record collecting if you had a Beatles Promo signed by all four Beatles then it would be worth a fortune label, cover or otherwise, guess we like our stuff Mint? I have many 45's signed but tend to be mainly on the white card sleeve....lol Regards - Mark Bicknell. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
45cellar Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 (edited) Hard one to call this personally I'd rather have the records clean and in general good order, having said that I presented Lorraine Chandler with my three RCA Victor Demo's back at that legendary night at Stafford with Eddie Parker early 80's and she signed all three on the label which I still have to this day and treasure as it was such a real moment in Northern Soul history and pretty unique to have all three signed by the artist so I'm with Alan on the fact that as with his treasures mine ain't going anywhere, funny in other areas of record collecting if you had a Beatles Promo signed by all four Beatles then it would be worth a fortune label, cover or otherwise, guess we like our stuff Mint? I have many 45's signed but tend to be mainly on the white card sleeve....lol Regards - Mark Bicknell. I agree that It is a hard one to call, It all ultimately comes down to Personal Preference. You raise an Interesting point regarding The Beatles Signed records. They are enhanced due to the Autograph (Price Wise) I may well be wrong, I Just have this protective urge regarding vinyl. I have seen many ways of mistreating Vinyl, Label & all. Maybe I am wrong regarding The Artist scrawling their signature on The Label. However, given the choice, I still would prefer the sleeve. Edited June 28, 2008 by 45cellar Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest mel brat Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 (edited) Hard one to call this personally I'd rather have the records clean and in general good order, having said that I presented Lorraine Chandler with my three RCA Victor Demo's back at that legendary night at Stafford with Eddie Parker early 80's and she signed all three on the label which I still have to this day and treasure as it was such a real moment in Northern Soul history and pretty unique to have all three signed by the artist so I'm with Alan on the fact that as with his treasures mine ain't going anywhere, funny in other areas of record collecting if you had a Beatles Promo signed by all four Beatles then it would be worth a fortune label, cover or otherwise, guess we like our stuff Mint? I have many 45's signed but tend to be mainly on the white card sleeve....lol Regards - Mark Bicknell. I think this is a rather recent development and probably due to the enormous rise in value of rare 45s. Back in the early 70s for example I had all my Edwin Starr records signed by the man (as Edwin's autograph was in 1973, still a novelty!), years later however, when I had to sell "Scotts On Swingers" and "You're My Mellow", the guy who was buying them bemoaned the fact that they had "WOL' ! I also had Frank Beverly sign a Sassy demo of "If That's What You Wanted" (it had only cost £1 and who knew that prices would rise so much?) To me, every record or theatre programme etc. signed is a personal memory and are never intended to be sold on at the time. I treasure my copy of "You Shouldn't Have Set My Soul On Fire" on Pye Int. signed by Inez Foxx, and luckily it's not at all "rare" so I can enjoy it without worrying about someone complaining in future! Edited June 28, 2008 by mel brat Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Dark Horse Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 People seem really pleased when they get there favorite rare mint record signed by the artist! Is this a good thing, or is it a rare record that is now not mint, because it has writing on the label? W.O.L.! It is down to personal preference I suppose,but I think they should all be reported to the Stardom Police!! Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 I bought Matt Lucas' copy of Baby You Better Go Go off him and asked him to sign the sleeve, he signed the label in silver pen, I was not happy Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest swoz Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 AUTOGRAPH COLLECTORS WILL SELL JIMMY CONWELL..TOO MUCH. LIGHT GREEN ORIG...SIGNED ON CARD SLEEVE, READS...THANK YOU FOR KEEPING THE MUSIC ALIVE...JIMMY CONWELL. THIS WAS SIGNED FOR DAVE SHAW BUT GOOD OLD DAVE DIDN'T GET IT SIGNED TO HIS NAME HENCE MAKING IT MORE OF A CLLECTORS GEM Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Get involved with Soul Source
Add your comments now
Join Soul Source
A free & easy soul music affair!
Join Soul Source now!Log in to Soul Source
Jump right back in!
Log in now!