Familiar Names and Titles for The $1,000 Bin
Catching up on some more jazz vinyl auctions on eBay, starting with Tommy Flanagan, The Cats, New Jazz 8217. This was an original purple label mono deep groove pressing. The record features John Coltrane among others. The record and cover were listed in M- condition, although the picture of the bag cover is clearly not M-, and is probably just VG+. The final price was $1,675. Based on Popsike, that is the highest price we’ve seen for The Cats, possibly more than double the previous high.
Whilst we are perusing the $1,000 bin: Duke Jordan, Flight to Jordan, Blue Note 4046. This was an original West 63rdStreet pressing listed in VG++ condition for the record and VG+ for the cover. The final price was $1,514.89. This one had a start price of about $5,000 but did not sell: Tina Brooks, True Blue, Blue Note 4041. This was an original pressing. The record was listed as M-, but the cover was VG-. It is back on eBay for the same start price.
When I wrote about this one the first time, the bidding was less than $1,000 with nearly two days left on the auction: Freddie Redd, Shades of Redd, Blue Note 4045. This was an original West 63rd Street pressing listed in EX/EX+ condition for the record and EX for the cover. The final price was, ta da, $2,670.
The seller, vinyl-house-uk, had a pretty nice haul the week that this one closed. In addition to Shades of Redd, there were original pressings of:
Cliff Jordan, Cliff Craft, Blue Note 1582: $1,938, VG+ for the vinyl and EX+ for the cover.
Introducing Kenny Burrell, Blue Note 1523: $1,719, EX/EX+ for the record and cover.
Hank Mobley Sextet, Blue Note 1560, $2,753, EX for the vinyl and VG+ for the cover.
The Burrell had a much later cover.
Agreed that the Cats cover was not NM. For the Flight to Jordan, what do people think of grading a record with a mark that causes audible ticks VG++? I’ve thought of this grade as only for records that show slight evidence of being played, but otherwise look and sound nearly new. What’s VG++ to you?
Justin…you’re absolutely right. I think we need to start giving out “tickets” to Sellers who are obviously off on their grading.
I recently saw a seller grade a record that “skips once” as VG+.
Justin- on the Flight to Jordan lp . i agree 100%…. the problem with most eBay sellers is:they want the most money they can get for there lp’s . grading is a big indicator of price , and lets face it, records look a lot better when you sale them, versus when you buy them, a VG++ is basically saying the record is Excellent plus
sellers knows if he can’t call the record Excellent, not with 14 clicks, so i assume adding the extra plus sign is suppose to come off as still a great condition record,
Given who the seller for The Cats is/ was I’m not surprised it was over graded for the cover.
I wonder what the minus M condition for LP really is ?
I’d be more concerned with that Tina Brooks cover being called VG+.
It would really throw into doubt the grading of the vinyl.
Oops I think I mis-read.
It was actually VG-.
Well, the seller for Cats has this disclaimer “All are believed to be originals and 1st pressings however, I am not the Jazz expert of the world so please check the photos carefully.” I still remember his full page ads in Goldmine from the 90’s….
To answer the question above, to me a VG++ grade is just below near mint. I also think it’s ok for a seller to give an LP a visual grade of VG++ and then give the audio a separate grade and explain why that grade is given. It’s more dangerous when a seller only gives a visual grade. Without a separate audio grade, who knows how bad the record will sound. But for some reason, buyers continue to pay huge prices when only a visual grade is given.
Since grading is nonstandardized, anything goes. It is a matter of understanding how an individual seller grades, the knowledge of the seller, the honesty of the seller, and the care that the seller takes in grading. A visual grade without the benefit of a listen is the mark of a substandard seller.
I’ll admit to having had grading issues with the seller of the Cats record before… in my case, it was a rare Louis Armstrong 78 on OKeh that had a repeat that made it unplayable, which didn’t match the description. I don’t think it was an intentional oversight, but I was disappointed. That said, I have a lot of respect for that guy… his blues 78 collection is incredible, and he has found several blues 78s that had previously been considered lost that he proceeded to make and distribute sound files of, preserving the music and making it available for everybody. But yeah, his grading standards are iffy.
As far as grading goes… I tend to be very conservative and cautious when it comes to grading. I do not like dealing with returns. If I grade a record Very Good+ (VG+), it’s nearly perfect. I rarely grade anything with a feelable scratch above Good (G). I’d rather sacrifice a few bucks instead of overhype a record. Usually this works out fine, sometimes making customers happy to the point that they seem to think the records I sent them were in Mint (M) condition according to their feedback (which always feels weird… when I see that, I tend to think, “Uh, that record had a bunch of scratches… glad you’re happy with it, though”), but it does occasionally cost me. The best example of it costing me was when I sold a copy of Soul Station a year or so back. It was an original pressing with the deep groove and the Plastylite ear (by the way, I only say “original” with first pressings, I don’t go for that “original Plastylite pressing” nonsense), and I was test-playing before listening when I discovered a bunch of skips. There was a barely visible scratch along the grooves. I took out a sewing needle and a magnifying glass to straighten the grooves out and fixed the skipping issue completely, but this made the record look all marred and ugly where the skips had been. It played fine, and most of the record sounded excellent, but… I didn’t have the heart to grade it anything higher than Good+ (G+), and I made a point of pointing out the scratch issue in the description and telling bidders to be wary. Instead of getting, say, $350 or more for a Very Good- (VG-) or Very Good (VG) copy- the latter of which which would reflect how it played overall- I barely got $200. A week later the buyer left rhapsodic praise for me in my feedback, saying that this was the finest-playing copy of Soul Station he had ever ran across. C’est la vie… but hey, at least the buyer was happy, and somebody got a new favourite play copy of Soul Station. Any scenario that ends with somebody happily listening to a copy of Soul Station can’t be all bad.
TurboCharged Weasel do you sell on ebay or discogs or both?
TurboCharged Weasel – i wish all sellers were like you, nothing like a honest upfront seller.
Could someone explain to me what determines grading a record VG++ ? whT does the extra + mean? i notice it’s only done on VG records and not other grades, i never see someone saying Nm++ EXC++ Good++
GST- eBay. I buy off Discogs a lot, but I don’t like the idea of selling things without photos and in-depth descriptions. I run into enough trouble as is with people not looking at my descriptions or pictures before buying and then canceling orders… I imagine it would be worse without photos. That’s part of why I don’t generally sell high-end stuff… Even if I do everything right, customers might still cancel an order on me or decide to return an item because they didn’t read the description, and with a $300+ item, than can really tie my wallet up. I take more issue with unpleasant and dishonest sellers than I do buyers- the bad sellers are usually trying to screw over buyers and squeeze every last penny out of them, whereas problem buyers usually just want a good item and are a bit unreasonable, which is significantly less malicious- but it’s enough to really keep me out of the real high-price end of selling. The other reason I don’t sell that much high-end stuff is because I generally want to keep it. I view eBay selling as a source of pocket money, not as a means of self-support, and I use that pocket money to buy records.
(Also, I wanted to clarify that I see a bad seller as somebody that deliberately lies to customers or otherwise misleads them. I’m not talking about sellers that accidentally overgrade things.)
Mark- I personally never use the extra +. My grades are Poor (P), Fair (F), Good (G), Good+ (G+), Very Good- (VG-), Very Good (VG), Very Good+ (VG+), Near Mint- (NM-), and Mint (M). I understand that VG- is apparently an odd grade, but I see that as, well… if I’d look at a record and say it’s almost in very good condition, but I don’t like the look of this nonfeelable scratch that doesn’t really do anything but still irritates me visually… it gets a “-“. You know, a record that is teetering on the edge of mediocre condition, but more on visual terms than really on audible terms. It’s kinda like how there needed to be another rating between PG and R. Sure, PG and R cover a lot, but every now and then you get a Poltergeist or a Gremlins that doesn’t really fit under either rating. Yeah, it’s mainly just a compulsive thing that I think makes sense, but hey, my customers seem alright with it. I imagine a lot of sellers kind of have similar things they do, like the extra pluses. I’d imagine a “VG++” would be a really nice VG+ record that isn’t quite Near Mint- or Mint- or whatever but is really on the high end of VG+. However, a more likely answer in most cases is simply that the seller knows their Blue Note is worth hundreds if not thousands in nicer shape, and they know that people interpret “+” as meaning “more!”, yet as long as they don’t actually say it’s Mint-… where could somebody say they technically lied? I think it’s kind of a hype modifier and little else, lying somewhere between “Nice shape!” and “Insanely rare original 1957 pressing! Good luck finding another copy! I believe from my years of experience that this is indeed a first pressing! Do not listen to the Fred Cohen worshippers kneeling at their golden calf, I have personally built a time machine and watched these get pressed in 1957 myself, and they looked like this, no Plastylite “ear” in sight! I also saw New York labels in use while there, too, and went to catch Rollins at the Village Vanguard! Do not believe everything you read on line, just believe me!” yada yada yada maybe he’ll send in another hyperbolic editorial, I really don’t care. Point is, if you see multiple extraneous “+” symbols, look real closely at those pictures and try to make your own assessment.
(Also, I should admit that my weakness as a seller is shipping and handling time. I have a long S&H period because I pack everything myself in my free time, and when that number of packages to ship passes 20, things start to slow down. I figure that my customers are less likely to get angry if it’s maybe better than described. That said… I did, after all, start selling and grading the way I do in the first place because I got burned by a few sellers and took it a bit personally and wanted to do a better job than them, so… this has been my policy along, this is just an added perk. I think it has worked well… I mostly avoid selling things that aren’t as described, and it helps provide a feedback cushion for when my customers wait a little longer than they expected, because nobody actually reads my S&H time, even though it’s in the description in bold. Oh well. I think that’s on the very light end of shady, but it’s unfair of me to be critical of other sellers like I was above without mentioning my weak spot.)
Anyways, hopefully that wasn’t too contentious. If so, you all have my apologies.
eBay, unlike Discogs or Goldmine uses Excellent as a rating between VG+ and NM. That translates to VG++. To me it’s the same as Goldmine VG+.