Comments on: Of Original Blue Notes and Shrink Wrap

By: Earl

Earl — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:52:01 +0000

Concerning the shrink wrap: I thought I remembered buying BN’s back in the 50’s in shrink, but I could be wrong. What I do know is that shrink wrap has been known to be applied to used records, and sealed, and with the proper machine, is not hard to do – one more reason why I will NEVER buy an LP sealed

By: Michel

Michel — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:28:49 +0000

You are right Zarabeth. It is probably original. Impossible to read the adress on back cover.

By: zarabeth47

zarabeth47 — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 08:20:58 +0000

MICHEL, who listens to covers anyway?
Obviously not these guys: http://www.ebay.com/itm/121084091245?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
someone paid a lot for a G+ cover on that one! Wow.
0 feedback? C’mon take a chance man! LOL!
I don’t know –
1) DG both sides.
2) Labels appear to be the large blue type but you can’t really see the cut off line in pic. But even if they are the small(45) type label the title’s cat number is correct for that transition from large to small meaning they could be either type.

3) No INC. to label.

The record has export stamps to labels but records weren’t pressed in the UK (fontana) until a few years later where smaller logos and no deep grooves were common. Some exports had a US patent / GB patent matrix so it could be a RESAERCH CRAFT press (LA) but doubtful as they would of had the smaller logos and no deep grooves. Then again anything is possible! It could well be a Fontana press! For $20 bucks who cares! I’ve plenty of those and they are fine sounding records. An ioda less than the real thing but a fine sounding press no doubt. I wish I would of seen it for $20 !!!!!! Dang!!!!!
WHY DO YOU SAY IT’S NOT AN ORIGINAL PRESS?

By: Michel

Michel — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:26:20 +0000

Zarabeth you are right, this is a fine session but…

1 – The cover has severe damage
2 – This is not an original press
3 – The seller has 0 feedback

This would have drstically reduced the number of potential buyer…(And especially the potential buyer who has a NM first press waiting for a clean cover to match, in other words, me :-))

By: zarabeth47

zarabeth47 — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:18:06 +0000

http://www.ebay.com/itm/261188686756?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

Obviously no one was looking for J. G. on Riverside. Jeezo! $20 for a VG+ record of this one! Some lucky person is going to be very happy if the grading is even anywhere near VG+ … MAN! Mine’s VG and I wouldn’t sell it. Trade it. Let my best friend borrow it. I won’t even let anyone look at it. Heck, My wife will have to pry this one from my fingers before they throw me in that coffin at the mortUary! LOL!
Where were the great true jazz lovers when this one ended?

By: Joaquim

Joaquim — Sun, 24 Mar 2013 20:43:09 +0000

PS.For exemple. I have purchased one year ago on http://www.cdandlp.com, one John Lewis Afternoon in Paris Versailles in VG++ condition for $500. Has been sold on Ebay the last week for $2400

By: Joaquim

Joaquim — Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:54:58 +0000

From what I see,the records on the Ebay auctions are sold more and more expensive . I opted for the buy it now, especially with best offer. And the webs collector vinyl shops.

By: Rudolf

Rudolf — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 08:53:22 +0000

Michel is right.
Re an outright sale of an item which is already on auction: as a seller I sometimes get requests (only from US members by the way) asking to negotiate a separate deal.
If I can get an extremely good deal, and if there are no bids on the item, I sometimes decide to end the listing. EBay foresees this case and the reason I give is that the item is no longer available. Which is true. But it is something which, in my feeling, is against EBay etiquette and, if practised all the time, is damaging one’s seller image.
I remember as an early EBayer, watching an item I’d love to have, to see it had all of a sudden disappeared, reason: Item not available anymore.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:37:44 +0000

Hi Michel,
I’d agree about the Jutta Hipp cover except I thought they removed the 767 address on the back cover of those, but I might be remembering incorrectly.

By: Michel

Michel — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:02:01 +0000

1 – Regarding shrik wrap or loose bag. Blue Note were not sold originally with any kind of schrink wrap or loose bag. Shrink was only for resell, cut corner, low prices etc etc…

2 – Regarding the Jutta Hipp. I think that this record is an original record, but the cover is the reissue from the United Artist period. No kakubuchi frames, cut corner, very white back… hmmmm this looks really like an UA reissue cover. Not 100 % sure, but…