Comments on: One For the $3,000 Bin, And A Few More

By: zarabeth47

zarabeth47 — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 04:45:41 +0000

MikeJ(NZ) – Labels can always be found and used up (later) so never trust labels. There are Liberty presses that have 47 W. 63RD st. labels for instance w NO EAR! With BN titles always ask for an EAR check (LOL!) Matrixes, Stampers and mastering codes/symbols (for BN titles – the EAR) on the deadwax will help pinpoint it more closely.
I ask myself this when receiveing any BN record – does it have the EAR – then it will probably sound great if there’s not much goovewear or scratches. Do I enjoy this record? YES? – I keep it! NO? I send it back or trade it in if I’m not into it too heavy. L8R

By: Clifford Allen

Clifford Allen — Mon, 18 Mar 2013 01:13:21 +0000

$139 for a great copy of 4015 is a reasonable price – heck, I’d keep it and enjoy it as that is an incredible LP. But I understand what you and Rudolf are getting at.

By: Mike J (NZ)

Mike J (NZ) — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 20:04:54 +0000

Clifford,

Thanks so much for your feedback. The seller was very good in this instance apologizing for the mistake and offering to take the record back.

I thought about your comment a little more overnight regarding the possible “transitional” aspect to it, given that it is 4015 in the catalogue, and that 4017 was supposed to be the first full INC LP.
The copy is VG++, bordering NM- and it is in really nice condition, so I decided to keep it. I paid US$139 for it.

Rudolph,

Many thanks for your advice. I guess I answered my own question in many respects. I’ve just added “always double check with the seller” to my buying criteria.

Much appreciate your feedback Gentlemen.

Best regards,

Mike

By: Rudolf

Rudolf — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 06:52:56 +0000

Mike: I have had in my hands a G copy of 4016 with DG labels and without R and Inc. on either side.
I returned the album to seller because it had been sold as VG+, otherwise I could have sent you pictures.
Do never trust a seller when he claims it is a first pressing, how can he know? Only follow your own buying criteria.

By: Clifford Allen

Clifford Allen — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 01:19:50 +0000

IIRC, 4013 was something of a transitional title, so it could still be a probable first with the INC/registration on one label. According to my reading of Cohen, these designations started to appear around this time in the catalog. We know that dead wax is probably more indicative of its life in the pressing than the labels – leftover “early” labels ending up on repressed LPs, etc. In the end, I suppose the label uneasiness factor is pretty correlated to the cash outlay…

By: Mike J (NZ)

Mike J (NZ) — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 23:21:57 +0000

Hi guys,

I’m just after a bit of feedback here.

I bought a copy of Blue Note 4015 a couple of weeks ago (Art Blakey & The Jazz Messengers) At The Jazz Corner Of The World.

In the description header it was described as 1st edition.
There was a picture of the front of the cover, back of the cover and one label showing no R and no INC.

I have just received the album, only to discover that the label on the other side has the R and the INC.

Is this my fault for not asking to see a photo of the other label, or asking the seller to confirm if the other label has no R or INC?

Or was there no need for me to ask, because as it says in the description, that it is a 1st edition, and one photo of one label confirmed that?

I guess the onus is on the buyer at the end of the day to absolutely confirm all required specs, but at the same time, I thought it was a little bit deceptive to create the perception that I was buying a 1st pressing, when it was not.

By: Clifford Allen

Clifford Allen — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:02:57 +0000

That deepgroove1549 guy had the original Canadian Ted Curson LP, “Live at La’Tete de l’Art.” I’ve only seen one other copy and have looked for years (though admittedly knowing it would be a little rich for my blood). That other copy was in the Dick Wright archives at the University of Kansas. Surprised it didn’t go for way more money.