Shades of Blue Note
We’ll continue to keep an eye on Blue Note today. Here are some recent sales of Blue Note jazz vinyl:
Freddie Redd, Shades of Redd, Blue Note 4045. This was an original deep groove pressing that looked to be in beautiful M- condition. I’ve always wanted an original copy of these record, since it is a personal favorite and I’ve only owned a Japanese pressing for many years. One day I’m sure I’ll find an original at a price I would be comfortable paying, which was not this copy, which sold for $1,282 from my friends at Music Matters in California.
Curtis Fuller, Bone & Bari, Blue Note 1572. This was also an original pressing from a reliable dealer. The record was in what looked to be VG++ condition, while the cover was listed as being “in very good shape” which sounds better than VG and, from the pictures, also seemed to look better than VG. If I were bidding, based on the description, I’d be disappointed if the record wasn’t around VG++, which is probably what the winning bidder assumed as well, since the record sold for $710.
This one was from the same seller: Hank Mobley and His All Stars, Blue Note 1544, This one also looked to be an original pressing in M- condition for both the cover and the record. It sold for $920, which, although it may sound ridiculous, is actually a relatively low price for this record in M- condition.
The price of this one was affected by the condition of the cover: Lee Morgan, Candy, Blue Note 1590. This was an original pressing. The vinyl was around VG++, but the cover had water damage. Still, even with a not-so-great cover, it sold for $906.03.
Kenny Burrell, Blue Lights Volume 1, Blue Note 1596. This seemed to be an original pressing, but to find out you had to read the questions and answers, since the seller didn’t include much in his original description. Would that impact the price? This one was in M- condition for the vinyl and VG++ for the Andy Warhol cover. It sold for $557.
About Candy(my favorite Blue Note I don’t own a first of, although I have like 5 different re-issues), what do people think about buying a record with Water Damage to the cover. I would be concerned that even though the vinyl looks good there would be mold problems and such with the record that may not be visible. I have a Turrentine “Up at Mintons” that I found for cheap with water damage. It looks fine, but plays with way to much surface noise. I’m curious what other’s think, because I was tempted to try and bid for Candy but held back.
There are vinyl-eating bugs I have read, but I have never come across anything that stands up to isopropyl alcohol-based record cleaning fuid. You’ll never know till you try. The music will triumph, I bet.
As for Shades of Redd, I have a King press of this and it is absolutely the best of all of my thirty-odd Kings, an absolute joy to listen to sonically and musically.
I would be wary of assuming a high-priced fancy M- OG will actually sound better. I’ve had a few upsets where in my view they don’t and $1200 is an expensive way to find out.
Like Mike, I also held back from bidding on Candy for the same reason. Since this LP in VG++ or better condition sells for a fortune these days, I was thinking of taking a chance on the LP as it might be the only way to get it at a reasonable price but was concerned about water damage to the LP. At $906, the decision to pass is made even easier.
I have never found a King pressing that comes close to an original Blue Note including Shades of Redd. The opening cut with the unison horns sends chills up my spine. Magic!
i like every blue note album with Tina Brooks!
Maarten,
I think myself and all other bidders on ebay can agree with you. All Tina sessions and most(all?) side sessions fetch a kings ransom even compared to other Blue Notes.
I never really liked the Freddie Redd LP and I even think, that the unissued “Redd’s Blues” does a better job to introduce Redd. Comparing to all the fantastic sessions Tina Brooks has made and which stayed on the shelves I just wonder. This is true with a lot more sessions that where shelved. The thing why I don’t like this LP has to do with McLean. I rarely like him during these days, he really matured, being paired with more visionary players.
And for the Burrell: You really can se, how much the difference is, when there are no exact descriptions.
I onc saw an auction for BLP 4003. The most beautiful copy I’ve personally seen and it went for like 20$, because most of the details were missing but were somewhat recognizeable on the pictures. Stunning.
Jack – “never found a King pressing that comes close to an original Blue Note”
Neither have I.
On the other hand I’ve never found an original Blue Note of Shades of Redd I can afford, or Cool Struttin’ or Mobley 1568.
I prefer King over any of the other reissues, they are generally always NM, and I can afford more of the rarer titles. One by one, very slowly, they get replaced when an affordable VG+ or original but subsequent pressing turns up.
Katharsis – top copy of Moanin for $20? Bring a collector to tears with such a story. Correctly described items get sold at the correct price. But I did manage to pick up a NM early pressing of 1521 for $25 late last year, being only bidder due to defective spelling of the item title. Not as good a story as yours I concede, but it pays to understand the ebay search engine.
@London Calling: Oh yes, I can remember countless hours thinking of possible mis-spellings.
Once I got lucky with a Tina Boorks for 10$…no, I’m just kidding. Your 25 bucks are absolutely well spent, my congratulations for such a find!
Hmmmm… Misspelled items on eBay… Now THAT is something I hadn’t thought of before. But I should have known, of course: misspell your query on Google and it asks “did you mean…”. eBay doesn’t do that, but might cough up some seriously collectible stuff. So it doesn’t only pay to understand the eBay search engine, but also the carefully read the comments! 😉
vg original Blue Notes often sell at reasonable prices so why settle for Japanese pressings? The bottom end on those are never right.
Yea but with a VG BN you usually have pretty high surface noise. So it’s pick your poison. Also, the J-presses I have vary in quality, some are more anemic than others. They usually sound nice and are in good condition though. but to be honest, I haven’t heard any that really stand up to the modern audiophiles presses in terms of in low end fullness(or mid range fullness).
Today I listened to some Blue Notes, I haven’t heard in a while and I would grade them all as copies around the VG-area. It’s absolutely right, what Mike says. The later the pressings are, the higher the surface noise is. Records within the 1500 and 4000 series tend to sound better, even if they have a lot of marks and scratches.
A vinyl “afficionado” tells me its all in the depth of the groove. Scratches and scuffs on the surface do not interfere with the information which is stored in the deeper cut groove walls on early heavy vinyl. Original quality recording is pretty well protected.
I have a number of classic OG 1500/4000 that the record stores rated only VG or VG- on the visuals – lots of surface tracery and scuffs, but they play fantastic, as I knew they would. Its the “feelable” scratches that are really the enemy. Feel it, hear it.
I’ve also found the intrusiveness of surface noise varies with arm/ cartridge/ turntable quality. The noise-to-signal ratio changes as you improve the ability to extract that music from the grooves, such that nowadays I hardly notice surface noise. Its drowned out by music.