Why are the best records always the hardest to find/ most expensive?

[billybuck]

Oh wait... is it because most people have lousy taste?

That definitely has a connection - without being snobby or anything - take a look back at what was selling bucketloads in your favourite era.

For example - i'm a huge Chuck Berry fan - particularly his '55-'64 Chess stuff.

Whilst Michael Holliday's 'Story of my life' hit the #1 spot in 1958 - Chuck Berry's 'Johnny B Goode' didn't even chart - in fact 95% of his stuff from '55 - '63 didn't do a damn thing until the Rolling Stones told everyone to buy them....and then they gave him a number one with 'My fucking Ding a ling' - only in '72

Johnny B Goode is his most well know tune too - try getting a mint copy of 'You Can't Catch Me' on a London Tri 45....

Don't get me started on the Pat Boone covers of Little Richard records......or Adam Faith's enduring popularity, when 'Green Onions' should have been number one for at least a year...

of course it did bugger all.....



Same with James Brown's releases - just minor dents in the charts here and there; Sex Machine rose to the giddy heights of #32 in 1970, whilst the ahem, 'quality' hit and the bane of all JB comps 'Living in America' got to #5 in '85.


Never trust those who put Tab Hunter's 'Young Love' at the top spot....

[Filthy Rich]

"The garage 45 world is a good example of the best being the most rare. Just look at the G100 for proof. They are all paint-peelers and virtually unobtainable."

But if I remember rightly, in the intro to the G100 they say something about how they are picking records that are both good and rare - and then go on to say that if they were simply picking the best the top ones would all be by the Seeds.

[loosejoints]

I think the expensive/impossible to find items relevance are due to the obsessive nature of record collecting. I know that there are a good few items I'd love to get hold of, but wouldn't dream of paying tons of cash for, these records have idled for years on mu wants list, and there is little chance of coming across them at down the booter etc. As a result they seem to grow in desirability disproportionably in my own mind anyway. I think these tend to become the "ah finally found it, now to store it away" items that I would tend not to appreciate fully enough. Sure I like to play things that are new to me, and unknown to the majority of people listening when I play out so want to explore the largely unknown/un-comped sides out there, but sometimes you are as well to dig deeper in cheaper stuff for under-appreciated tunes, b-sides etc. Besides am I really going to take a £500+ record out to drunkenly dj with every week? Unlikely!

[ladyboygrimsby]

That definitely has a connection - without being snobby or anything - take a look back at what was selling bucketloads in your favourite era.

For example - i'm a huge Chuck Berry fan - particularly his '55-'64 Chess stuff.

Whilst Michael Holliday's 'Story of my life' hit the #1 spot in 1958 - Chuck Berry's 'Johnny B Goode' didn't even chart - in fact 95% of his stuff from '55 - '63 didn't do a damn thing until the Rolling Stones told everyone to buy them....and then they gave him a number one with 'My fucking Ding a ling' - only in '72

Johnny B Goode is his most well know tune too - try getting a mint copy of 'You Can't Catch Me' on a London Tri 45....

Don't get me started on the Pat Boone covers of Little Richard records......or Adam Faith's enduring popularity, when 'Green Onions' should have been number one for at least a year...

of course it did bugger all.....



Same with James Brown's releases - just minor dents in the charts here and there; Sex Machine rose to the giddy heights of #32 in 1970, whilst the ahem, 'quality' hit and the bane of all JB comps 'Living in America' got to #5 in '85.


Never trust those who put Tab Hunter's 'Young Love' at the top spot....

I don't think it's fair to put the blame on the average pop buyer. While they do buy an awful lot of tripe, the fact is often they only get to hear a load of tripe, so don't have that many choices. I think it's possible that Chuck Berry didn't have the hits he deserved because he really wasn't getting substantial airplay in the way that, say, Pat Boone was. They were both on the same label at one stage but Boone was getting far bigger hits and I suspect it was a lot easier to promote him on TV and radio than Chuck Berry who looked a bit too feral, quite frankly, for the like of David Jacobs to handle. Berry went through at least three labels in the first few years in the this country which suggests nobody knew what to do with him. He had lots of success in the States were radio was a lot more advanced than it was here and where specialist black radio had existed for a good while already.

I think there's a good reason why James Brown never had many hits here and that's because he was making purely dancefloor records that didn't have massive crossover appeal. Doesn't mean theey're not great records, mind, but I don't think many of them would have worked as well on radio as other black artists of the time like Al Green, Sam & Dave etc etc. And I doubt very much whether there was as much of a budget put aside for black artists generally at major labels, which has been an issue right up to today.

Stevie Wonder won three grammies in a row for his albums. Lots of other great artists had deserved huge success, although in the case of Earth Wind & Fire and Kool & The Gang for the worse end of their catalogue...

[ROCKPROF]

I don't think it's fair to put the blame on the average pop buyer. While they do buy an awful lot of tripe, the fact is often they only get to hear a load of tripe, so don't have that many choices. ...

So true,when I was a teenager in the 80s,I bought some right crap with my paper round money because thats all that was on offer to me at that time by the media.I should gone to Oxfam instead but there was stigma about going to charity shops when your that age.

[sermad]

I think it is a fair argument to say that lots of the best records are expensive - mostly their quality is reflected in the price - but I believe that rarity is the sole factor. (I think most people here are also on this thought.)

For example - check the Yesterdays folks - US69 record. I think most people will agree that is just an incredible record - solid all the way through and yours for less than a tenner these days. If it was pressed into micro quantities it would be worth ten times more.

[SirSlim]

Ever given that one any thought?

I have.

Many times.

Many many times.

Good taste is something money can't buy.

[Mr Naga]

Ever given that one any thought?

It's simply not true.


Cozy Powell - 'And then there were skins' is the best record ever and it's cheap as chips.

[rusty sheriff]

I think the price of a said record reflects how much it is in demand or appears to be. Ebay has opened up so many records we would never have previously found, yet at the same time it has allowed sellers to hike up the price for something that may not actually be worth it.. I hate it when ebay sucks me into an auction for a record... theres no going back! As someone said earlier, record collectors want the desired record now... patience isn't part of the deal, almost like a drug, vinyl is a hyperdermic reaction!

I find that when I'm frustrated with the price of records, I need to spend more time and effort finding different places to dig.

[Nick Cope]

Ebay has opened up so many records we would never have previously found, yet at the same time it has allowed sellers to hike up the price for something that may not actually be worth it

But surely it's the buyers that are doing the hiking? Sometimes it seems like buyers are falling over themselves to pay more and more for certain records, then actually want people to know how much they paid - possibly in attempt to keep the value of that record artificially high, now that he has it.

That last part is just speculation but enough people are willing to pay 200 quid on a particular 45, then that 45 will end up being 200 quid to buy from anyone selling it. Even if a boxload turns up, plenty of people will rather just pay the previous price and not ask around or realise the seller has tons of copies. It's just blind fucking stupidity on the part of the ferocious buyers - I don't blame sellers at all.

When it comes to the general question posed by this thread, I'm thinking more of "why are the best records so rare" rather than "why are they so expensive". For rare it makes a lot of sense, even though there are plenty of not rare records that are brilliant.

[john stapleton]

I still don't agree with the assumption of the post though.

If we didn't all know things like James Brown stuff, Small Faces, Hendrix, etc. etc., then we'd all be going 'this is amazing!!!' when we found them.

We're just too jaded.

[Mr Naga]

I still don't agree with the assumption of the post though.

If we didn't all know things like James Brown stuff, Small Faces, Hendrix, etc. etc., then we'd all be going 'this is amazing!!!' when we found them.

We're just too jaded.

I'm not and neither's my wife.

[medlar]

I still don't agree with the assumption of the post though.

Nor can I. The world is full of music, be it good, bad or whatever, from million sellers to home made cassette runs that sold not at all. Point is it's all music.
What makes records expensive is a combination of rarity, market forces, and hype.
Now get down the chazza and pick up a copy of "Spacer", it's great

[jakartajive]

All those are great recs, but none of them are "Egyptian Thing" by The Syndicate.

I have very little to say about this thread, to be honest, apart from the fact that I would rob anybody's house if I thought I could escape with a copy of The Syndicate 45. The only ossible thing in the world that destroys me more than 'Egyptian Thing' is, of course, 'My baby's barefootin'"!!!

Now if THAT ain't the best 45 of all-time ever in the world ever of all time ever that I don't know what is.

PS: The answer is NOT 'Cozy Powell'

[Mr Naga]

I have very little to say about this thread, to be honest, apart from the fact that I would rob anybody's house if I thought I could escape with a copy of The Syndicate 45. The only ossible thing in the world that destroys me more than 'Egyptian Thing' is, of course, 'My baby's barefootin'"!!!

Now if THAT ain't the best 45 of all-time ever in the world ever of all time ever that I don't know what is.

PS: The answer is NOT 'Cozy Powell'

You must have nicked the wrong answer sheet chump

[bazooka joe]

I have very little to say about this thread, to be honest, apart from the fact that I would rob anybody's house if I thought I could escape with a copy of The Syndicate 45. The only ossible thing in the world that destroys me more than 'Egyptian Thing' is, of course, 'My baby's barefootin'"!!!

I've been to the house where it is, numerous times.

[jakartajive]

I've been to the house where it is, numerous times.

Jus' PM me that addy and I'm there, Joe!
I mean it, man.

[medlar]

Jus' PM me that addy and I'm there, Joe!
I mean it, man.

And so do NYPD now

[jakartajive]

And so do NYPD now

The best episode of 'Columbo' you've never seen.

"Oh, and one more thing . . . That Syndicate 45"

Bang to rights guv, bang to rights