____twoism

That's actually breaking my heart!

I dunno, I kinda like it that way.

ps. my geogaddi is a bit ripped as well

Mexicola wrote:
Seriously, if you've not dipped into the world of vinyl records yet, this one really is worth the money in my opinion.

Waiting for the re-releases that was mentioned as a slight possibility.

Vexille wrote:

Mexicola wrote:
Seriously, if you've not dipped into the world of vinyl records yet, this one really is worth the money in my opinion.

Waiting for the re-releases that was mentioned as a slight possibility.

Re-issues are always inferior to originals.

noby wrote:

Vexille wrote:

Mexicola wrote:
Seriously, if you've not dipped into the world of vinyl records yet, this one really is worth the money in my opinion.

Waiting for the re-releases that was mentioned as a slight possibility.

Re-issues are always inferior to originals.

explain this.
I don't buy it.
and I'd like to hear your reasoning behind it.

noby wrote:

Vexille wrote:

Mexicola wrote:
Seriously, if you've not dipped into the world of vinyl records yet, this one really is worth the money in my opinion.

Waiting for the re-releases that was mentioned as a slight possibility.

Re-issues are always inferior to originals.

I don't have the originals so I won't notice a difference. And their inflated prices are not worth whatever difference there may be either. Especially considering the band doesn't see any of that extra money.

*not inferior in quality in any way, but they aren't collectibles, and thus not as hip and cool

Well you can always make a copy of the original one with a bit of craftiness

noby wrote:*not inferior in quality in any way, but they aren't collectibles, and thus not as hip and cool

Ah that sort of quality. Yea I won't deny that then.

Each to their own. The collectibility is irrelevant to me. But that's cool if you like it.

Vexille wrote:

noby wrote:*not inferior in quality in any way, but they aren't collectibles, and thus not as hip and cool

Ah that sort of quality. Yea I won't deny that then.

Each to their own. The collectibility is irrelevant to me. But that's cool if you like it.

I understand, I used to be that way too. But I just don't like buying an album that says on the cover stuff like "2010 RE-ISSUE", "DIGITALLY REMASTERED", "MUSIC-ON-VINYL 2011" or anything like that...

noby wrote:

Vexille wrote:

noby wrote:*not inferior in quality in any way, but they aren't collectibles, and thus not as hip and cool

Ah that sort of quality. Yea I won't deny that then.

Each to their own. The collectibility is irrelevant to me. But that's cool if you like it.

I understand, I used to be that way too. But I just don't like buying an album that says on the cover stuff like "2010 RE-ISSUE", "DIGITALLY REMASTERED", "MUSIC-ON-VINYL 2011" or anything like that...

well that's why they usually have that sort of rot on a sticker on the overwrap and the way to tell it's a reish is in the fine print by the copyright.

Cryabetes wrote:well that's why they usually have that sort of rot on a sticker on the overwrap and the way to tell it's a reish is in the fine print by the copyright.

Sometimes yes but not nearly always, and for me even the copyright is bad enough. It's also disturbing to find web and email adresses in albums that are re-issues of albums from mid 90's or older.

To each their own but I try to avoid reissues always when possible.

Magrathea wrote:Well you can always make a copy of the original one with a bit of craftiness

Pretty cool! But I wouldn't do it, the original paper based center label on each vinyl record would be completely ruined.

polar sky wrote:

Magrathea wrote:Well you can always make a copy of the original one with a bit of craftiness

Pretty cool! But I wouldn't do it, the original paper based center label on each vinyl record would be completely ruined.

actually I was looking into this - on the smooth-on website, there's a dude that does it for old swing/big band 78s and the labels are fine. But hella thank you for posting that; I think I'm going to make a short run of a single or something pressed from a dubplate.

Cryabetes wrote:

polar sky wrote:

Magrathea wrote:Well you can always make a copy of the original one with a bit of craftiness

Pretty cool! But I wouldn't do it, the original paper based center label on each vinyl record would be completely ruined.

actually I was looking into this - on the smooth-on website, there's a dude that does it for old swing/big band 78s and the labels are fine. But hella thank you for posting that; I think I'm going to make a short run of a single or something pressed from a dubplate.

Yeah, I would test it out on a record you don't care about first, just to make sure it wouldn't wet the center labels.