Perspective - What the vinyl resurgence really looks like

Well, the math that matters to me is what is available for me as an audiophile/ music lover now as compared to when vinyl was declared dead in the early 90s. *That* math clearly says vinyl is back. And that is the math that matters to vinyl enthusiasts. I would imagine that if one doesn't understand this key point then it might be difficult to wrap one's head around the idea that vinyl is back. No, it's not back in a mass market sense to where it was at it's peak. Not even close. But for the needs of hobbyists it is very very very much back.

 

Huge point. Huge

 

It's not that there is a "need" to do it. It's just that is what actually happened regardless of what you and your friends were doing.

 

Retailers most definitely had a choice. If their record sales were strong enough to support the sales they would have kept the records instead of sending them back in exchange for CDs. The fact is from a financial standpoint it made sense to do it because CDs were grossly outselling records and records took up much more space. It was a no brainier from a retailer's perspective.

 

Hope this vinyl fashion quiets down somewhat so the prices may drop. They're obscenely overpriced at the mo !

 

I couldn't think of a better word to describe the vinyl revolution. "Evolution". I like that.

 

I don't think you give young people enough credit. Some of what you say is true. Let's say 40 or 50% lose interest over time, I bet the rest will continue to buy vinyl over their lifetimes. Once you're bit by the vinyl bug it's hard to give them up.
And there is a huge difference in the "physicality" of Lps and cds. You sound like you don't even own any records.

 

Excellent question !

 

I'm not sure how they could have continued to sell records when the manufacturers were actively choking off the supply chain. Manufacturers constructively forced retailers toward CD's, and any perception of choice by the retailers was simply imaginary. Don't get me wrong, they were happy to play the game to stay viable, but the demise of the LP record was completely contrived, and that is why it never actually died, and is the subject of a renaissance today.

In 1998 I flew to England and bought a ton of new vinyl at HMV, and it existed side by side with CD's. The demand was clearly there, but manufacturers on this side of the world refused to allow that same opportunity to exist, and they threw the baby out with the bath water....until recently of course. Now the lesson has been learned.

 

Its the other way around. Many young people, who grew up with the technology revolution, have forsaken its empty soul for a return to something that is multi-faceted and real. Like many people, they have realized that music can be far more interactive and enjoyable when tangible and the center of attention, rather than being something virtual and peripheral.

 

Doesn't matter how strong sales were. The labels systematically stopped supplying vinyl as a means of reselling their back catalog at twice the markup. You can't sell what you don't have. That is what actually happened. Retailers did not have a choice.

 

So if someone is into something "retro" that makes them pathetic? Wow, that's pretty condescending of you. So if you buy a new Camaro or Challenger that makes you pathetic for buying a retro looking car?

 

They were actively chocking off the supply chain because records were expensive to manufacture, sold for less than CDs and we're not selling anywhere near as many as cassette and CD. As I stated earlier if LPs were selling so well why did companies decide to send them back? The answer is LPs didn't make sense to keep in Stock anymore because people weren't buying them as much anymore and they took up way too much space then the other better selling formats. It's simple from a financial standpoint for a retailer, stock the shelves with smaller items that sold more or stock them with items that take up more space that don't sell as well.

 

And why do you think they stopped supplying vinyl? Do you really think they would stop supplying it if it was making them money?

 

No. They sent them back because the manufacturers had made it abundantly clear that there was not going to be a continued supply, and that they needed to get "on board" if they didn't want to get pushed under. It had little to do with a natural progression, and everything to do with an agenda. There was lots of money to be made by the manufacturers with a pricey, yet "better" technology, and they could not push that agenda fast enough. If people naturally gave up vinyl, as you suggest, then we would not be seeing such interest in it today, some 25 years later, nor would it have continued to remain viable in England for another 10+ years after CD's were introduced.

 

i'd say look at what's happened in the last 5-10 years with digital downloads and streaming taking an even bigger share of the market. in that time vinyl has increased in popularity almost exponentially. i think it has proven itself by this point.

 

funny how that has flipped with record stores these days. at my locals, about 75-80 percent of space is devoted to vinyl

 

What you're talking about is equally valid for both CD and vinyl, so I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here in the context of this thread. Do you think all physical media with beautiful art and spinning discs we have to manually put in a player will prevail?

 

Your wrong. I worked at both Big Box Retailers and Record Stores around this time and the higher ups of both companies did it because of the reasons I mentioned and no other reason. They weren't going to be punished if they kept the inventory it just made sense from a floor space issue and financial issue. That is it. Vinyl just wasn't selling much anymore.

 

I agree the more that any format sells the better. If people wish to avoid any given format it leaves more for those that do want it. I personally love vinyl and for the past 14 years have bought nothing else, but for me personally if they stopped pressing them tomorrow it wouldn't bother me in the least. Aside from The Beatles Mono Box, I only buy four a five LP's a year now. In 2014, again setting aside The Beatles Box, I bought 2 Neil Young reissue albums The Division Bell reissue and Led Zeppelin III reissue, and that was only for the live set.

 

No, I'm afraid that you are wrong Jim, and I was around then too, so there goes that advantage. But I'm content to have differing opinions on this.

 

The problem was it wasn't making them enough money. CDs were cheaper to manufacture, sold at a premium price, and had a huge profit margin. Vinyl was getting more and more expensive to produce and was stuck in a lower price tier -- and because the labels were cutting every corner in terms of pressing and packaging, they were getting more returns than ever.

It was not any type of conspiracy, it was a purely rational (albeit greedy) decision for the record industry to kill off the LP.

 

What happened has been documented so there is no need to speculate. The labels did force vinyl off the shelves almost overnight in an orchestrated change in policies. So the retailers had no choice. My understanding is that the prospect of reselling their back catalogs at twice the profit was the motivation behind the changes in policies which were clearly designed to replace vinyl with CD as quickly as possible.

 

Some are I guess. But on average I can buy an album for around 1hrs wage which was what it was in 1972. It's always been that way, at least from my perspective.

 

Normally I would agree with you but I'll make an exception for him as he just started a thread about how new vinyl costs something like $50-80 dollars in Argentina, where he lives.