Do you prefer new LP releases or collecting vintage LPs?

At what point do you call a record "vintage" ?
For an album issued in the 80s for example, would a 90's reissue or early 2000 reissue be called vintage ?

For example the Nevermind ORG press is known here to be the best pressing of the title, the recent reissue (the 320) is not bad either.
The original pressing i have not heard.

Would you say that the ORG is vintage ?

 

I research and keep/collect the version that sounds the best. While that is subjective and price dependent, it can always be researched within this Forum or Googled. You would be surprised what percentage of the releases can be eliminated. Nothing is sacred - I have purchased better sounding remasters and have sold the way more collectible original. I learned to become true to my process and sell the loser, then again I have 35 years of experience in very serious record collecting. The first 30 years I made the mistake of collecting for value and not for sound and I have spent the last 5 years correcting that flawed strategy. I would have multiple and different pressings on titles just to realize after shoot-outs that I would only listen to the best of them going forward. I have sold a great number of records (many valuable) and not a one of them were the 'best sounding' pressing to me. I will buy a repressing of a valuable record to listen for improvements. Improvements can often come in the most unsuspecting way - like simply having less surface noise. The surface noise on the superior mastered UK, German and European 1970's Prog on M- appearing albums will drive an audiophile crazy. While superior in mastering and much, much higher in value - I cannot live with the invisible but audible surface noise just to have an original. That said, I would estimate that 80% of the reissues do not sound better that an original. The reissue labels that do sound better, soon become evident within your genre of experience - as well as the complete dogs that just throw out great titles with no real effort to improve them. This Forum is essential - critical to making wise decisions and making your money go further. Nothing can be more discouraging than bad buying decisions that could have been avoided with searching this Forum. You have do decide early in your hobby what your collecting goals are because you will hit what you aim for
1. Do you want to collect value over what interest you?
2. Do you want to collect 'originals' from the country of origin over the best sounding from no matter where?
3. How large is your target collection? How much room do you have? What is your available income without going into debt or robbing your savings program?
4. And most important, always, always, always purchase only M- used records or go for the reissue. This hobby's ability to liquidate - which every one will do partially or entirely at some time - is entirely build on the foundation of condition. You will buy the M- record once and the VG+ copy three to four times. Once you buy it, know it's the best condition and audio that you could find and afford. It will keep you from second guessing yourself when you find another years from now. Set your boundaries, set your goals, set your process and learn to trust them. Never get too attached to any record because one day that over the top, remastered version will be released by MFSL or Analogue Productions and now the music has never been more revealing. But you say to yourself, "my original record and I go way back...I mean, we studied for finals together and I had it when I met my wife and it has memories ... and then MFSL just released it last week and it blows my original away". That's when you fall back on years of self disciplined process and sell the higher dollar original with all of the memories. Record Collectors develop Hoarders Disease which destroys their finances, sanity, objectivity and home. I have learned to prioritize finding and owning the best audio version available, even if that means selling my old album from college or my cherished and rare $300 copy. Learn to let go of the past if the remastered/reissue is the better audio product.

 

Should have been a POLL.

 

What's Tull new vinyl like?

 

Katatonia, Joe Bonamassa, Primus... to name a few.

 

No wonder I can't find Selling England By The Pound anywhere.

 

"The price on original/first pressing are still too high and it make more sense to go for reissues.
I also believe that the sound quality is often better on reissues, and of course the condition is mint. "

You answered your own question. As long as you have taken the time to find out which companies are putting out quality pressings with good mastering you should be in fine shape.

As for myself, I rarely buy first pressings. They are often prohibitively expensive and I ain't rich. The new pressings also tend to be expensive but not nearly so. They are also new so I know they haven't been unknowingly trashed by someone in years past. If I have a first pressing or early pressing that has great fidelity and sound that nice, but I don't need it. I don't collect to have a collection, I collect to have a bunch of music for the rest of my life.

 

used...today. usually for the cover art.

 

Funny Michael, just the other day I picked up Eagles-Their Greatest Hits (N/M), a beautiful textured cover for 5 bucks, for that very reason
Partly also for nostalgia, it's one of the earliest records I remember playing on my aunts system back in the 70's

 

I buy both.

 

Both. Was just ordering a new AAA Kevin Grey cut "Electric Warrior". There are originals out there I'm sure, but will they be as quiet as a freshly pressed record?

 

Well, they won’t be as freshly pressed, but they will be made from fresher tapes...guaranteed. Let us know how it sounds. KG does good work.

 

I've also compared the Beatles mono box to the UK mono first pressings that I own and they are VERY close... as you said, not as lively but close. For the money some of the best reissues out there I think.

 

Both.

 

I prefer vintage.

Darryl

 

I stopped "collecting" long ago. Collecting, to me, is what I did when the cool factor mattered much more than sound quality. Mainly, because I didnt know much about or give much regard to what sounded best. Now, Id rather have a great sounding versions of my favorite albums instead of some fancy looking packaging, 180 gram this or whatever.

My conclusion has been: For many many albums, the mastering was done right the first time. Or even the second or third pressing. While fancy inflated priced reissues have been mastered differently. Now thats not to say reissues never out do an original. There are mamy examples of that also. But Ive found that Ive bought an awful lot of 10-15$ second pressings of albums that sound great!

Conclusion: Probably 3/4 originals and 1/4 reissues.

 

MY main interest in Collecting Records, my #1 Goal from the beginning (some 45+ years ago), was to hear the track how it was originally presented. Given that so many older songs back then, and even more so today, (Oldies) were remastered, remixed and electronically altered to fit a then-modern taste, I figured the only way I was going to hear how they were originally intended was to buy the record in it's original form.

When I'd hear a specific song on the radio, and the DJ says that the record was from 1958, I could only laugh when I knew better, that what was played wasn't what it was presented to be. It may have a better overall sound (to some ears), but it's NOT the way you could have heard it in 1958...

But then it all depends on your personal tastes and priorities. I can't tell You what you should buy, since that's purely subjective and Your choice, and for all your own reasons. You really can't go wrong whichever direction you want to take it.

Fred

 

Vintage.

Not really interested in digitally recorded music on vinyl, if you mean new releases by artists after the analog era.

If we're talking about reissues, then those are cool, but I bought most of my vinyl in the 90s when it was dirt cheap.

 

I have mostly vintage LPs (4000+) and CDs (6000+) for modern releases.

I like the original artifact and bought most records in the 90's and early 00's for cheap.

I like new re-issues when they are of hard to find and expensive old titles I neglected to hunt down and very close to the original U.K. Pressing. Beatles Mono box is a good example.

Otherwise I see these $25 to $30 records of titles I already own in high grade vintage and don't feel too compelled to buy them again.

For new Releases I only consider the record of it's something I know I like and it's materially better than the cd (Icky Thump). Otherwise new records are 2x the price of the cd and less user friendly

I also find new vinyl frequently is disappointing due to noise and distortion

 

I apologize, OT: what about this release? Thank you.

 

Either one if the price is reasonable. I'm not gonna pay more than $4-$5 for any used LP. $20-$25 is where I top out on new releases. Otherwise I'll just pick up a CD.

 

Both.

 

Both. It's really nice to get a pristine copy of a Nick Drake album you know you're never going to find an affordable original of in a lifetime, but wonderful to track down a gem or two from the actual time it came out...I tend to keep my old and new separate, but enjoy both !

 

Both, but vintage needs to be in great shape. I don’t listen to scratchy records.

 

original by far when i was collecting..