Is a Test Pressing on vinyl worth buying or is it just another way to make money?

I have a few, either blank white labels with handwritten info, or those generic pressing plant label with the info written on. I got them when I was working in a record shop. The reps used to give them to us like they would a promo. They are all good quality pressings.

I just don't believe test pressings are never as good. If you are sending it to the label for an ok then by definition it has to sound good in order to get approval. If it sounds poor the label will just reject it and the pressing plant will need to waste time doing another test. That's not logical.

 

I have a German 1968 IMMEDIATE pressing of Ogdens' Nut Gone Flake (stereo) which has the regular labels but has a sticker (on side 2) that says:

Unverkäufliche
Musterplatte

I think this essentially means "Not for sale, sample disc" or similar. Is it a promo or a "test pressing"?

The thing that makes me think it may be a test pressing in the literal sense is that for side one it has IMSP 012-1Y-1 in the dead wax (IMSP 012-2Y-1 on the B-side). All first pressing commercial stereo copies using the UK parts I've seen have 1Y-2 on the A-side (2Y-1 on the B-side).

I'm guessing about the UK metal parts but it makes sense, since the first pressing commercial German copies seem to have the same deadwax info as the UKs.

So, could my copy be pressed in Germany using UK stampers but with the side A stamper made from an earlier cut (1Y-1) than the one (1Y-2) that was eventually used for the first commercial pressings?

I've not heard a 1Y-2 vinyl pressing but from how people describe them matching the CD re-issues for speed, I assume that the most significant difference between the 1Y-1 and 1Y-2 is that "Rene" and "Song Of A Baker" run a tad faster on the -1 than the -2. I actually like the 1Y-1 speed (only about 2-3% faster on those songs) to the regular released versions which drag very slightly if you're used to the faster playback. The speed issue may not be why it was recut but it's the only obvious difference I've noticed from the regular release.

Anyway, my point is to raise the question of whether or not all test pressings have generic or white labels or if they can also exist with the commercial label with an additional mark or sticker.

So, is my Ogdens' a "test pressing"? There are no quality issues with it as far as I can tell.

 

Personally i would view it as a promo having not seen a test pressing with commercial labels.

 

Generally yes, I've got test pressings of most of the records I've been involved with over the last twenty years and I can think of only one occasion where the plant was switched.

Normally you get 5 or 6 TPs included in the price, but obviously you can have as many as you want pressed, hence some labels using them as advanced promos, some labels/plants have specific TP labels, Decca for example, but usually blank labels are used, usually white, but also pink, blue etc., EMI used to have a nice patterned paper and I've even seen one example of what appeared to be lined paper from an exercise book, no idea how that came about. I have a lot of TPs from the sixties onwards, everything from Classical to Bob Marley, for a major release there would be TPs for each set of stampers so for example I have two Sade TPs from different stampers and in the past I've been offered as many as a dozen TPs of the same record, all different, although that was back when records sold. Some companies would make a one sided TP for each side, HMV for example, TPs normally come in blank sleeves although sometimes they can have proof sleeves and if intended for review can have press releases as well. In the UK a lot of Reggae labels as well as some Soul and Indie labels would press part or all of the run with blank labels to save money so the labeled copies can be scarcer.

I can tell you that we always use TPs to check the cut, the quality and that there are no mistakes such as the wrong track being used, I'm always shocked when labels let the wrong version slip out, it should be spotted at the mastering stage, but definitely at the TP stage, obviously not everyone listens. TPs won't be as good as an early release copy when the presses are nicely warmed up etc., but generally they sound good and often very good although sometimes they look like they were pressed in a hurry without much care and attention.

 

the crucial line!!

In answer to the title at the top, as a collector i think they are definitely worth getting, i like owning rare records, even though better pressings exist. I do not think they are pressed as a way for labels to make money.
Some test pressings i have differ from the commercial release, i do not think that is because of a mistake, but because the artist/label have changed their mind on a track or mix

 

Thinking about it, I suppose the generic labels used for test pressings signifies that no royalties are being paid since the pressing is for internal testing only. If it's a promo, then maybe there are 1Y-1 commercial copies out there too.

 

I only have two TP. One is an early fusion jazz album I picked up cheap that had come from the collection of Russ Soloman's (Tower Records), the name of the group I can't recall at the moment. The other is a Music Matters 45 pressing of a Donald Byrd album that was sent to me gratis. It looks and sounds great but it of course comes in a plain white cover and white labels so I didn't get the awesome graphics that usually accompany the music. I might end up buying a regular copy or ask to purchase a cover if they can spare an extra.

 

I have two copies of Tool "Aenima" Classic Records 200g reissue TPs from 2002, which was a project that never went into production. Its been suggested around 20 were pressed and the metal plates from the original vinyl release were used for these TPs. Given the fact this project never came to fruition, the limited run and the fact the original release is so rare and sought after, I think (hope?) these are good investments. Not to mention Tool has been one of my favorite bands since they hit the scene and "Aenima" is possibly their best work! Since I have two, I'm thinking of opening one to play.

 

Years ago a friend of mine had a Test Pressing of Fripp's Exposure that had a cut with Daryl Hall singing which, on the official release had a different singer. So Mr. Hall came in the shop one day and my friend slipped it on, much to Mr. Hall's surprise. So that's some fun you can have with Test Pressings!

 

you should man, its sad that it was never released with the demand surrounding it and I bet everyone else who has one doesn't play it cause its that rare. Besides even if you play it you could probably dictate price on it, what are they going to do buy someone else's?

 

What about acetates? I have a bunch but I'm afraid to play them. More a collectible than a sound quality thing. Correct?

 

Test pressings from the vinyl era were almost exclusively pressed either for insiders to evaluate the product, or for other promotional purposes.

The test pressings that the audiophile labels have created these days serve another purpose: Manufactured collectibles that they can overcharge for.

 

I worked at Creation in the 90's and it was part of my job to check the test pressings which were always handed to me by the Production Manager in batches of about 10-15 copies. In general they were checked on a fairly mid price HiFi system mostly for clicks, skips etc but also for the sound quality.
Other copies were handed to bands management and the artists for their approval as well but in general all the test pressings were of very high quality and I can't even remember rejecting anything for quality issues.
Test pressings by their very nature are rare but does that make them more valuable when they don't come with the complete package of sleeves etc only you can decide.

 

This is a very important point.

"Back in the day," there was a much more "romantic" side to collecting test pressing of original albums because of the real "insider" stature they held -- y'know, "this test pressing of 'Tonight's the Night' right here is the one Neil took home to listen to and approve!" Now, yes, that's a stretch, but even a 1.5% possibility is better than nothing.

But, a test pressing of the upteenth reissue of a 43-year old LP or some such? Nice to have in some sense, but they do seem to enter the realm of "Beanie Babies" a lot faster -- that is, the manufacturer contriving a collectable before it even hits the market.

 

I have a bunch of test pressings and lacquers but they're all of projects I worked on.

The whole purpose of getting them was so that I could evaluate the product before it was released, but it was kind of futile. I discovered flaws but was voted down in just about every case when I suggested a remaster. If that was the case, why bother with the test pressings?

These weren't remasters as most of us are familiar with, but original masterings. For the most part, the production team fussed over every detail and then turned the masters over for mastering and had no apparent concerns what happened after that.

 

That's based on from what I've witnessed at a few plants to be a false assumption that the presses are just sitting dormant until they run a test then they let it cool down again before doing another. It's not the case. Every pressing plant I've been to either has a designated press that's always running or they shuffle them in between production orders. So the only thing that may need to be warmed up is the highly conductive 100% nickel stamper that's about to get hit with about 350 degree steam followed by around 150 degree water to cool it (for every record). Other than say a record that was pressed first thing after a plant opens after a period of inactivity this premise makes no sense at all, and even then the production presses would be in the same boat as the test press.

 

This must be the German equivalent of a "DJ" or white label promo record, not a test pressing:"Not for sale sample disk" .

A true test pressing would never have a regular label. A test pressing is to see how well the disk stampers were mastered, it has nothing to do with the label printing (which can be "tested" just by looking at the paper stock before one gets pressed onto a disk).

I have several test pressings of records that were recorded in my studio. In one case I had a big band where there was a hot trumpet ending tag on one of the songs. The test pressing showed a flaw that had to be fixed, the hot trumpet had the record equivalent of print-through (thee was no print through on the master tape) . They had to recut side one putting more space at the end of that track. I had a series of 3 test pressings before that print through was fixed! In that case it was well worth the extra expense for ordering test pressings before the final run.

 

In my case the test pressing showed a problem with the cutting of the master lacquer, which was done in Phoenix from tapes recorded in Ohio. We already went through a remix of over half the record due to the disapproval of the father of the bandleader (he thought it wasn't "stereo" enough ). This was a 24 track recording with a separate track for every instrument! I panned every instrument into it's own unique location the the stereo spectrum. "Grandpa" wanted it to sound like a late '50's early stereo mix. The one instrumental track on the album was the only original mix that survived with my panning choice.

 

The holy grail of test pressings. Blood on the Tracks with the New York recordings. Apparently sold for $5000 on Ebay.

 

Situations like that are when you're better off with a reference lacquer than a test pressing. I'm surprised refs aren't more common but I guess when vinyl costs as much as it does people try to cut corners where they can.

 

That's actually an acetate, not a test pressing. Acetates are cut one at a time, on a special lathe, and can sound amazingly good when first played. Unfortunately, the acetate material is quite soft, and acetates wear down VERY quickly even with the most careful play on the best equipment.

 

That's right. It's an acetate; I believe only one is known to exist with the Columbia Reference Recording label (?). The others are on A&R Recording Studio labels. Cool stuff.

I came thisclose to spending $3000 for an acetate originally owned by Queenie Epstein, via Rockaway Records, of Sgt. Pepper with the different track order. I actually held it in my hands, but couldn't pull the trigger (at the time a month's salary for me, before taxes). I wonder what it would be worth today.

 

Well it's not really a special lathe, unless a record cutting lathe is considered special. A acetate is actually a direct cut and the product of record mastering. They can either be used for evaluation or for creating the actual stamping parts.

Usually you'll make one and inspect it with a microscope, handling it with extreme care. If you play it you should no longer use it for production, though many acetates have been played and used. Often the client takes a lacquer for evaluation, and if it passes, the mastering engineer cuts another one to the same specs for production.

I've got a handful of acetates here, once again only from projects I was involved with.