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

OR it may be a great way to obtain an out-of-print album that is now selling for much more on the secondary market than the price of the test pressing that may still be available on the manufacturer's website...

 

Similar story, and perhaps more on topic, I held Brian Epstein's personal test pressing of With The Beatles, white test labels, identical matrices to the originally released mono pressing. $10000 pricetag on it. Put it down, no way. I would assume the acetate you mention is worth much more.

 

I learned my lesson years ago when I was looking for a copy of Neil Young's "On The Beach" and thought that a CSM test pressing that was being offered up would be great. Paid big bucks and it wasn't all that impressive. I did a shoot out recently with a -1A / -1A stock copy and the stock copy was a big improvement. Different (louder) cut and much quieter.

I have a test pressing of Springsteen's "Born To Run" and it uses the same cut as a first pressing I picked up in the bins for $4.99. The cover on the test press is pretty cool to have though.

 

I have an acetate of cheap trick dream police, boston don't look back, and some others. They're one record side per record with a combination of hand written and typed labels. Never played them. Afraid to. An Ozzy one I have has started to crack apart, exposing the metal beneath the shellac or whatever it is. Pressed at sterling. Got them from a former Epic records exec, along with a ton of WLP and test pressings. Cool stuff. Still afraid to play an acetate, tho.

 

I'm sure there are some cases where they are worthwhile but I believe in general the manufacturers are just making tons of them to sell them at elevated prices as collectibles to suckers.

 

Columbia contract

Gotta agree with that.I have a lot of test pressings,everything from Columbia test pressing 78s from the late 1930s by Felix Weingartner.to the test pressing of The Mummies Play Their Own Records that was sent to Gearhead Magazine to review,one of my very first ebay purchases in 2000.I have classical test pressings from Columbia Masterworks,HMV,and UK Decca from the early years of the LP,I bought from Ars Antiqua's old "rarissima"supplements back in the day.I have a bunch of 60s-80s test pressings,including The Police,Robyn Hitchcock,Rolling Stones,Pete Townshend,Philles Records,The Stray Cats,Jimmie Gilmer and The Fireballs,and The B-52s.Test pressings from back in the day are cool,but I would never waste my money on these new ones,unless I was lucky enough to find a test pressing of a new album,like Everyday Robots by Damon Albarn.

 

I have a number of EMI Australia test pressings (red/white/grey label with typed details), with some containing matrices that were not used on regular releases (ie -1/-1 yet the initial release was -1/-2 for example). Some sound good, some have visual or audible defects hence why they never lasted past test press stage.

Having seen many EMI Australia acceptance sheets dating back to the 1960s, I really envy the guy who took delivery of the (usually 10) test pressings made of each title. Can't recall his name atm, but it's written on the sheets and mocks me every time I see it! If he kept even one of each title, he'd not only have an awesome collection, but an expensive one as well!

I also have a friend who has an awesome collection of test pressings including some iconic Aussie EMI albums, such as The Twilights' "Once Upon A Twilight". I've told him not to take his eye off it, or it will disappear, LOL.

At least one of my test pressings belonged to a member the subject band - that's what I like best about it; having something that belonged to a member of one of my fave bands is more important to me than how it sounds.

 

Historically significant acetates and test pressings are really hard to value. They don't change hands regularly, so there's no "market price". You need to know (or be able to make a very good guess) how many were made, how many have survived the years, what condition they are in, how important they are in the context of the artist's history, etc., not to mention being able to judge authenticity. I guess that's what makes them so interesting and desirable - Dylan's original Freewheelin', Blood on the Tracks, Glyn John's Get Back album, the Velvet Underground, etc. - I can definitely see the appeal.

In contrast, I have no interest in test pressings of reissues by audiophile labels (with some exceptions - unreleased Classic Records titles are cool)

 

What I don't at all understand are the classic records lacquers I see for sale... Packaged as if they were an item made to be sold. I don't get it. Was classic just running off sets of acetates for the hell of it? A way to sell more records for more money and skirt licensing costs?

 

I was talking with a friend of mine whose family had a pressing plant a while back. I said something to him about "I had a test pressing" of something, and he said "How do you know it was the final, approved, copy?" That pretty much did it for me. The one I have, I paid less than the reissue of said album. I would like to think it was one of the final copies, but who knows? I don't even look anymore. Some are less than $10. That is fine. There was a Nirvana one for $5,000. They are literally printing money.

 

Well not literally, figuratively.

 

There are a number of labels that do this sort of thing - particularly the sort that release everything in various limited coloured configurations ("First pressing: 100 on turquoise-gold splatter vinyl, 200 on maroon-peach marble vinyl, 300 on pink-aqua haze vinyl..."). They'll have a dozen or so "test pressings" in black or some off-count coloured version that sell for double or triple what the regular run copies do.

 

You seriously had to post to correct me? Couldn't let that go? If they press these like Dudley Morris and Serge are saying above, they might as well be printing money. Literally, physically, emotionally (based on want), figuratively, etc.

 

The problem with a reference lacquer in this case was the pressing plant (Wakefield) was in Phoenix, while we were in Cleveland. By the time the lacquer got shipped back there may have been damage. Besides the print-through problem may have been on the stampers. With a test pressing, you can say go ahead with a job once the test pressing passed. With a reference lacquer they would still have to cut another one to make the stampers.

 

That's sort of true, except I believe they use the same lathe for the lacquers. The difference is the size of the platter. A lacquer that is going to be used to make stampers for an LP are 14", acetates are 12" (or 7" for a 45).

 

Amen!!! good to know that!
so if NEVER sound as good as the first pressing, I dont care that are unique, I dont want it!

 

I've seen/owned 12" or 10" acetates with only one song on them (as opposed to them being on a 7"). Sometimes they were made with whatever 'blanks' were at hand, regardless if they corresponded to the size of the commercial release.

 

I'd be very wary of those. They were most likely rejected cuts. Usually they'd be thrown away but I guess somebody figured they could sell them for big bucks.

 

My test pressings of the B-52's first album, and Mesopotamia, sound as good or better than the first issues that I have. My test pressing of Sleater-Kinney's Hot Rock album sounds identical to the first issue. My experience has been the same with WLP issues.

 

Hey! Just thought this article on what to look for in your Test Pressings may help get a grasp of what they are for.