What about calling them and speaking to a manager? 5 years ago I bought my TT from MD. The following year I had a problem with a record that I purchased from them. I went through several copies and at the very last time, the MD rep mentioned something to me about a ban or suspension. He got funny with me. I said calmly, I’ve spent thousands at MD, including my VPI turntable last year and your hassling me over a record?? Are you kidding me!?? The dude backed down.
I hear you. I bought one of the Dylan mono MoFi 45RPM pressings from MD back in 2016. I didn’t open it until last fall. Both records were the same. I had to eat it. I couldn’t call MD back due to the fact that it took me two freakin years to get around to it. That’s on me. I’ve had this problem with MoFi in the past with duplicate LPs in a 2 record set. I’d assume it’s the fault of RTI? Don’t they package the records?
I am curious what the Music Direct staff think of 'audiophiles'. We are a unique group to deal with, and as a comedian would call us ....... a 'tough room'.
Wow you only started collecting vinyl in April and you spent $10,000 on it. You sure dive into a hobby headfirst don't you? I can't have spent much more than that over 40 years though most in the last decade. I think you have a strong case to overturn MD ban since it was likely done by an employee that your emails pissed off. They can't afford to lose customers like you. You might even be their biggest non retail customer!
My Marvin Gaye inners had those scuffs on...like they’ve been rubbed on a surface. I don’t think it should really be happening. It’s not a deal breaker for me, but they need to listen to the feedback rather than keeping on doing the same thing!
They can but they’re wedged in extremely tightly....I removed mine but didn’t want to put them back in as I didn’t want to risk damaging the printed inners. All they are is a piece of blank cardboard anyway...
What I’m doing with these sets is removing the tight fitting, poster board / rice paper inner sleeve combos and replacing them with Sleeve City Ultimate Diskeepers sleeves. They work much better than the two piece combo that comes with the 1-Step sets. Then I place one of the original MoFi rice paper inners between the two outer sleeves to prevent further scuffing due to them rubbing against each other. You can use one of the cardboard inners to contain and protect the extras that come with the set (glossy photo, 1-Step process sheet, etc...). Hope this helps someone.
I’m afraid I’m about to leave for the airport so no time today. When I’m back home though....happy to.
I totally agree. People that have spent thousands over the years should be given some leeway. One thing I have learned when buying records, is if I get a bad record from a dealer, I ask for a refund or a store credit. Getting a replacement record from the same place is likely to end up being bad as well. On my last return, I told MD not to send me a replacement because they will grab another record from the same box of the bad batch. MD gave me a store credit. I bought the same record from Analog Spark and it was just fine. I bought a first press of record that was horribly noisy. Years later I bought a repress that was pristine.
Logically, if so many people got 2 x disc 1's of BOTW, why has nobody reported that they got 2 x disc 2? What happened to all those disc 2's that never shipped?
I don't get this thinking. Even if they sell out, if MD or mofi put an extra number 1 lp in the package, that means they ended up with TOO MANY NUMBER 2 BOTW records. What did they do, THROW THEM OUT????!!! Therefore, when someone calls up, even years later, and says I have AN EXTRA number 1 record, they say "we have the number 2 for that set." Simple. You send back the extra number 1 as proof and they send off number 2. In fact, the only thing they HAD to do was actually press more number 1 discs since they handed out too many and must have run out in order to produce 7500 sets. I don't see any fault in my logic IF they actually pressed 7500 sets to begin with.
Thats a lot of assumptions. But even if they werent it has nothing to do with my point. Which really is: Why the hell would anyone pay for an expensive audiophile recording and then wait 3 months to open it? And then feel as though they are *owed* somehow by the distributer to fix things when they suddenly find out that its got non-fill out the wazoo? Its nearly unavoidable, unless you live under a rock, to be involved in buying resissued lps without knowing that the current massive output of product is riddled with defective lps. Its silly not to open a purchase up and check for defects and at the very least spot check where one possibly sees a defect. I get a sealed lp? I rip it open and the first thing I do is to inspect it under a bright light. Defect? I play it. Audible defect to a degree that is unacceptable? I get on the horn immediately and make arrangements to send it back for an exchange or refund. And when I wait or forget on those rare occassions for a lengthy time I never EXPECT them to say "Oh np sir, there is no time limit. Send it back." Im grateful if they do. But accept the egg on my face at my own stupidity or carelessness when they dont. They dont OWE me anything after Ive waited so long. I APPRECIATE if they do and are understanding.
(Please forgive my snarkiness. I enjoy reading your posts. But ...) Alarickc getting banned for life from MD must have really put the fear of God in you.
It will be a wonder if MD will get around to releasing the next One Step considering all the drama coming from the members on this thread. @alarickc -- MD is not a luxury company and One Steps are not luxury products despite what others would have you believe. Like any goods purchased online, use common sense, and buy responsibly from a reputable source.
3 Months is nothing. I'll wait years sometimes. I open new stuff when I want to hear it. Not necessarily when I get it.
Sure, but would you expect the vendor to address an issue if you wait to open something years after receiving it? Particularly if the item is limited in nature? I think that's more of the point here.
The recourse should be with the seller. That seller/dealer then takes it back to Music Direct for replacement. I do not believe Music Direct would of had a problem with the original buyer returning the set for replacement or store credit. I am sure there are still sealed sets setting on the shelves of many record stores. This was the chain of purchase and accountability Music Direct seems to have tried to establish. Music Direct cannot be responsible to anyone other than the original buyer. This comes down to the fact that the seller appears to have refused assistance in any way. The offense should be directed at the seller - not Music Direct.
