POLL - Should sellers on the forum use "Excellent" to grade vinyl?

Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by TLMusic, Aug 9, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Randy W

    Randy W Original Member

    If enough people think we should not change the “Classified Forums Vinyl Grading” system at all, then that makes my job a lot easier!

    However, I don't think someone brought this thread up randomly. And I don't think there is a desire to overhaul the whole system. Any suggested changes from me would still be using Goldmine as the basis.

    If we are to continue to use Goldmine as the basis for grading vinyl, then Excellent cannot be used as a grade above VG+, because they are equivalent and of the same value according to the latest Goldmine grading scale:

    http://www.goldminemag.com/collector-resources/record-grading-101/2

    Maybe it’s not a big deal, but there are plenty of examples where the use of a grade between NM and VG+ would have been helpful in better communicating the condition of a record between seller and buyer. There are also plenty of examples where "no surface noise" next to VG+ in the Classified Forums Vinyl Grading system has set up expectations in a buyer that the used VG+ record they just purchased should sound like a NM one. Avoiding miscommunication and conflict in buying and selling records is not useless. Steve Hoffman himself feels a modification is long overdue.

    Of course asking questions of a seller and encouraging sellers to be more descriptive in their ads is a good idea. But not everyone will do that (or be expected to). A simple grading system that is clear and understandable is the next best thing. What we have now really does not accomplish that as well as it could, hence this thread.

    I welcome suggestions from everyone. Keep them coming!
     
  2. harmonica98

    harmonica98 Senior Member

    Location:
    London, UK
    The wording in #43 works for me and would be an improvement.

    Tom
     
  3. Randy W

    Randy W Original Member

    Thanks to everyone for their comments and ideas.

    This is the recommendation I will send to Gary in a few days, unless there are objections:


    Proposed “SH Classified Forums Vinyl Grading” system:

    We will be using the US Goldmine grading scale for Vinyl and not the UK/European version.

    Please note that the Goldmine grading scale has audio quality descriptions for NM, VG and G, but not for VG+. Please also note there is a reference to a grade between NM and VG+ called VG++:

    http://www.goldminemag.com/collector...rd-grading-101

    For our purposes, we will be including the grade VG++ to fill the gap between NM and VG+, just has been done with CD grading. We have also added a brief audio quality description to VG++ and VG+. All visual grading assumes a bare 100W bulb is used.

    Sellers and buyers are encouraged to read the Goldmine link above for accurate grading descriptions. Sellers are encouraged to describe their items in more detail, including any audio issues, when possible. Here is a guide to SH Classified Vinyl Grading:

    Near Mint (NM or M-): Near perfect record and cover. No visible flaws or defects (any manufacturing scuffs should be noted). No unexpected surface noise or other audible issues at normal listening volume.

    Very Good Plus Plus (VG++): Only a very small number of minor flaws present (ex. a couple of faint hairlines, a light scuff). No unexpected surface noise or other audible issues at normal listening volume. No significant ring wear. No seam splits.

    Very Good Plus (VG+): More slight signs of wear but still an excellent condition record that plays well. Any surface noise is very minimal and the record is still an enjoyable listen. Covers may show minor defects including very light ring wear.

    Very Good (VG): More obvious wear. Surface noise evident on playing, especially in soft passages, and during a song's intro and fade but never overpowers the music. Ring wear and other defects evident.

    Good (G): Worn. Significant surface noise throughout, scratches that produce noise, but will play through without skipping.

    Poor (P), or Fair (F): Worn out. Won't play through without skipping or repeating.

    If the buyer or seller have any questions with how a purchased item has been graded, they are encouraged to PM each other before posting feedback in an attempt to reach a satisfactory agreement.
     
  4. HeavyDistortion

    HeavyDistortion Senior Member

    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Nice descriptions, Randy.



    Ed Hurdle
    HeavyDistortion
     
  5. Raunchnroll

    Raunchnroll Senior Member

    Location:
    Seattle
    This is nonsensical. Surface noise, as that term is used by experienced folk, rarely has anything to do with the sound i.e. the musical information cut into the lacquer - let alone altering the 'intended' sound.
     
  6. johnnypaddock

    johnnypaddock Senior Member

    Location:
    Merrimack Valley

    :righton:


    I have always thought that the grading guidelines could use an improvement, and really appreciate you putting that together. I don't see ANY harm whatsoever that could come from this additional clarification. Thanks. :cheers:
     
  7. shinedaddy

    shinedaddy Forum Resident

    Location:
    Valley Village, Ca
    I think this thread is still nearly worthless as there is nothing that needs fixing. If each ad is taken by itself, read carefully, etc then you should understand how a person grades. IT'S ALL SUBJECTIVE ANYWAYS. VG++ just does not have the ring to it that EX does and it will turn buyers off. period.

    I would NEVER buy something on ebay listed as VG++ because I think it is a seller trying hard to NOT grade something as EX but still trying to make it look better than it is, Then when you come back and say its not that good he can say I just graded it VG, not EX in any way.
     
  8. Randy W

    Randy W Original Member


    Objection noted. Anyone else feel the same way?
     
  9. MikeyH

    MikeyH Stamper King

    Location:
    Berkeley, CA
    I don't actually like the extra grade at all; this is most subjective, and of course equipment specific.

    I play a mint looking direct cut disc and it plays VG, with constant noise and it's clearly dirty. I play it again and it's a lot quieter. I play it twice again and it's NM, silent. I have no idea how it's going to play on your system. I grade it VG+ and say it might need a clean. I could grade it EX or NM. If I did the latter you might be disappointed, if I stick to VG+ you'll probably be happy.

    I'd really like to see an approach where it was clear the lowest matching grade was used rather than the highest; unfortunately that's unlikely. (there's a significant perceived price difference between VG and NM, which frankly doesn't reflect the amount of enjoyment one gets from listening to the record.... /rant)
     
  10. chazz101s

    chazz101s Forum Resident

    No, I don't feel that way about VG++. However, I've always believed that EX carries with it some equivocation. (I'm glad that EX is not to be used in the new grading definitions.)

    Your new definitions for grading vinyl are a nice improvement.

    If the current definitions are followed to the letter, any LP with any surface noise can be graded no better than VG. How realistic is that?

    (Tell me if I am wrong in my reading of the current forum guidelines for grading vinyl. . . .)

    In the real world, minimal surface noise is inevitable and is found on **ALL** LPs. That's why a new LP should be graded no higher than NM.

    But the flip side is: Surface noise should not require a grade as low as VG. (Do any sellers really follow the guidelines that are now in place regarding surface noise = VG at best?)

    In general, VG is a pretty off-putting grade for an LP to bought sight-unseen, no?

    Your reworking of the definitions for grading vinyl better reflects the real world and is a favor to all who buy and sell on this forum.

    Thank you.
     
  11. Randy W

    Randy W Original Member

    Mike, thanks for your input. I appreciate your viewpoint.

    I do think sellers have the option of splitting their grading of records into two or three parts if they really have concerns about a record like the one you describe. For example you could advertise it as: "Vinyl looks NM, plays VG+, cover is VG++. I know, that's complicated, but I've done it a few times for the odd record that warrants it and it doesn't take much time or effort. If that's the only way it was advertised it would probably be adequate. That's why we people use grades like those from Goldmine, so they don't have to note every hairline, scuff, spindle mark, writing on cover, corner ding, slight crease, edge wear, seam split and illegible spine.

    Of course it would be great if everyone did that. Then we wouldn't need any grades.

    My main concern, and the reason why I joined this thread in the first place is the "no surface noise" description that currently exists for VG+ vinyl grading on this forum. Anyone who has been selling and buying records knows this stuff is all subjective. And anyone who doesn't is fooling themselves. However, subjectivity aside, a description of "no surface noise" is just not realistic for most VG+ records IMO. There seem to be several others who agree with me.

    If the consensus is that we do not need an extra grade of VG++, I'm fine with that. Keep the comments coming.
     
  12. David R. Modny

    David R. Modny Гордий українець-американець

    Location:
    Streetsboro, Ohio

    Personally, I think an intermediate grade between VG+ and M- can only be a good thing for a multitude of reasons -- the biggest being the exact one you list. That is, to say that a VG+ record should have "no surface noise" (with "no" meaning exactly that....nothing) is just asking for contention between sellers and buyers. Using that model, 99% of records would grade a VG as a maximum, and frankly, that's just too big of a value hit IMHO for an item that might still qualify as something higher in every other way (i.e. it's flat-out absurd). Even removing the "no" qualifier, as you did in the new scale, I still think that most record grading scales prefer to have a grade for something that's *not quite* the virtually pristine M-, but still better than the more-flaws-allowed VG+. IMO, the intermediate grade fits that bill.


    Now, whether or not that grade should be called VG++ or EX, assuming that's the decision that's made, I'll let others decide. As I noted before, even though it wasn't an "official" grade in Goldmine's old grading scale, they acknowledged that the grade had grown to be an acceptable one, clearly defined it, and more importantly, considered both interchangeable (i.e. the exact same thing). Either or would work for me, but if I had to vote, I'd probably go with EX (all properly defined of course), in that I'm not the biggest fan of multiple pluses and minuses. Yet, if they're clearly defined as the same in the forum grading scale, it really shouldn't matter what it's called. I can live with either. On the other hand, I can also understand how some overseas sellers (and even some here) have a different concept of the usage of EX. Though again, as long as it's clearly defined here, that shouldn't really matter.

    Bottom line: I very much like the new grading scale. Its closer to the old Goldmine scale that I remember, and it has more gradual gradients, which can only be a good thing for both buyer and seller. As others have noted, even play grading can be subjective and yield different results on different systems (e.g. different arms and stylus-type profiles), but the more gradual (and clear) the grade drop-offs, the less chance for any contention.

    Nice job, Randy. :righton:
     
  13. TLMusic

    TLMusic Musician & record collector Thread Starter

    Yes Randy, thank you for your fine efforts.

    When I started this thread, I had hoped a useful discussion would develop. The main reason was to address something that seemed really strange. That is, we (the forum) have a list of rules and guidelines to sell vinyl records. But not one person actually follows the guidelines. Either we're all naughty, or the rules themselves need improvement. I choose to believe the latter. It would be great to improve the vinyl grading guidelines so that forum members can communicate more easily, and to minimize confusion between buyers and sellers.

    The good thing that has already come out of this is that the "no surface noise" for VG+ description has got to be removed. It seems most people agree on this point.

    However, the EX vs. VG++ question has yet to be resolved. I'm so sorry that the poll didn't work as intended at the beginning of the thread. It's still not clear to me which description most forum members prefer.
     
  14. johnnypaddock

    johnnypaddock Senior Member

    Location:
    Merrimack Valley



    Shinedaddy, first of all, I respect you as a seller and I know you do a great job in describing the LP's you sell. To me, that is not in question at all. I also agree that there should be a grade between VG+ and M-... whether you call it "vg++" or "ex" doesn't make a difference.

    You have posted three times on this thread, but at the same time you are referring to the thread as "useless". If the thread was really "useless", I figure that it would not deserve your attention.

    The question that has been asked in this "useless" thread is whether EX is a valid grading term. I respect the fact that you choose to use EX in grading, but the simple fact is that the official guidelines of the SH forum classifieds section do not include this grade.

    Posting your opinion in this thread is productive. Repeatedly saying that the thread is "useless" or "worthless" does not contribute anything at all.
     
  15. johnnypaddock

    johnnypaddock Senior Member

    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    Hahaha, whoa, what was I doing on here at 3am? Sorry for my rambling post above... All I remember is a case of beer and some ether. :D Now I'm off to figure out what else I might have done. Carry on.

    :cheers:
     
  16. Randy W

    Randy W Original Member

    OK, here's a rough consensus so far:


    Let's add the grade "Excellent" to the “SH Classified Forums Vinyl Grading” system: 5

    Let's add the grade "VG++" to the “SH Classified Forums Vinyl Grading” system: 7

    Let's leave the “SH Classified Forums Vinyl Grading” system the way it is: 4

    Let's modify the description "no surface noise" in the vinyl grade "VG+": 10

    Let's not modify the description "no surface noise" in the vinyl grade "VG+": 1
     
  17. Raunchnroll

    Raunchnroll Senior Member

    Location:
    Seattle
    I associate EXC as the equivalent of VG++.

    Since we're talking about records that are 'used' - it constitutes, generally, the highest grade one's likely to find the record in, especially the older it is.
     
  18. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    Having no Dog in this fight I would vote for Exc just because it seems more concise than VG++. I mean what's next VG+++? :confused: K.I.S. VG+ with no surface noise "could" work.
     
  19. rdavenport

    rdavenport Active Member

    Regarding the subjectivity of record grading:

    A few months ago I bought a collection of classical LPs from Ebay. I picked out what I wanted, and the rest I gave away on Freecycle. In that lot I gave away was a sought after Decca SXL box set. The discs were in a horrendous state - covered in scratches, nearly grey. Ten seconds on the TT was all I needed to know they were useless. There were also several Decca Eclipse records, which were also trashed.

    A few months later I saw the Swan Lake and the Decca Eclipses on Ebay. I knew they were "my" records as I recognised the stickers on them. They were visually graded as "in good condition with no major scratches".

    The box set sold for £60, the Eclipses for £75. I watched the seller for a while afterwards, curious to see the feedback they received.

    To my astonishment, the feedback was positively glowing for both buyers.

    What can you do?
     
  20. David R. Modny

    David R. Modny Гордий українець-американець

    Location:
    Streetsboro, Ohio
    I think that's why I would tend to slightly prefer the EX designation to VG++ (I believe I already voted, or at least stated a preference ). Again, assuming that they're defined *exactly* the same. Anything more than a single "+" , and there's probably a good chance of having some kind of confusion, or a simple mis-read.

    I actually once saw a seller on eBay grade LPs as VG+++++, VG++++, V+++, etc., while simply having a VG+, NM type grading scale listed. I kid you not. Five pluses! :laugh:
     
  21. TLMusic

    TLMusic Musician & record collector Thread Starter

    Many UK sellers describe their "stunning!!!!!!" records as EX+++++(add as many exclamation points as you like)

    There's a prominent US internet seller who describes some of his records as being "Near Mint Minus Minus". jeez...
     
  22. David R. Modny

    David R. Modny Гордий українець-американець

    Location:
    Streetsboro, Ohio

    LOL! Absolutely nuts.

    Funny thing is...I thought it was insane when I encountered a VG with *5* pluses. That is, until I did a Google search of some old eBay items and found 9....10....11....12! pluses used in actual eBay auctions.

    LP - VG++++++++++++
    Cover - M-

    A person couldn't make this stuff up if they tried!
     
  23. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    :biglaugh: Thanks for the am. laugh David. :cheers:
     
  24. David R. Modny

    David R. Modny Гордий українець-американець

    Location:
    Streetsboro, Ohio
  25. NorthNY Mark

    NorthNY Mark Forum Resident

    Location:
    Canton, NY, USA
    As someone who up to this point has only been a buyer and not a seller, I definitely feel that the more open discussion of vinyl grading we get, the better. In general, I agree with Raunchnroll--as an audiophile, visual condition means very little to me--at least as far as the vinyl itself is concerned, all I care about is the sound. Visual grading, therefore, means next to nothing to me, and I try to avoid sellers who do not play grade. Second, a detailed verbal description means much more than a letter grade.

    That being said, I do have some strong feelings about the letter grades. First (and this is where I don't really agree with Raunchnroll), I think the whole "every record, even a stone mint one, will have surface noise" claim is a major red herring. Perhaps it is true at the most literal level, but it is not how most buyers actually interpret "surface noise." I consider most of my new albums and quite a lot of cheap 80s pressings I picked up for a few bucks at the record store to be more-or-less free of surface noise. By that I mean pops, clicks, and static. On the other hand, most records I've bought on eBay listed as VG+ or EX have had quite a lot of pops and clicks. My luck on this forum has been better, but even here I bought a fairly expensive record where the seller raved about how quiet it was, and it turned out to have quite a few sections with repeated, annoying pops and clicks. I didn't complain because I gather that it may be tough to find that particular album in better condition. There was another time when a "NM" record actually had several deep scratches, including one that produced repeated clicks for several minutes. Although that transaction was on eBay, the seller was a forum member who was very responsive and changed his grading system as a result. Still, I think sellers sometimes make a very simple issue (i.e., how many pops and clicks are there, especially repeated ones) into something that sounds so very complex and mysterious. To this buyer, it really isn't. Quiet records not only exist, but are quite common in my experience. Quiet records from the mid-70s or earlier, especially of coveted titles, seem to be far less common, however.

    Frankly, the idea of a record that visually looks bad but plays without the kind of surface noise that results from scuffs and scratches does not seem so far-fetched to me. I actually think it makes sense for such a record to be listed as VG+, and anything with more than say two or three audible clicks would be VG. But clearly, that is not how people are grading, so I support the change to include VG++.

    I've bought from Shinedaddy before and was very happy! But I do prefer VG++ to EX, for the simple reason that EX obviously means VG (not even VG+) to most UK sellers, so using Ex to mean something better would cause confusion. But when sellers give real verbal descriptions, the letter grade doesn't really matter so much.

    One last point I want to make about surface noise and grading: EVERY time I've been annoyed by what I consider significant surface noise, I have been able to find the cause of it (usually a scratch or scuff) fairly easily with the 15 watt lamp (yes, 15 watt) next to my turntable. This demonstrates to me that surface noise is not something inherent to vinyl--rather, it is a symptom of damaged vinyl. Sellers who pretend otherwise, I believe, are kidding themselves and their buyers. I think a lot of the problem with overgrading comes from visually grading unclean vinyl. I suspect the cause of the "NM" grade on the vinyl with the deep scratches was that it was also covered with cat hair, and the seller probably thought the scratches were hairs. How anyone can give a visual grade to an unclean album is beyond me (and I have a really hard time evaluating vinyl in record shops because of this), but it seems to be the rule rather than the exception. A simple clean on a VPI makes all audible scuffs and scratches pretty easy to locate, even visually (though a play grade should always be done for any expensive record, IMO).

    Sorry about the rant, but my view is that the references to relative surface noise levels in the grading system are crucial and need to stay. What's more, they need to be taken far more seriously. FAR more albums need to be graded VG (with no plus). I know that will infuriate some sellers, but it's how I feel.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine