AFAIK there isn't any Goldmine style resource for most dance music. That
still seems to be the world of Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Bob Dylan
collectors. I'm not sure if it's a question of the music being underground
as there are lots of genres that are underground but still get written up
about in these books. I think it has more to do with it being "rock" music
or not. Experimental electronic music by the likes of Moog, Subotnick, etc.
will get mentioned but not your average techno producer. It has to do with
respect for the music. Generally the people who put these books together
don't have much respect for these artists. It's an anti-disco thing.
Currently, it's pretty much guided by what the last person paid and if
someone is willing to pay more or less than that for the next copy that
becomes available.
The reference books that are out there now could help you grade a record
but couldn't would be worthless in leading you to a monetary value.
The writers are clueless when it comes to the music and there probably
hasn't been enough of a trading/buying/selling history to get an accurate
value on most of these records.
What more, these records are meant to be played - and played and played and
played. They get abused. Not many of us take care of our records the same
way some ultra-anal Beatles collator would (humidity controlled rooms, no
light, removing records from sleeves to protect covers, etc.). I think that
is another factor that affects why the genre and the records themselves,
are paid much attention. We just don't treat a SID record the same way that
someone does a ultra rare Sgt. Pepper's Brazilian promo release with a
misprint on the B side.
MEK
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.net> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Toby Frith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: robin <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>, Ken Odeluga
07/06/04 09:54 AM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, placid
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 313-List
<313@hyperreal.org>
Subject: Re: (313) Re: what's
the most people are willing to pay for
rekkids?
Question. With all this talk about what you'd pay for a record, is there a
resource in print or online, like Goldmine, that would place a value? Or is
this just a totally underground territory? Where does one place $300 value
on a record in this genre?
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 10:28:58 -0400 (EDT)
> To: Toby Frith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ken Odeluga
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> placid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 313@hyperreal.org
> Subject: RE: (313) Re: what's the most people are willing to pay for
rekkids?
>
> I'm not sure of the media "deteriorating" per se, but I will give a short
> description of popular methods of CD-R and CD-RW techniques. Basically,
> we're dealing with teh same sort of principle as vinyl, accept the laser
> in a CD player or CD rom is reflected off of the reflective material in
> the CD that is different heights and widths (although it's read a bit
> differently than on vinyl [from what i hear - this is the part i'm not so
> familiar with]). The "burning" process actually involves the CD "burner"
> hitting a recordable CD that has a reflective material with dye on it.
> This dye is manipulated by the laser so that can make the pits and
grooves
> (although extremely small) so that it can be read by another. I would
> assume that if this dye is cheap enough (or in some cases the actual
metal
> film is in itself manipulated by the laser) it could be concluded that
> over use the "normal" type laser could affect the pits and grooves and
> therefore affect the sound. I've not heard of this, tho, so I won't try
> to substantiate or disprove.
>
> cheers,
> dense
>
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Toby Frith wrote:
>>
>> Interesting point about file retention. I read somewhere that a lot of
> cheaper CD-Rs only last for about 2 - 3 years
> before the quality slowly disintegrates.
> Not sure how, but I'm sure some tech
> people could source that. I mean,
> how much would you pay for a hard drive of say,
> 100 gigs worth of music
> that in essence could be duplicated in a very short time?
>
