JackNine wrote: Ever heard of properly mastered CDs, Paul? They blow the crap out of your rare vinyls and their shelf-life is way better.
Show me a good sounding CD from the 1880's and I might agree with you. But I guess you will even have trouble finding a CD from 1982 that isn't already completely dissolved.
A shitty collection.
Well I guess you've already checked out his 2 1/2 million records to make such a valuable statement, right?
Amazing how the free market works, eh?
Amazing how ignorant people can be. This is a historical archive, not a discount item. That's totally beyond any market idea.
A million vinyls just for the sake of a million vinyls? Most people already have most of the content they want, and they're looking for specifics to fill the gaps, making this collection useless even as an archive.
He's not looking for private vinyl collectors. Think of this achive/collection thing once more, and then try to imagine something like a museum. If you can...
The whole line about how he's "given his life to music," that just kills me.
Oh hell, there's somebody more dedicated to something than I am. That thought just bloody kills me!
That's like saying, "HEY GUYS LOOK I DEDICATED MY LIFE TO ARCHIVING DANCE MUSIC -- I BOUGHT EVERY SONG ON BEATPORT AND NO ONE ELSE HAS THEM ALL! GIVE ME A MILLION DOLLARS SO I CAN PRESERVE IT FOR LIFE!"
You might consider the aspect of a virtual item vs. a physical item. Or you might consider that not everything you put a "like" in front makes up a comparison, but then again that might include starting to think, so maybe just leave it...
The problem is 99% of the purchased tracks are garbage and no self-respecting fan of this type of music would get anything out of it. All the "proper" tracks are already archived.
Brilliant! Now here's one guy who can tell us any proper redord from a garbage record without even listening to it, and then even give us an ultimate decision about what should be preserved for future mankind and what will better be blown into the limbo of unworthy, forgotten pop culture!
Even if you really wouldn't like the music on most of his records, and even if nobody else would (which I doubt), this is not about good or bad music, it's about music history, it's about having an archive of original, un-digitalized and therefore uncompressed recordings from the time they were made. If you can't see the value in it and think all music is best preserved on archive.org, we don't need to further discuss this. But from an archival standpoint it's way better to preserve vinyl where you basically just need a little needle and something to amplify the vibrations, than having a digital database that depends on a lot of technology in a data format that who knows how long will be legible.
And who knows how many last records of anything he has in his shelves?
This collection actualy IS af real worth for a music history institution. I just wonder why he is charging 3 million for it. He should just donate it to some museum if he wants it to be preserved. Truth is, academics really don't give a sh!t about pop culture history, so he's absolutely right about that. Music intellectuals usually have their head way up their ass and only carwe for what they themselves label "high art". That's really something to be sad about.