Where's the line you do not cross?

[Raven X Army]

For a standard pressing of a new/unknown band's release let's assume that 1000 run would be the average. Imagine you're a record label. How do you distribute the 1000 records and break it down into "different versions"? Where's the line you shouldn't cross? When does the record go from "collectible" to just a "mash of random pressings"? Kind of like the YOT CCME scraps pressing. So many variations, none of them really collectible. Pick your options (there could be a lot more variations of course but I tried to go with the most common ones).

[Raven X Army]

I voted 800 black (or colour), 200 colour, same cover but I'm just as well OK with any option 1-4, 3-4 being the most appealing since 1-2 are a bit too boring although if we are talking multiple pressings, with each done a little differently, then option 1 seems really cool too (see Filler EP for example) but in one off press when you don't know if there will be any represses I'd go with 3 or 4.
5-6 are still acceptable if not overdone but 7-8 is a definite no go for me.

[Raven X Army]

And to give you a visual on these options:

#1
1000 on black vinyl all with the same cover
see X-Claim Records #1-6 as a good example

#2
1000 on one colour vinyl all with the same cover
Chain of Strength True 'Till Death (although there were 2000 of them not 1000 but it's a good example of 1 colour/1 cover, no intended variations, sans the 1 or 2 blank labels)

#3
800 black (or colour), 200 colour, same cover
Bold Looking Back : 12"
1st press : 1010 black vinyl
206 purple vinyl

#4
800 black (or colour), 200 colour, diff covers
Think earlier B9 releases, or all the examples of "special covers" made in the 80s and 90s...

#5
700, 200(pre) 100 (rec rel) va colours same covers
This seems to be the standard for mid-to-now B9, Rivalry, REACT! etc

#6
700, 200(pre) 100 (rec rel) various colours/covers
Same as above. This seems to be the standard for mid-to-now B9, Rivalry, REACT! etc

#7
400, 300, 200, 100 mix of colours/covers
Dead By 23 + countless other labels

#8
11, 57, 88, 233, 335, etc mix of colours/covers
Dead By 23, Bottled Up (especially the Have Heart releases) etc...

Edit: I do not in any way mean this poll as a diss on any label or an individual. I just wanna make it clear since this being the Internet, someone may take it that way. This is for you to simply state your preferences in how releases are being presented to the kids in their final form.

[xreganx]

I don't really have a problem with the way labels like react! put out records; about 3 colours plus maybe a pre-order. And generally the band will do a record release cover or something.

You also have to remember that it would be virtually impossible for record labels to exist in this day and age to lessen record colours as most of them just get by at the moment. I mean if I really like the band I will try and collect everything, if there is too many variation or you just want to check out the band, then don't order multiple copies. (though this may seem like a crazy idea to many of you lol).

But there will always be variants with colours, look at the GB 7" on yellow, people go crazy trying to find different shades of yellow. Also there will also be 'transition' presses, like the bold 7". Though most bands now seem to give them a stamp or something to indicate an 'official' transition press. Also not to mention aborted tests and presses.

Call me crazy but I don't really have a problem with any of this, sure it can be frustrating when you find out about anther super rare record you had no idea existed for your collection, but isn't that part of the fun of collecting? I mean no one is forcing you to track down that super rare record out of 3, but if that's what you want to spend your free time and money on, more power to ya.

[Raven X Army]

Yeah, I get all that... but there's clearly a line between when it all makes sense and when it just gets out of hand. Where's that line?

[chris2far]

to me, i prefer the 800/200 pressing. that makes it kinda easy for everybody.

i also could go with #1 #2
and i love it, when a band takes a couple of records on tour and give them an extra tour cover or colored vinyl.

but i think labels shoud keep it more clean and simple.
i also have my problems with rev. to many variations of everything. but some releases are ~30 years old so there must be a couple of diffrent pressings.
thats why i just go for the first colored ones.

i liked it the way youngblood records pressed their releases.

800 black 200 colored. it was mostly the same amaount of each version.
i alos wouldt have a problem with a 3 diffrent pressings like lets say 700 black 150 red 150 blue.

but those small amount of 50, 25 whatever is kinda stupid.
i also don't get the point of making more than 10 tests.

[xreganx]

I know what you mean, like for instant have heart collecting, as a collector I don't really have a line, for instance if there was a ridiculous re-press of the Brotherhood 7" (I never hope that happens) i would still try and collect them all. So for me there is no 'line' just individual basis for each record. But for a record label I think labels like react! are fine, above that is getting a bit ridiculous.

[nico]

The only thing that annoys me are limited stuff, like out of 3, 6 or 11 copies. But if a release comes on 4 colors in a total pressing of 1000, that is cool with me.

If I every will release a record. I will probably do 400 on colored and 100 on black or 800 on color and 200 on black. I loved it when they did it with that last Ten Yard Fight 7".

[moos]

It is also a bit of a counter effect. A lot of labels have to do limited edition versions pure for the reason that this makes people think the release is 1) as special as all those other 'limited editons' 2) something you have to buy now.

if you'd do one press run of 1000 on black a lot of people will have this whole 'will pick it up later' attitude. result: you don't move shit.

i draw the line with these ultra limited versions as mentioned by Nico. And with stuff that is clearly pressed for variant collectors. Take most of these New Age re-presses. it's not like they're gonna sell even one A18 album to a kid who never had a chance to pick it up before, or like they had any mailorder or distro backorders. Yes, this is frustration speaking.

[reasontorevelate]

Some thoughts to throw in the fire...

*If a band puts out a decent record, and has plenty of plans for playing live/touring, I will say that 1000 on one colour shouldn't be a problem to "move". It all depends on how fast you want to get rid of it. If I were in a band, I think it'd be cool to still be able to sell a 7" I released 2 years ago. For some this is too long; don't understand that.

* "Transitions" pressing: I've decided not to collect this, the numbers are often too low (prices too high) and the decision of whether or not a record is transition or not is too subjective.

*More than 10 test pressings: unnecessary IMHO. I really dig having a test press out of the 80/90's that is out of 4. That is a real test, and therefore has more value (emotionally).

*I have the same feeling concerning t-shirts: a few years ago I LMFAO at a band that played a small gig (80 people) but had bags and bags and bags of shirts; the table was covered 2-3meters wide with them. That seems more like a Green Day/The Police/etc thing to do. They were a popular band, mind you. But IME they set a strange example.

I choose #4.



I feel there is also some discrepancy concerning money "put into the scene" through the route of buying a label's release 4 times per person. There is something to say for people that save all this money to put into (better) equipment, practice space, organizing gigs, putting out zines and recording and/or releasing stuff in a DIY manner (without a label, why not?).


Good poll, Dobek!

[chungking48]

I always used to say that I preferred the "old model", i.e. mainly black with one colour vinyl limited edition. However, I have to say that my mind may now have changed. I do enjoy collecting and hunting down variants, and for my absolute favourite bands I do actually enjoy buying/owning several variations. So I guess it depends partly on the band. If there is demand for a band's records and a label has to keep repressing then I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing for them to knock out new variants. Keeps things interesting for all involved. I mean, considering this is the Rev baord, think about the Warzone 7". I imagine most on here would actually quite like to own 8 different versionsof that one, right?

For me, "the line" depends on a number of factors. But generally speaking, it seems to me that the line is crossed if there are hundreds of variants made specifically to take advantage of collectors and/or make a fast buck... which I think is very different to a label cranking out different colours for fun.

For example, in the early-ish days of the band ISIS, most of their records were pressed on two or maybe three vinyl colours as well as black vinyl. There were probably on average 200 of each colour. To me, that is not excessive. But then when the band became huge, their old records started to get repressed, and most of them got repressed on at least five different 'new' colours, some more. These repressings just felt like they were created to rinse as much money out of people as possible. I mean, the band was popular & there was demand for thousands of records, but the labels could have sold them pretty much regardless of colour, such was the demand for the band. So it just felt like repressing them on numerous colours was engineered not only to supply new fans with records, but also to take advantage of existing fans/collectors and make a fast buck.

So I guess the line I won't cross is the one where the label are trying to trick me into buying more copies than I want. But if a label legitimately creates five cool variants for fun and because they like the band or record, I don't think that's too bad to be honest.

The other slight gripe I have is that it seems everyone is following a set formula these days. Test press, release show press, friends press, pre-order colours x 2 or 3, tour press, final show press. Even though records are fun, I wish it were the case that bands/labels weren't in a position where they think that they HAVE to follow this formula.

Mind you, having said all of this, that Boston Strangler LP seems to have created an insane buzz recently, and I haven't seen any colour vinyl of that one. It may well exist for all I know, but it seems to me that the label can/has/will easily sell 1000 copies on black vinyl.

[chungking48]

Mar 30, 2012 9:21:05 GMT reasontorevelate said:

* "Transitions" pressing: I've decided not to collect this, the numbers are often too low (prices too high) and the decision of whether or not a record is transition or not is too subjective.

Couldn't agree more.

[ferry]

I don't have a problem with all kinds of pressings, colors, record release show cover, tourcovers whatever. it's up to the collector how far to go along with that. what anoys me is when labels or even bands make the more limited records more expensive that the normal black/regular version. I think that is crap. for instance: normal version is 5 dollars, but the more limited version costs 7 dollars...

[chungking48]

Mar 30, 2012 11:35:44 GMT ferry said:

I don't have a problem with all kinds of pressings, colors, record release show cover, tourcovers whatever. it's up to the collector how far to go along with that. what anoys me is when labels or even bands make the more limited records more expensive that the normal black/regular version. I think that is crap. for instance: normal version is 5 dollars, but the more limited version costs 7 dollars...

Sorry dude, but I disagree with this. The way I see it, its supply and demand. If a label makes a limited record and knows full well that a lot of people will want one, why shouldn't they charge a couple of bucks extra? If people will pay it (which they will) then all the label is doing is help finance itself. I just believe that if there is money to be made from records, then it is the labels and bands that should see it. If some kid buys a limited record and puts it on ebay, more likely than not he'll make at least two bucks extra over what he paid, so if everyone acknowledges this is the case then what's wrong with the label seeing some of the fruits of their work?

[reasontorevelate]

Mar 30, 2012 15:49:25 GMT chungking48 said:

Mar 30, 2012 11:35:44 GMT ferry said:

I don't have a problem with all kinds of pressings, colors, record release show cover, tourcovers whatever. it's up to the collector how far to go along with that. what anoys me is when labels or even bands make the more limited records more expensive that the normal black/regular version. I think that is crap. for instance: normal version is 5 dollars, but the more limited version costs 7 dollars...

Sorry dude, but I disagree with this. The way I see it, its supply and demand. If a label makes a limited record and knows full well that a lot of people will want one, why shouldn't they charge a couple of bucks extra? If people will pay it (which they will) then all the label is doing is help finance itself. I just believe that if there is money to be made from records, then it is the labels and bands that should see it. If some kid buys a limited record and puts it on ebay, more likely than not he'll make at least two bucks extra over what he paid, so if everyone acknowledges this is the case then what's wrong with the label seeing some of the fruits of their work?

Sorry mcs, but I disagree...
Who says the kid making the money won't put it back into the scene by financing a tour, organizing shows, releasing something him/herself?
The clue is actually: is the profit made beneficial to the "scene", and how beneficial is it? Do we need 5-6 variations of every record? No. Don't forget: colour vinyl and multicolour covers cost more than a regular B/W one (like the old days). I'd trade a lot of my records from a glossy layout style to sober B/W with one colour in an instant.

Also.....for the kids that flip stuff: aren't the labels also partially to blame? They are making it "limited" in the first place!! Labels know by now that a record /50 will become expensive a year later. You don't need a crystal ball for that. Turn the world around, labels have a certain responsibility here. They have a power/force to drive certain patterns/trends/changes in a given direction.
Instead, we're confronted with the "I found a few lost copies in the closet, and made a special sleeve to celebrate" records a year after it's release.

But I'm an older dude, so maybe I'm just getting more and more out of step with the (hc) world around me.

[lecky]

Considering what I've said previously about black/colour limited/numbered deliberate variants I surprised myself when I voted #6 on this poll.

The main reason is that when my bands released records (recently at least) we have made limited versions in that kind of way.

Walk The Plank LP = 550 black, 350 blue, 100 release show, 25 benefit for Out Of Step store, 10 test press.

SickFuckinO 7" = 400 black, 100 red, 15 blue, 5 test press.

Voorhees "Spilling Blood..." LP re-issue on Grot Records = 400 red, 100 clear/red drips, 20 test press with alternate sleeve.
Whereas originaly when it was pressed on AWA Records = 3000 black 1st Press (various pressings with small printing differences).

So I'm guilty of being as responsible for this trend as anyone else really.

[Raven X Army]

There are so many interesting points that were raised in the replies above. I would like to add one more to the mix:

If a label makes a limited pressing that is intended for a certain thing, ie: "200/ preorder" or "100/ record release" etc, I noticed it has become somewhat of a standard for the label owners to have let's say 70% of the pressing actually available to the people with 30% or so kept with a sole intent of eBaying it later to "finance the new releases"

This being a DIY hc/punk scene that is supposedly be run on some set of the ideals: is it ethical for the labels to do that? or do they have a responsibility to get this out to people (some of whom will no doubt flip the shit out on eBay later on)?

If I was a label owner I would want to get ALL the records out to the kids for sure but I would not want them to go flipping them for 3 times the value later. Realistically speaking however I would have ZERO influence on what kids do with the records once they buy them. Also, I could of course use extra money so keeping a part of the pressing myself and flipping it on ebay is a very appealing way of turning a quick profit for myself but even thinking about it makes me feel somewhat uneasy. I'd probably do it but I wouldn't be able to shake off this feeling that I'm being a bit of a scum.

Especially when I think of a regular kid who put in the preorder early enough to be the 177th in a queue to get the limited pressing and I, being the label guy, only made 170 available, keeping the 30 for myself, I'd feel too much of a plonker I think but then again if I saw some kid in Arizona making $30 on top of what he paid me for a 7" that would make me feel like a knob just as well..

How would you balance this if you run a label/were in a band:

Being an honest lad, selling off the entire pre-order (keeping 2, 3 copies for yourself), feeling good about the job well done and then watching a bunch of random dudes turning your hard work into a quick buck on eBay while you cannot do anything about it

or

Feeling a bit on the dodgy side for not delivering on the preorders to the kids who would have otherwise gotten one if you sent them all out but didn't because you kept a larger part to get a piece of the eBay action yourself.

or

is there a middle ground? Like keeping a very few copies to flip/trade? Not too many so that you don't feel like a cunt but not too few either?

This is a modern day punk ethics dillema that needs to be discussed.

----------

Another thing, are there any labels (except for Dischord I think) that put "PAY NO MORE THAN..." on their records???

[Michel]

I voted option 3. I like it when labels/bands keep it simple.

[chungking48]

Mar 30, 2012 20:03:54 GMT reasontorevelate said:

Sorry mcs, but I disagree...
Who says the kid making the money won't put it back into the scene by financing a tour, organizing shows, releasing something him/herself?
The clue is actually: is the profit made beneficial to the "scene", and how beneficial is it? Do we need 5-6 variations of every record? No. Don't forget: colour vinyl and multicolour covers cost more than a regular B/W one (like the old days). I'd trade a lot of my records from a glossy layout style to sober B/W with one colour in an instant.

Also.....for the kids that flip stuff: aren't the labels also partially to blame? They are making it "limited" in the first place!! Labels know by now that a record /50 will become expensive a year later. You don't need a crystal ball for that. Turn the world around, labels have a certain responsibility here. They have a power/force to drive certain patterns/trends/changes in a given direction.
Instead, we're confronted with the "I found a few lost copies in the closet, and made a special sleeve to celebrate" records a year after it's release.

But I'm an older dude, so maybe I'm just getting more and more out of step with the (hc) world around me.

Hey, I'm an old dude too. I doubt that you are any more out of step than I am!

You do make a good point - kids would not flip stuff on eBay if the labels didn't make the rarities in the first place.

However, sometimes the labels probably have to make some rarities to encourage people to buy the records.

I released a 7" last year by a completely unheard of band. I made a special preorder edition of 60. I knew that it would be difficult to persuade people to take a chance on a new band on a small label, so I put a lot of effort & money into making a special edition record. And because it cost me a lot of money to make, and I knew that it would be hard to make my money back, I charged more money for the special preorder version. Only like an extra $1.50 or so. Anyway, I did not feel bad about doing this simply because I knew that I would struggle to sell all the records and I would probably lose money.

Anyway, I just wanted to relate this back to the original question in this thread. As I said in my response, "the line" is when labels make moves just to exploit people and make money. So I think it depends on each individual case. For very small DIY labels who release new & small bands, it is very difficult to make the money back that you put in. So charging an extra $1.50 on 50 records is not exactly taking the piss. But perhaps on a label that know that they can easily sell a couple of thousand records, even if they were all on the same colour, then perhaps charging more money for a limited version IS slightly exploiting collectors.

At the end of the day though, record collecting is just fun. Sometimes its cool to have a record that has one pressing all on one colour, sometimes its cool to have like 10 different variants. So I don't think there is a 'one answer fits all' solution.

[chungking48]

Mar 31, 2012 3:01:10 GMT Raven X Army said:

How would you balance this if you run a label/were in a band:

Being an honest lad, selling off the entire pre-order (keeping 2, 3 copies for yourself), feeling good about the job well done and then watching a bunch of random dudes turning your hard work into a quick buck on eBay while you cannot do anything about it

or

Feeling a bit on the dodgy side for not delivering on the preorders to the kids who would have otherwise gotten one if you sent them all out but didn't because you kept a larger part to get a piece of the eBay action yourself.

or

is there a middle ground? Like keeping a very few copies to flip/trade? Not too many so that you don't feel like a cunt but not too few either?

This is a modern day punk ethics dillema that needs to be discussed.

Obviously I'm not really a 'proper' label, but what I have done with my releases is keep back 5-10 copies of each version for the future. My original thinking on this was just in case any of my friends, or people I mght meet in the future, decide that they want one of my records. I've known loads of people in the past who ran labels or were in bands who did not have the foresight to keep more than one record for themself. I always thought this was pretty amateur. I mean, I did a couple of zines in 1996/97 and held back a bunch of each, which meant that I was able to give copies to to people I met (and became good friends with) in the past few years, which was nice.

So ultimately I think that again it depends on motivation. Nothing wrong with denying someone you don't know a record if ultimately you will end up giving it to someone you know well. But to intentionally hold a load of records back just so that you can sell them for ten times the price... well, that's obviously not quite so cool.

Having said that though, it must be hard to run a proper label and watch kids buy your records and sell them on eBay right away for BIG money.

[lecky]

Mar 31, 2012 20:59:48 GMT chungking48 said:

...what I have done with my releases is keep back 5-10 copies of each version for the future. My original thinking on this was just in case any of my friends, or people I mght meet in the future, decide that they want one of my records...

That is exactly what I've done from day one, beginning with the Steadfast 7", I always make sure I keep 5 of each, not just for friends (although I have given some out to friends) but for family, I always thought if I had any kids, they may want some keepsakes of what their dad wasted his youth on, I envision them giving it to their kids..."look at what Grandad did when he was younger"...haha.

[lecky]

Mar 31, 2012 3:01:10 GMT Raven X Army said:

Another thing, are there any labels (except for Dischord I think) that put "PAY NO MORE THAN..." on their records???

Most British anarcho labels did it, Spiderleg, Mortarhate, Bluurg, Xntrix etc... I think more labels should do it now, there's so many ebay stores that charge twice as much as anywhere else, but I doubt it would change if they did put a "pay no more than" on the records, even Dischord seem to have given up now, there is no postpaid price on the latest Out Of Step LP, just the web address.

[reasontorevelate]

@ mcs I also still have 10-20 copies of my band's releases of 1995-1997 in a box. I haven't sold any on ebay, since they still go for about the same as what we sold them for, something I'm proud of. I give them away to friends now and then, and even buy it back up if it's real cheap at say a recordfair or something.

This is partly due to not creating scarcity in the first place when we released it:
a 10" : 3500 press (3 pressings, only one extra colour 500, no tests)
a mcd : 2000 made
a 7" : 1000 made on black
As I said before, we could sell these during a period of about 2+ years. We traded stuff, and sold the traded items as well, making it more available and rewarding people coming to shows, since they could buy tons of stuff without postage costs.

@ #44/88: what if a label makes 500 black and 500 on limegreen-flamingopink splatter...and the band sells the black copies on their release show, no stamps or sleeves extra. Instead, they add a A5 sized thank you note (thanks for coming to the release show, etc) and on the bottom write: "This is intentionally made on B/W, so when you buy this on ebay, beware that it might be bootlegged!! " or something more poetic...Or add a simple sticker. Something non-vinyl and non-cover. There's gotta be alternatives!!
This way, a label doesn't have extra pressing costs (except for the kinko's costs) and the people at the release show will have a feeling of being "special" anyway.
But maybe this is a stupid idea :-)


BTW, No For an Answer released a 7" on TKO last year, 500 pressed on black, no variations, no tests. It seems to be sold out already, within I believe 6 months(?). Of course this is a well-known band, but I admire the choice the band/label made. I wish more would follow.

Lastly, as an old fart I got into record collecting again 2 years ago. I was astonished seeing people's tradelists with 200 listings with only 50 releases. WTF? 4 copies of each record?
And then they have financial problems and want to sell them.
My question to them is "Why are you here?".

[lecky]

Apr 1, 2012 9:58:28 GMT reasontorevelate said:

I was astonished seeing people's tradelists with 200 listings with only 50 releases. WTF? 4 copies of each record?

I know exactly where you're coming from, I don't get it either.

The most enjoyable thing about record collecting for me is when I finally pick up a record I have wanted for 10+ years and never had the luck/money/ability to get my hands on it previously, can't beat the feeling of finding it in a rack. Getting that winner notification from ebay is pretty cool too, then the anticipation of it arriving in the post and the relief that you didn't get ripped off or screwed by the postal system.
I don't see how buying loads of copies of a record direct from the label that released it on 10 different versions can give that same feeling, it's not any different to going out and buying a new pair of shoes or coat or something, yeah it's nice to buy things you want, but it just cant compete with how it feels to get an old record that you had started to think you would never own. All I can think is that it must be a bragging rights kinda thing.

[Clichejon]

Apr 1, 2012 9:58:28 GMT reasontorevelate said:

Lastly, as an old fart I got into record collecting again 2 years ago. I was astonished seeing people's tradelists with 200 listings with only 50 releases. WTF? 4 copies of each record?

I would put myself in this category. I think I must have around 75 different releases, but 5-10 versions of the same record.
I think the most of one release i have is the GB 7", I think i'm on 30 versions of the same record 7". (Not to inc tapes and CDs)