[78-L] Here's a suggestion

[Steven C. Barr]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Taylor Bowie" <bowiebks at isomedia.com>
>>> What an odd statement.  Dare I say that Steve has a different 
>>> perspective
>>> on
>>> the cost of records and shipping than do many collectors?
>> No...I'm trying to live on a VERY minimal pension...which allows for the
>> purchase of a very few 78's...but NOT for the 21st-century postage costs
>> to get them up here to Oshawam Ont'o., Canada...?!
>> Steven C. Barr
> That's exactly my point,  Steve.  You are  somehow extrapolating that
> because you are on a tight budget and can't afford postage that somehow 
> this
> indicates the immediate Decline and Fall of Record Collecting.  Not so.
> I won't be buying an iPhone any time soon,  but I wouldn't say that the
> industry is going to exactly collapse without me!    If I go out in the 
> rain
> without an umbrella,  I don't assume that everyone else is going to get 
> wet,
> too.
> BTW I am sure you have duplicates and other surplus records which you 
> could
> sell and/or trade to other collectors,  with little or no cash outlay on
> your part.  I know a couple of collectors who do just that,  and turn up
> interesting things all the time.
>
1) We 78-L folks are constantly reading e-mails concerning 78rpm records...
and thus think constantly of "78's!" However, keep in mind that we represent
a VERY small minority of humans...EVEN North-American and/or European
humans...! The first group of 78 collectors (30's-early 40's) were driven by
nostalgia...they wanted to hear the music of their "younger days," and the
relevant records could still be acquired; add to that a fair-sized bunch of
folks who enjoyed and strove to collect the "race" (blues) records of a
then-recently "past" era! The odd thing is that 78's usually sold originally
for $1 or thereabouts, and have kept values in that range (blues records
excepted, of course...?!) ever since...!

2) My original post simply noted that I had to quit receiving and bidding
on British auction lists...because I could no longer afford the 
transatlantic
postage on the .5 lb. shellac discs. The records still sold for $1 or less,
but it cost $3 or $4 to have them mailed "across the pond!"

3) While I most likely DO own any number of duplicate 78's, keep in
mind that my "half-vast" archive SPECIFICALLY excluded 78's of
any noticeable value; I would always rather buy 100 "ordinary" 78's
for $50, as opposed to ONE "rare" jazz 78 for the same $50!

4) My comments per "the Decline and Fall" of 78 collecting were
NOT based on my eventual (not too soon, I hope...?!) demise...OR
my inability to afford purchasing 78's...! I just wonder about how
much longer the hobby will survive, given the harsh reality that there
exist VERY few young (<30) 78 collectors! Popular music of the
1900-1950 period has its own style(S?!)...and those of us who
love it are an aging, and as a result dying, minority. In fact, I would
predict that in another fifty or so years, ONE hapless 78-ophile
will suddenly inherit ALL the extant 78 collections...more or less
by default, since no one else will WANT the dommed things!
Now, some 78's may hold their value...items like original blues 78's
and, possibly (to some extent) original country records...?! However,
I can't help but wonder if, come 2050, ANYBODY will want, or
even be interested in, an original Campbell & Burr 78...?! Especially
since the record weighs around .5 lb. (230g) and thusly will be VERY
expensive to mail...?! I am anxiously awaiting the development of a
method to "digitize" solid objects...and then e-mailing them. Consider
this...a solid object consists of a finite (albeit VERY large) number of
atomic particles! One can now buy 2TB (2,000,000,000 bytes) hard
drives...and that quantity has been RAPIDLY increasing. If an object
contains two wacka-wacka-snillion atoms...and one can buy a HD
which stores FOUR wacka-wacka-snillion bytes...it then becomes
possible to create a data file which includes details on each atom in
this object...which in turn suggests the atoms could be REcreated in
accordance with the stored data...?!

Steven C. Barr