[78-L] grading 78s with lamination cracks

Tue Nov 15 12:32:47 PST 2011

When I think of the overall condition grade (E or E+ or V+ or whatever),  I 
think of the kind of damage to a record that would come with 
middling-careless use over time...scuffs,  light scratches,  general wear.

Anything else in the way of condition issues  should be noted directly...be 
it a lam or other crack,  chip, an unusually deep scratch,  actual stripping 
of the grooves (as opposed to general wear), digs (skipping or not),  etc.

That seems to be how most of the good auctions list their stuff.

I have noticed in recent years that more auctioneers also describe the 
condition of the label.  So long as I can read it,  I'm not too worried if 
there is a sticker or other mark on it,  but I know that some collectors 
want the record to look great in all ways,  even the parts you can't play.

Taylor

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cary Ginell" <soundthink at live.com>
To: <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [78-L] grading 78s with lamination cracks

>
> Many people would consider any record with a crack as being in Fair or 
> Poor condition because, as far as they are concerned, it is unplayable and 
> therefore, useless to them. There are collectors, however, who are good at 
> repairing records, so they would be more willing to purchase a record that 
> would otherwise be in E+ condition if not for the crack. If that person 
> sees a record like this that has been downgraded as V+ (with the crack 
> mentioned), there's no way to know whether the record itself was in that 
> condition or that it has been downgraded because of the crack. The 
> condition of the surface without the defect is what the record grade 
> should represent, but if you "downgrade the whole record," as has been 
> suggested, then there could be confusion as to which was the actual grade. 
> If you look at Kurt Nauck's detailed grading analysis on his website, you 
> will note that the grades reflect the groove wear only. Any other defects, 
> including cracks, chips, warps, woofs, or what
> have you, are all mentioned separately. I'm wondering if Kurt can clarify 
> his position as to whether a grade should be lowered because of these 
> other cosmetic and/or deleterious defects.
>
> Cary Ginell
>
>
>> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:33:23 +0100
>> From: ekluwer at gmail.com
>> To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>> Subject: Re: [78-L] grading 78s with lamination cracks
>>
>> Yes, I also would mention the defect separately, but if the surface
>> (without the defect) would be graded say E+, I still would down grade the
>> whole record
>>
>> Erwin
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Matthew Duncan
>> <recordgeek334578 at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, I agree - separating the condition from the defect is the best and
>> > most honest way.
>> >
>> > For example, I wouldn't be impressed if I bought a 78 from Ebay or from 
>> > a
>> > set sale list graded as V+ that was actually E+ with a crack.that
>> >
>> > Easiest all round to say ...'E+ with 2" hc, nap' ...or similar.
>> >
>> > I tend to stay away from records with cracks or bad digs where possible 
>> > as
>> > I try to get 'keepers' rather than having to upgrade things. Having 
>> > said
>> > that, some records are so rare that I still buy them if they have said
>> > defects, I just bid accordingly.
>> >
>> >
>> > Different collectors have their own opinions on all these aspects, I 
>> > guess.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Matthew
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Cary Ginell <soundthink at live.com>
>> > To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>> > Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2011, 17:17
>> > Subject: Re: [78-L] grading 78s with lamination cracks
>> >
>> >
>> > I tend to favor separating the condition of the record from defects 
>> > such
>> > as cracks and chips. To me, the condition of a record determines its
>> > overall wear. A record can be E but have a hairline crack in it. To me,
>> > this more accurately describes a record than by just saying V+ with a
>> > crack. If I received a record described that way, the wear would appear 
>> > to
>> > be undergraded. It's not like if it were a coin, where a defect such as
>> > lack of luster or a ding actually devalues the condition. Records have 
>> > an
>> > added purpose for being able to be played. A record should be graded as 
>> > if
>> > the crack were not there, but noted accordingly. At least that's how I
>> > would do it. The same goes for a pit or a dig. I have many records that
>> > play great except for a flaw like this. I might bid on such a record if 
>> > it
>> > were otherwise in excellent condition, so long as the defect and its 
>> > effect
>> > on playing were noted in detail.
>> >
>> > Cary Ginell
>> >
>> >
>> > > Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:54:32 +0100
>> > > From: ekluwer at gmail.com
>> > > To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>> > > Subject: Re: [78-L] grading 78s with lamination cracks
>> > >
>> > > Causes: external pressure , temperature/humidity changes, etc
>> > >
>> > > In my opinion one has to lower the grade a notch or two...
>> > >
>> > > Erwin
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Rod Brown <raudiobrown at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I'm afraid this issue has probably been discussed roughly a 
>> > > > bazillion
>> > times
>> > > > already. If there's enough patience for one more go-round, I'd be
>> > > > interested to hear how list members take laminate cracks into 
>> > > > account
>> > when
>> > > > grading 78s for sale. On-list or off is equally fine with me.
>> > > >
>> > > > I've got some Columbias, Brunswicks and Okehs that I'll be selling 
>> > > > a
>> > few
>> > > > weeks hence, and many are in beautiful shape except for a few each 
>> > > > of
>> > these
>> > > > blessed cracks. Does one simply lower them from E- to VG+?
>> > > >
>> > > > Do we have theories (or facts) on what causes 'em?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for any advice, clues, etc.
>> > > >
>> > > > Rod
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > 78-L mailing list
>> > > > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> > > > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>> > > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > 78-L mailing list
>> > > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> > > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 78-L mailing list
>> > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 78-L mailing list
>> > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 78-L mailing list
>> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
> 