2. analog
  3. 1198677127

How many LPs is enough?

Right-- the answer is "Just a few more..." However, here is where I am and what I'm thinking: The last three times I was in my local used/thrift shops, I came across a few that I was not quite sure if I already had, or whether I had that pressing. I wondered if I need to carry a Blackberry (anathema to my analog way of life) with my collection downloaded so that I could avoid this kind of dilemma.
I only own about 700 or so titles, spanning classical box sets to recent limited-release albums. I realize that this is nothing compared to most of you, but I donate what I upgrade and I sell what I do not enjoy listening to. I maintain an Excel database of what I have, and enter each upon cleaning and test-listening; I don't just buy 'em and throw 'em in a bin. While it is rather engaging to compare, say, six versions of Bolero or Beethoven's symphonies 1-9 to determine which sounds best, am I really going to listen to the other five once this is determined? Likewise, while I own a stereo and mono version, and often an audiophile reissue, of most of my favorite late '50's through '60's jazz, surf, folk, and psych, it usually turns out that one or the other sounds significantly better. My overriding rationale is that I don't really need more than a one-year supply of one title per day. While building my collection, I have enjoyed making the comparisons or searching out the missing performance when it comes to classical, but nobody who I expose to this stuff is interested in making these comparisons-- they want to hear the vinyl magic, so I always pull the superior recording.
Maybe I only need about 300-400 titles of what I consider best of the best. Even when and if I retire and have more free time, I'm not sure that I would listen to more than one LP per day, and this gives me a year of no-repeats. Of course, my husk can still haunt the local thrifts and resale shops for that fifty-cent, mint six-eye Kind of Blue, so long as I immediately sell my two-eye... Has anyone else come to this conclusion? Am I to be immediately and henceforth banished from the Brotherhood of Crusty Vinyl Seekers after having my stylus bent?
morgenholz
thomasedison
34 posts
 
I'm also lucky enough to work at home. My work desk is at the back of my listening room, so I get great sound all day long. I used to listen all day to my digital music collection from my computer hooked up to my stereo, so I would'nt have to get up so often. But then I developed a bad back from sitting too long in one place.

My doctor just told me I need to get up every 20-30 minutes to stretch in order to prevent future back issues. So I've switched back to vinyl while I work, which forces me to take those stretch breaks. Now I listen to around 10 LPs per day...Doctor's Orders!!!
jyprez's avatar
jyprez
241 posts
 
I am more for quality than quantity myself. I started collecting jazz about 5 years ago and have about 1500 now (about 1/2 original issies, 1/4 early reissues and 1/4 newer (post danalog age)"audiophile" reissues). Average cost about $50/record but many are in the $75 to $300 range for a very nice early Blue note for example. I find that you very rarely find anything of quality in jazz at most used record stores, let alone the thrift shops so I dont bother with these. I have a few key sources (which I will not disclose), that have "the really good stuff" but at a price that is commensurate with the quality. You just cant expect to get a record from the early 50's in near mint condition for a cheap price I have found,(not very often anyhow. To avoid buying duplicates, I carefully catalog each record in Excel making special note of things like address on label, issue info, marks in the deadwax etc. All of this is critical to properly identifying the issue of jazz records which, unlike rock, were issued and reissued many times with varying quality in the heydays of vinyl.
sirspeedy
738 posts
 
I have met collectors,over the years who have told me they had to take out storage space to house their collections.
Take a look at the AVguide website.There is an article entitled "The World's Greatest Audiophile".In it you meet a collector who not only has a four story Equipment collection,BUT 260,000 LP's!!God only knows how many CD's the guy has got!
Suddenly my 2500LP,and 350CD collection seems small!
Best.
grimace
624 posts
 
Too many is never enough!
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,980 posts
 
Good vinyl recordings are great, but many are inferior by today's standards.

I recently bought a lot of ~ 40-50 albums of interest for ~ $2.00 each, a very good deal.

All were in good condition. A few recordings were top notch (Alan Parsons Pyramid for example). Many were just good or OK.

I suspect many sound better professionally remastered on CD these days, but CDs would cost a lot more and I only have so much time to listen (unfortunately).

I use my Denon CD recorder to transfer cuts or whole albums to CD for flexibility and ease of listening, including in the car when needed.

The Denon-mastered CDs sound as good as the originals to my ears even on my reference system....like vinyl transfered to digital should when done right.

My only concern transferring LPs to CD (other than the time required) is whether the recorded CDs will still work 20-30 years from now. Vinyl lasts and does not seem to deteriorate much or at all under normal conditions. I don't know that the same is true with CD media available for mass home recording.
More to discover