Megadeth original pressings

http://www.amazon.com/Good-So-Original-Recording-remastered-enhanced/dp/B00356KMI6/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1296918491&sr=1-8

Have you kept the first prints of Megadeth's early albums?
I have the orignal except I colored the Megadeth logo with a purple sharpie (I stayed in the lines)

Amazon sellers always grossly overestimate the value of their items. I see the first pressings going on eBay all the time for a reasonable price.

I have two of those. Does that mean I can get $400? WOW!

SpectreFate wrote:

I have two of those. Does that mean I can get $400? WOW!

Isn't there like literaly millions of Megadeth's original pressings floating around?

troublemagnet wrote:

SpectreFate wrote:

I have two of those. Does that mean I can get $400? WOW!

Isn't there like literaly millions of Megadeth's original pressings floating around?

Thousands, yes.

If you play the remasters backwards, do you get your original pressings back ?

James B. wrote:

If you play the remasters backwards, do you get your original pressings back ?

Ha Ha!!

People are real asswipes. The japenese first press, which is rarer, averages about 32USD. Someone tell that guy to put the crack pipe down

Hey, if they can get it, more power too em. I'd like to actually meet someone who pays this much so I can laugh at them.

TheNazgul wrote:

Hey, if they can get it, more power too em. I'd like to actually meet someone who pays this much so I can laugh at them.

or sell them some of my other cds

I only own the originals. A lot of what was done in the remasters just ruined the songs to me.

DeathMasqueRed wrote:

I only own the originals. A lot of what was done in the remasters just ruined the songs to me.

they are a case of remasters gone bad, just like the ozzy ones.

My Peace Sells and So Far, So Good cds are original pressings, but Killing Is my Business and Rust in Peace are the remasters. Still am planning on getting the original Rust in Peace eventually. See it at the local used cd store on occasion.

I had the originals of everything so I never bothered with the remasters.

http://cgi.ebay.com/CYCLONE-Brutal-Destruction-86-SEALED-RARE-3000-1850-/120675061966?pt=Music_CDs&hash=item1c18cb50ce

Here's another that's grossly overpriced. I bought one whose number is somewhere in the 40's about a month ago for about 8.99

I saw the original peace sells on amazon for something ridiculous like 70 bucks several months ago.

Well I got the first pressing, the Holland issue for a measly 5 bucks (brand new) at a 2nd hand music store in Sydney here. So either the CD is really valued at 5 bucks or I found a total bargain!

Those 2004 remasters are CRAP.

skullkrusher wrote:

Those 2004 remasters are CRAP.

That's what I mean. Could the original versions eventually be worth more?

Give it another 10 years and they may be worth 50 - 60 bucks each.

In fact that may be what most older CDs will be worth in the next 10 years as most are likely to go out of print by then or be available only in very limited numbers.

To put it into some perspective 10 years ago both Megadeth and Slayer were moving well over 100k copies of their new albums in the first week of release, 15 years ago it was even higher something around over 500k for each band (Megadeth maybe even more). Turn to 2010 - 2011 and the last two releases of Slayer and Megadeth sold approx 34k - 40k each in first week of release.

And that's a massive fall in sales for 2 very celebrated bands. Most other bands sell less than 10k

Sure the Metallicas, Bon Jovis and AC/DCs of the music industry are still moving million of copies but even their sales are comparatively lower than what they were 10 - 15 years ago.

Changing demographics and consumer expectations will soon see the CD go the way of the vinly. Like I said in another thread, I doubt the CD will disappear but chances are it won't be produced in large quantities anymore. It all comes down to cutting costs and increasing profit - something Itunes can help with.

I don't think the artists necessarily like it, I think most even the newer acts still prefer the physical packaging to a jpeg of their album cover and mp3s of their songs. However consumers these days are no longer buying CD systems - the younger demographic is likely to have never even owned a CD player and most are just after the latest ipod fashion.

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

However consumers these days are no longer buying CD systems - the younger demographic is likely to have never even owned a CD player and most are just after the latest ipod fashion.

Whilst I agree with your general sentiment, I've got to call you up on that. The "younger generation" will all probably own computers and I'd be lying if I said my laptop wasn't my key CD player - it may be intended for other functions, but I know a lot of people who use their comps as CD players. Whilst I've owned a lot of discmans, I've never had a full blown stereo and would rather equip my PC with some stunning speakers than fork out for one.

Also, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "latest iPod fashion"? Clearly, by this point, iPods and their like are more than a fashion - they're exceptionally practical devices. I don't own one myself at the moment because my last one was stolen, but if I have the disposable cash any point soon, I fully intend to buy a new iPod because I love being able to have all my music with me on the go. Yes, I buy the CDs and love having the physical product but I also really appreciate the versatility that comes with something like an iPod as I probably listen to the majority of music outside of the house.

I remember when the remasters first came out there were dozens of the originals you could get dirt cheap. I have since seen them start to pop up again around here. I think people are just ditching their cd collections altogether.

Firstly, my sentiments were primarily about the type of people who listen to Katy Perry and other flavour of the day artists. In the past such music listeners used to purchase CD singles and from time to time the albums of flavour of the day pop artists. Nowadays, the type of people who like Katy Perry are more likely to buy their music via itunes and most likely do not own any cds and will never own any CDs.

More serious music fans are of course different whether it's because they are collectors or audiophiles. The serious music fans will always find some flaw with purchasing music in file format, preferring instead to have the physical product.

The current technology, however, benefits not only the younger demographic of Katy Perry and Lady Gaga fans but also the serious music fans like ourselves. You are completely right in saying the ipod is a practical device and, indeed ripping music on your hdd is imo the best way of experiencing a wide variety of artists while also preserving the quality of your music cds.

I'm not against mp3 devices such as ipods or ripping your music to mp3 files, far from it. What I'm not in favour of is purchasing music from itunes because that goes against my interests as a collector and as what I perceive a fan of the band. I like having the physical product and having the 'versatility' of doing whatever I want with it either play it as is or rip it in any format and at any bit rate on my hdd.

Itunes and similar services limit the consumer in what they can do with the music. In fact Itunes is more restrictive than a CD because with a CD you can play it on whatever and wherever, with Itunes music the licence is only for your computer and perhaps your ipod.

So don't get me wrong - I'm not against technology rather I'm frustrated by the new model of music distribution which is imposed on all consumers. It's fine if you like a song or two by Katy Perry but not quite the same if you are into collecting albums.

I do agree with you, but at the same time, I have to admit I'm a bit torn. I will generally purchase CDs because I'm a bit of collector and, hell, a lot of the music I want to listen to isn't available digitally (I'm looking at you, Dogs D'Amour). But, at the same time, there is a slew of stuff I will purchase digitally - for instance (and this is sacrificing all my credentials on this board, I realise), tracks by Katy Perry and Lady Gaga. They're not musicians whose albums I'm interested in, but I want a handful of singles and, as you stated, because they're not released on CD very often or in limited amounts, I'm happy to buy them digitally. It's impractical to buy the physical product with modern mainstream musicians simply because their marketing plan make very few concessions for it.

You're arguing that buying music on something like iTunes is restrictive and I used to fully agree with that, but it has loosened greatly over the last few years. Whilst iTunes is still a bit overly concerned with user licensing, you are granted access to your downloaded songs on around four or five computers. Any iPod linked to those computers, no matter how irregularly so, are also welcome to that music. It is certainly more restrictive than a CD, but the reigns have been loosened greatly in the last few years. Furthermore, the music is always in a high, relatively lossless format so I feel the audiophile argument is a bit moot. Having said that, I'm not much of an audiophiile so I'm probably missing something there.

As I said, I do agree with you for the most part. The key issue really boils down to the album format. In the context of a music industry still adapting to the digital age, the album is in a bizarre state of flux. It's not fit for the "modern consumer" model but is still lauded by those who are invested in relatively "classic" music (which, for some reason, primarily seems to be rock and metal fans like ourselves!). Ultimately, we're in a bizarre in-between period; I wouldn't dare buy an album on MP3 but a single or bonus tracks - why not? I think the online format as a whole is finding its feet still, but I'd rather have the music digitally than not at all.

Apologies for the probably incoherent ramble, it's been a long night.

No apologies needed. I loved reading your comment and these are the type of discussions I crave for.

You're definitely right about the in-between state that we're finding ourselves in at the moment. There's definitely a very practical solution behind services such as Itunes, and more generally digital music distribution. There's even a very green message behind it all, which whether directly or indirectly is being heeded by the great number of itunes customers.

I think the positives of itunes is that you are able to guilt-free and legally download music by artists whose few songs you might like but who may not fit along side your Megadeths and Slayers. In the past I used to buy greatest hits collections - for example, I like Journey well enough to just own a best of but not really interested in anything beyond that. However greatest hits work well with artists who have been around for a long time and can legitimately have a career-spanning retrospective greatest hits. The current Lady Gagas and Katy Perrys are still catching up.

But there's probably a few more positives than meet the eye with itunes. For one, it is less restrictive than radio airplay - listeners can enjoy a great catalog of mainstream artists that are not currently played in the top 10s and top 20s charts. There's also a degree of privacy - the metal fan in you can download the latest Lady Gaga singles and not be embarrassed by having to take one of her cds to the counter whilst wearing a Morbid Angel t-shirt.

I think in the long run, Itunes will probably win. There's certainly increasing demand for it and it's unlikely people will shun away. Itunes is likely to enjoy the same tenure if not longer than any of the physical media formats past and present. It's because of it's file format versatility that it will endure.

Obviously where the clash occurs is with those who like collecting albums. I assume it's akin to collecting stamps - a practice that went on a lot in the past seems to be a very antiquated hobby. With e-mail replacing personal letters, and with the post system increasingly using electronic bar code stamps, the contemporary philatelist has little in the way of collecting. Traditional stamps still exist of course but their usage is not as wide spread as it was several decades ago. It's likely the CD and Vinly will face a similar fate in the decades to come.

http://www.amazon.com/So-Far-Good-What/dp/B000002UDD/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1296965631&sr=1-2


New/Sealed copies are apparently selling for some pretty good money right now, but used copies are still fairly inexpensive.