Well how about that, Columbia House Record Club is coming back!

I'm interested!! I just hope "regular club price isn't $39.99".



http://www.stereogum.com/1850376/columbia-house-to-relaunch-with-vinyl/news/?utm_source=sc-fb&utm_medium=ref&utm_campaign

Vinyl ? Pass...

And that's why my vinyl collection is all used and under $10. I am not paying $30-$40 for a new copy of something I can get for five or ten on the bay or at a store. I would really like to help grow the vinyl community but I simply cannot afford those prices. It's cool that it has been re launched though.
Thanks for the info, mike.

The vinyl resurgence is the only hope this company has for still existing. Every other physical format is irrelevant at this juncture.

007 wrote:

Vinyl ? Pass...

Basing a business model off CDs at this juncture would be about the same as basing a business model off the potential sales of buggy whips or telephone booths.

S.D. wrote:

007 wrote:

Vinyl ? Pass...

Basing a business model off CDs at this juncture would be about the same as basing a business model off the potential sales of buggy whips or telephone booths.

Oh I fully understand, I just have no interest in vinyl whatsoever.

And who knows, maybe we can order 10 at a time under an assumed name and end up actually getting a good deal. I don't care what anyone says, when I was member of the CD club I was up to "buy one get two free" and that included box sets. I think I ordered The Police Message in a box for $40 and got two other box sets free. Now I doubt a new incarnation of the club will be like this but it will be interesting nonetheless.

007 wrote:

S.D. wrote:

007 wrote:

Vinyl ? Pass...

Basing a business model off CDs at this juncture would be about the same as basing a business model off the potential sales of buggy whips or telephone booths.

Oh I fully understand, I just have no interest in vinyl whatsoever.

Ok good, so far I have my real name that I will use to join and I'll use yours!. So far so good, 2 memberships only 3 more to go for a total of 5!

I like vinyl but the current price structure keeps me from buying much of it.  This year I only bought 2 new releases on LP format and both of those were for technical reasons.

1.  Iron Maiden - The Book of Souls.  The LP was made from a different master with better EQ choices that made it superior to the CD release so I chose that format.  Got it on sale for $22 which I thought was a good value for a 3LP set.  

2. Enslaved - In Times.  Bought the LP of this title because the CD was horribly compressed, the LP sounds MUCH better and has twice the dynamic range.  

As for other releases my format choices depended on what I considered the best available option.  In some cases that was a blu-ray hi-res release (Steven Wilson, David Gilmour), in some cases a hi-res download purchased directly from the band (Perfect Beings, Big Big Train), sometimes it was a CD quality download purchased via Bandcamp because the import CD prices were too high and last but not least I bought a few actual CDs when they were the best available option.

I can agree with that logic, S.D. I also would pay $22 for a 3 LP set new. I remember the new Bob Seger coming out a year or so ago and the difference between the LP price ($30) and the CD price ($12) made the choice easy. Some of the vinyl prices for a single album are just stupid. The FYE at the mall about 10 minutes from my house wants over $40 for Kiss' re released "Destroyer." That's ludicrous to me. I know it costs more to produce a large vinyl disc and more paper and cardboard than it does for a smaller plastic disc and a digibook or jewel case. I understand; I just don't think it should be almost triple the price of its CD counterpart.
The pendulum has swung in the other direction for me regarding used vinyl. I jumped in a few weeks back b/c I realized I could find a lot of my want list items much cheaper on vinyl than CD as they are more plentiful. I have 9 albums in my collection so far that cost me a total of $42. If I purchased those same titles on CD (either originals or remasters) it would have cost me about $200. My rule of purchase is "good condition, $10-15, and nothing I already own on CD."

At the moment we're dealing with an industry where demand is far outpacing supply. So few functioning vinyl production plants, many working on 24/7 schedules to try and keep up and still LP releases get delayed frequently because they just can't handle the load. That demand and the scarcity of available options in manufacturing mean prices will remain high for the foreseeable future.

Most of the bands I would be interested in buying vinyl from are from Europe and in many cases the LPs are only available as pricey imports. It's all just too much for my budget these days so I do without.

I was in a used LP store the other day (that's all they carry) and their used LPs in good condition were running from $15 to $30. So it's not just new vinyl that is overpriced.

I was in a used LP store the other day (that's all they carry) and their used LPs in good condition were running from $15 to $30. So it's not just new vinyl that is overpriced.

I have passed on a few used titles recently b/c of that (Exciter, Phantom Blue, WASP) and put them right back in the bin. I am willing to wait the same as I did when I started tracking down the missing pieces of my collection on CD nearly 10 years ago. Old age has taught me patience. Haha.

A band like Raven is a great example. I didn't get into them until 2010 with "Walk Through Fire" so I only own that and "Extermination" on CD. I listen to them on youtube and want their whole discography. But I would go broke buying their catalog on CD rather than album where they are a fraction of the price. This also holds true for a lot of the Shrapnel shredders (Moore, Macalpine, Friedman) where used vinyl is a much cheaper option.

Not sure I would sign up, depends on the quality of the vinyl product. The Columbia house vinyl releases back in the day sounded terrible and were on much thinner vinyl than the label copies. The cassettes sounded like 3rd generation copies. If it's good quality vinyl and the price point works, then maybe.

If I remember correctly, the cassettes were sparse in the way of packaging and had the two pink lines on the spine that made them stand out as a budget release.

Columbia House was basically identical to the store-bought versions (the only difference was the barcode), it was the earlier incarnations of the BMG club where you would get the cheap knock-off versions. The cassettes from BMG were especially cheap.

S.D. wrote:

Columbia House was basically identical to the store-bought versions (the only difference was the barcode), it was the earlier incarnations of the BMG club where you would get the cheap knock-off versions.  The cassettes from BMG were especially cheap.

I stand corrected! I thought it was Columbia House selling the cheap knock offs.

Columbia House got their stock from the main factory, they just did a separate printing run for the barcodes.

BMG was actually getting completely separate "budget versions" produced for them, licensed from the label but completed by the lowest bidder. They ceased this practice once CDs came onto the scene, from that point forward they also just bought special runs from the main manufacturers.

S.D. wrote:

Columbia House got their stock from the main factory, they just did a separate printing run for the barcodes.  

BMG was actually getting completely separate "budget versions" produced for them, licensed from the label but completed by the lowest bidder.  They ceased this practice once CDs came onto the scene, from that point forward they also just bought special runs from the main manufacturers.  

Ahhh... it was BMG I was thinking of then. Thank you, S.D. This kind of reminds me of the "Extended Versions" live albums that are out there now.

thejokeriv wrote:

Not sure I would sign up, depends on the quality of the vinyl product. The Columbia house vinyl releases back in the day sounded terrible and were on much thinner vinyl than the label copies. The cassettes sounded like 3rd generation copies. If it's good quality vinyl and the price point works, then maybe.

I never had a problem with the quality. In some cases I have 2 copies, one bought in a store and one from Columbia House or RCA Club (which turned into BMG). I can't tell a difference in sound, the only difference is the record club version seems to be pressed on 130 gram vinyl. Other than that they play identical. (I have two copies of Billy Squier "Don't Say No", one store bought the other the BMG version and they sound the same).

Hey guys,  good thread. I'm bumping it!   I've been on/off vinyl collecting since the 90s after I raided my Dads  collection when I started really getting into music.  I was browsing the web and came across, what I felt, a decent article about vinyl collecting after one of my buds was talking about going to Best Buy and loading up on some 5 dollar records they were having a sale on.  

http://vinyljunkies.co/vinyl-101-original-vs-reissue/

"If a company sources their vinyl pressings from a cd, the result will sound worse than a cd. That said, cheap reissues are often the only way to track down a copy of your favorite records. A recent series of Sun Ra reissues, pressed by Scorpio, were inexpensive and available at my local shop.  I bought them because I knew I’d never track down originals, but they sound rather bad. Just because it’s on wax, it doesn’t always mean that it will sound better."

Most vinyl I see out now a days are heavy 180gram...from band/record merch tables and websites.  I'm a sucker for the variant waxes artists release now. I figure if your paying 10 bucks in iTunes or for the CD, for a 6 extra bucks you can get a limited number pressing and it comes with a download code.  As for FYE, Best Buy and all the noise, I pass because I just figure its a crap pressing, with a crappy source since people weren't putting out tons of vinyl in the 90s/00's.

Over the years I have got to know a few of the employees at my local music haunts and a few weeks back I got into the vinyl conversation with one of them. "Mike" is of the opine that the bubble is going to burst soon when all of those who bought a second sealed copy or only bought as investment want to sell to get a return on the investment. Then there will be a glut and supply will catch up with demand. According to him, the sales are "meh" the last few months and maybe will pick up during the Holidays. Again, these are his opinions as someone working in music retail for a decade. I am not qualified to make an opinion as to the future of vinyl "collecting" and the VC; but rather an observation that people can't keep paying $30+ for new albums week after week and year after year. I would imagine that at a certain point there will be enough plants to keep producing and catch up and therefore prices will drop. Until that point, I will continue to be a miniscule part of the community but only on the used end.

I don't disagree. Vinyl is really expensive. Thank God for the $5, $3 and Make An Offer bins.

Has anybody heard any more on this, or is it dead in the water?

Highway Star wrote:

Has anybody heard any more on this, or is it dead in the water?

Columbiahouse.com is only DVDs/Blu-Rays, nothing about vinyl, so I'd say you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for the "12 LPs for a Penny" offer to come back anytime soon.

Didnt RCA also have a record club? I have a cassette copy of Rush's Moving Pictures and on the cover it states it was manufactured by RCA Music Service.