Vinyl Grading-What Did You Expect, Accuracy?



Today, the Venator covers a small but very important aspect of the savage's quest for vinyl. This being the dreaded mail order. Whether it's the "old school" dealer mail order lists, or the newer trend that is eBay dealer's auctions, in either case, your gettin' them rekkids through the mail.

While the more sporting and less obsessive of us might consider this form of hunting much likened to shooting fish in a barrel, or perhaps hunting & trapping on a game reserve, I for one do not. After all if your after the "big game" like, lions, tigers & bears so to speak, unless your property butts up to your local zoo your not going to have much luck "back yard" hunting in New Jersey.

Often times once you have located that "trophy" the biggest element of dissatisfaction in terms of collecting your vinyl prey through the mail comes from poor grading. NOTHING sucks more than to have a record that you paid top dollar for arrive in notably less than it's described condition.

To me a record is accurately graded M- when it's been opened but appears "new". This being both in relation to the cover & the record itself. Some VERY experienced dealers seem to think this grading should be left up to their interpretation. Personally, I think that's BS. Please read the following relevant portion of an email that was in reply to a letter I sent expressing my dissatisfaction with this highly experienced seller's grading. This being after I purchased a tidy sum of records from him in the last month and a half.

From the desk of a highly respected long term experienced record dealer:

*The majority of Lp's I deal in are used and about 30 years old. Even Sealed Lp's have sleevelines , especially US major Labels like Bell, Atlantic, Capitol etc.. Does a barely played record with some faint sleeve lines or occasional angelhair with no affect on sound still qualify as M-. In my grading scale, yes.*

Gee, that's not what it says in Goldmine & I HAVE received quite a few records in my short career collecting them that appear "new" and don't have these "acceptable flaws". Most genuinely sealed records that I have encountered look new, don't have "angelhair", "sleevelines", scuffs or spindle marks. The ones that don't appear clean and shiny are normally the albums that have either (a) suffered obvious mishandling or weathering as evidenced by their covers, or (b) underwent a surface splotching or discoloration due to a long term chemically induced reaction. Many sellers are quick to note such conditions. What am I missing here?

*If I was just dealing in Reissues this might be a different story . You can pretty much take any record and if you hold it under a 100 Watt light bulb find something wrong with it. Maybe the M- grade should be left out completely and we should just use EX as the highest grade. Might solve a lot of arguments and complications.*

Screw incandescent lighting my friend, this is the 21st century. For the average person, florescent lighting provides the closest likeness to sunlight and you don't even need any heat to achieve it. Screw wattage. What is this seller really saying here anyway?

#1) I know I am too lax when it comes to grading, maybe I should just use the Ex grade and leave the M- to other sellers that grade more strictly????

#2) Because my records are generally older original copies that cost the buyer 3-15 times as much money as a reissue, the same standards for grading don't apply to them????

#3) When you buy a record from me, always employ the Dale Carnegie method in which we ease the pain of disappointment by expecting the worst.


Why do we make excuses for people that make the mojority of their living selling records? And they wonder why eBay is kicking their little asses as of late...