I once read that in the world of antiquing, 10% of things disappear every decade.
That is, if 100 chairs were made in 1924, 10% of them would be lost in the first decade to natural disaster, overuse, disposal, etc. So 90 left after 10 years, then 81 left after 20 years, then 73 left after 30 years, and so on until after 100 years here in 2024 there are very few left. And therefore, if deemed collectable by the current marketplace, they are scarce and typically have value.

Does anyone know if this same formula applies to vinyl records? Vinyl does wear out, gets thrown out (remember the 90's), and is lost to natural disaster, etc. I'm interested to know if anyone has estimated what the "attrition" rate is for vinyl over the years. I'm guessing higher than 10% per decade but am not really sure. And does vinyl from certain artists suffer different rates? I'm thinking "yes" as some artists will always be more treasured/collected and thus better taken care of. Hopefully Stones vinyl will be around forever!!!

Quote
CrackBaby

Does anyone know if this same formula applies to vinyl records?

ABKCO just re-pressed their Stones catalogue - [iorr.org] . And the Stones catalogue 1971-2023 is also still available on Vinyl-LPs.

There's no statistic to be found on what the replacement rate of Vinyl-LPs is due to wear, damage, or loss. Same with the attrition (shrinkage) rate.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2024-09-17 20:15 by Irix.

Quote
Irix

Quote
CrackBaby

Does anyone know if this same formula applies to vinyl records?

ABKCO just re-pressed their Stones catalogue - [iorr.org] . And the Stones catalogue 1971-2023 is also still available on Vinyl-LPs.

I may be mistaken, but I think he isn't referring to product that is continuously made, but rather the original pressing. So for argument sake, let's say the debut album would only have 40% of those pressings still in circulation.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix

Quote
CrackBaby

Does anyone know if this same formula applies to vinyl records?

ABKCO just re-pressed their Stones catalogue - [iorr.org] . And the Stones catalogue 1971-2023 is also still available on Vinyl-LPs.

I may be mistaken, but I think he isn't referring to product that is continuously made, but rather the original pressing. So for argument sake, let's say the debut album would only have 40% of those pressings still in circulation.

53%

Quote
hockenheim95

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Irix

Quote
CrackBaby

Does anyone know if this same formula applies to vinyl records?

ABKCO just re-pressed their Stones catalogue - [iorr.org] . And the Stones catalogue 1971-2023 is also still available on Vinyl-LPs.

I may be mistaken, but I think he isn't referring to product that is continuously made, but rather the original pressing. So for argument sake, let's say the debut album would only have 40% of those pressings still in circulation.

53%

A freakin' mathematician in every room.

Not the replacement rate, the "attrition" rate. That is, what is the percentage estimate of the Rolling Stones ENHM 1st issue US album still in existence after 6 decades? Using the "antique" formula for 10% lost per decade, that means 53% would still be in existence. But I think that is high. Do vinyl records have a higher "attrition" rate. I think so. It would be interesting to know a good estimate from a knowledgeable source.

53% is correct. But do vinyl records have the same "attrition" rate as other antiques? I think much higher. I would be interested in knowing an informed estimate.

Would be interesting to know a real answer. Maybe the closest measuring tool is Popsike and Discogs. This makes me think of multi color 45s from Greece and Pakistan. Lots of collectors aren't aware of their existence. Take a look at those 2 sites and see for yourself.

Quote
CrackBaby
53% is correct. But do vinyl records have the same "attrition" rate as other antiques? I think much higher. I would be interested in knowing an informed estimate.

Dunno about that. If we're talking about how people collect them today, as collectibles, for sure.

But back then the teenies buying early 60s albums were playing the ever-loving crap out of them, so I'd wager it would have been worse for albums coming out of that era, at least until you get to later in the decade, or the 70s.

If only Harry Smith was still around ......



ROCKMAN

Not that fast, actually.
Let’s consider ‘The Rolling Stones’ mono 1964.
You can have many of them.
How many razors, trousers, refrigerators, bikes, belts,… from 1964 can you find, today?
Everything is preserved by collectors (coins, stamps, oils on canvas, books) lasts for centuries.
If you ask me a percentage, I can’t tell. I say ‘a lot’
Bye,

Vinyl remains good for a relatively long time. There will probably be an LP that breaks or is thrown away, but the copies that came into the hands of real fans or collectors 30 years ago will be well preserved and not simply thrown away.

CDs are unfortunately a completely different story. Entire collections perish due to the concept of disc rot (or bit rot/laser rot). The lifespan of a CD is estimated at 30 years.

Quote
Jalfstra
Vinyl remains good for a relatively long time. There will probably be an LP that breaks or is thrown away, but the copies that came into the hands of real fans or collectors 30 years ago will be well preserved and not simply thrown away.

CDs are unfortunately a completely different story. Entire collections perish due to the concept of disc rot (or bit rot/laser rot). The lifespan of a CD is estimated at 30 years.

Years ago, I've seen "rot" in a few of my CDRs. Never had any problem with the official releases. All the CDs I bought in the 80s are still absolutely fine.

C

When I was a youth, the "attrition rate" of your album collection was determine by whether you could "borrow" your mates' records at a faster rate than they could "borrow" yours

One thing to consider is if a record simply exists still vs. if it's usable. As an avid record hunter in thrift stores, I can't tell you the number of times I get excited by a find only to discover 15 seconds later that it appears the actual vinyl was scrubbed vigorously with steel wool.
With that said, the hunt is still fun, though not being anywhere near as fruitful as it was in the 90's. Yesterday, I found an first (good) pressing of Obscured by Clouds and a UK pressing, no less, here in Halifax, NS.

Quote
liddas

Quote
Jalfstra
Vinyl remains good for a relatively long time. There will probably be an LP that breaks or is thrown away, but the copies that came into the hands of real fans or collectors 30 years ago will be well preserved and not simply thrown away.

CDs are unfortunately a completely different story. Entire collections perish due to the concept of disc rot (or bit rot/laser rot). The lifespan of a CD is estimated at 30 years.

Years ago, I've seen "rot" in a few of my CDRs. Never had any problem with the official releases. All the CDs I bought in the 80s are still absolutely fine.

C

isn't disc rot more an issue of rare manufacturing defect and less to do with age?

i've personally never ran into any discs from the 80's (i have hundreds) that don't play well unless there's tons of visible damage (scratches) to the discs

i mean i'm sure they'll all become unbonded and start rotting eventually but for most of them that should take a long time

i've seen claims (maybe over the top) of factory made discs stored properly lasting a century or more

and with burnable discs its an issue with the dye those discs use loosing reflectivity over time and not being able to be read back by the laser

Quote
downagain
One thing to consider is if a record simply exists still vs. if it's usable. As an avid record hunter in thrift stores, I can't tell you the number of times I get excited by a find only to discover 15 seconds later that it appears the actual vinyl was scrubbed vigorously with steel wool.
With that said, the hunt is still fun, though not being anywhere near as fruitful as it was in the 90's. Yesterday, I found an first (good) pressing of Obscured by Clouds and a UK pressing, no less, here in Halifax, NS.

I've always wished that used record stall holders would stop that fatal practice of "cleaning" records with a cloth and lighter fuel or whatever evil solvent of their choice.

The record may then look cleaner to the unsuspecting buyer...

...but all that's happened is that all the muck and crud has been pushed down into the grooves, just where you don't want it.

By all means catch surface dust with a carbon brush or similar...but unless you're going to clean records with professional methods and equipment, just leave the bloody things alone !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-09-20 09:46 by Spud.

Watch record collector Joe Bussard clean a 78 disc .......



ROCKMAN

Just sling 'em in with the washing .

Be sure that you select the "Delicates" programme though .

[..and a slow spin, ideally 33 and a bit.]

I bought the format "in use" at the time. My "Sticky Fingers" was vinyl back then, in 1971. My "Hackney Diamonds" was luckily a Deluxe CD box with the great book, otherwise I stream HD through internet via Apple Play when I play it, I haven't played vinyl or CD or DVD in ages.

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course. If they make one single multicolored vinyl HD signed by the entire band, I am sure there would be a demand, and a high price. Supply and demand is the key.

Bjornulf

Quote
bv

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course.

There is a "slight" difference between a an LP in any physical format and an old coin or stamp: you can't use old coins and stamps, while records can and still give me great joy!

C

I think the 10-percent rule is close to reality. The thing is though that vinyl, in a way, has survived its "death" since the format still sells. Not in huge quantity of course.
And I think there are still a lot of 78 rpm records out there. True survivors...

Quote
liddas

Quote
bv

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course.

There is a "slight" difference between a an LP in any physical format and an old coin or stamp: you can't use old coins and stamps, while records can and still give me great joy!

C

You are probably not a collector of stamps, coins or bank notes. When I was just a kid age 10 I used to dream about having in hand the Norway #1 stamp issued in 1855, as well as the old shilling coins of 1875/76. Then 55 years on my dream as a kid went through, and I enjoy owning and looking at these rare and now vintage items. Just like I enjoy owning Sticky Fingers the original with the zipper, as well as Satanic, Exile, the flexi, Hurricane and so on and on. A collector is a collector. No difference.

Bjornulf

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-09-20 19:54 by Stoneage.

Quote
bv

Quote
liddas

Quote
bv

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course.

There is a "slight" difference between a an LP in any physical format and an old coin or stamp: you can't use old coins and stamps, while records can and still give me great joy!

C

You are probably not a collector of stamps, coins or bank notes. When I was just a kid age 10 I used to dream about having in hand the Norway #1 stamp issued in 1855, as well as the old shilling coins of 1875/76. Then 55 years on my dream as a kid went through, and I enjoy owning and looking at these rare and now vintage items. Just like I enjoy owning Sticky Fingers the original with the zipper, as well as Satanic, Exile, the flexi, Hurricane and so on and on. A collector is a collector. No difference.

Sorry...I had to know:
[northwindstamps.com]

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
bv

Quote
liddas

Quote
bv

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course.

There is a "slight" difference between a an LP in any physical format and an old coin or stamp: you can't use old coins and stamps, while records can and still give me great joy!

C

You are probably not a collector of stamps, coins or bank notes. When I was just a kid age 10 I used to dream about having in hand the Norway #1 stamp issued in 1855, as well as the old shilling coins of 1875/76. Then 55 years on my dream as a kid went through, and I enjoy owning and looking at these rare and now vintage items. Just like I enjoy owning Sticky Fingers the original with the zipper, as well as Satanic, Exile, the flexi, Hurricane and so on and on. A collector is a collector. No difference.

Sorry...I had to know:
[northwindstamps.com]

That was a rather ugly and cheap Norway #1 stamp, due to the almost complete covering cancellation stamp. The cancellation stamp define the value, I do have three different ones, each with a different history, nom of hjem cover up the stamp itself that much.

Just like I own two copies of «Sticky Fingers» the original zipper album. The first one is the one I played to the pieces during 1971 and so on. The other copy is «mint» without crackles, never played on a record playet. Both covers are mint, protected by a plastic cover.

When I wisited Exhibitiomism I was disappointed by the quality of the Sticky Fingers on display. It was warn out. None of my vinyl album covers do look like that. It is possible to play vinyl albums without wearing out the cover, not using them as beer mats etc.

Bjornulf

BV, do you own any Stones 45 rpm records?

Quote
The Sicilian
BV, do you own any Stones 45 rpm records?

Of course. My Stones collection is complete, including all singles and EP’s. Also the rare official release of CD Blues with a German vinyl album box, quite funny how the record company eas fooled by hard core fans advicing about the release.

It was easy to «buy back» into 1963 when I started collecting Stones back in 1971. I guess it is harder to get the 60’s singles and EP’ mint these dsys.

Bjornulf

EPs and 45s are my fetish. Love the different picture sleeves from around the world. Also, color vinyl is a bonus.

Quote
bv

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
bv

Quote
liddas

Quote
bv

Vinyl is for collectors. Like a stamp or coin collection. As for stamps and coins, they need to be old and rare to have a real value, like 100+ years. As for vinyl, they are manifactured in thousands, and most have mainly an affectional value. That is my opinion, of course.

There is a "slight" difference between a an LP in any physical format and an old coin or stamp: you can't use old coins and stamps, while records can and still give me great joy!

C

You are probably not a collector of stamps, coins or bank notes. When I was just a kid age 10 I used to dream about having in hand the Norway #1 stamp issued in 1855, as well as the old shilling coins of 1875/76. Then 55 years on my dream as a kid went through, and I enjoy owning and looking at these rare and now vintage items. Just like I enjoy owning Sticky Fingers the original with the zipper, as well as Satanic, Exile, the flexi, Hurricane and so on and on. A collector is a collector. No difference.

Sorry...I had to know:
[northwindstamps.com]

That was a rather ugly and cheap Norway #1 stamp, due to the almost complete covering cancellation stamp. The cancellation stamp define the value, I do have three different ones, each with a different history, nom of hjem cover up the stamp itself that much.

Just like I own two copies of «Sticky Fingers» the original zipper album. The first one is the one I played to the pieces during 1971 and so on. The other copy is «mint» without crackles, never played on a record playet. Both covers are mint, protected by a plastic cover.

When I wisited Exhibitiomism I was disappointed by the quality of the Sticky Fingers on display. It was warn out. None of my vinyl album covers do look like that. It is possible to play vinyl albums without wearing out the cover, not using them as beer mats etc.

as someone who collects vinyl but also plays them a lot let me tell you its also very disappointing when people can't take care of the records in side the covers

i once found a copy of jamming with edward at a yard sale with with a perfect cover still in the plastic with a slit along the front to get the record out

i couldn't get the record out because it was so tightly in the the cover and i didn't want to damage the cover so i just paid the guy the buck and took it home

but after some struggle i got the record out and it was completely coated on side b with dried coffee

someone had decades prior spilled coffee on the record and couldn't be bothered to clean it off before putting it back in the sleeve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2024-09-21 20:39 by ProfessorWolf.