Buying Records for the label, recording, or both?

[Wolfe]

As for the "collecting labels" idea, has anyone considered that it's essentially the same as buying different versions of the same material on different CDs? I'm prepared to bet that there aren't many 78 collectors who also own material on CD, that would automatically buy a duplicate CD of something just to get a different picture on the booklet or a different record company logo etc on the artwork?

In essence, that is all that a "record label" represents, surely? So to my mind, having the material is key and not having 3 or 4 different labels for the same recording.

I've rarely found the same recording on two different labels. It does happen, but normally it will be a different take, or from a different recording session for a different label. Often these will be accompanied by a pseudonym which I find interesting too.
Then you've got artists like Caruso, where you buy an acoustic original, or a later "electrofied" version, so in reality, they're not really the same recordings.

I can't say I've bought many duplicate CD's because of a different label or cover art- with the exception of Kylie but I do buy vinyl with different labels etc. Back to Kylie again, I've found some PWL pressing sound better than her Mushroom pressings & visa-versa. Often the flip sides are different too. This also occures on 78's as well.
I think I've got examples of just about every "Oklahoma" soundtrack pressings that was done over the years, including a CD lol. I find the label changes & physical make-up or the records interesting too.

Even with cylinders that I really like, I'll buy duplicates if they're a different take, or even mould number.

I guess it is a bit like stamp collecting, but far more enjoyable

If you had a Louis Armstrong record on the Decca label, but then came across an Aussie pressing of the same song on the Festival label for $1, would you leave it behind?

If the Armstrong was a title I liked, I'd pick up the Festival in the hopes that it might be a better pressing.

[Steve]

the Black Swan label is noted for some of the jazz musicians who had initial success there, such as Ethel Waters. Fletcher Henderson was the recording director for that label from 1921-1923.

Thanks David.

So would a Black Swan be worth considerably more than a later record? And does it matter who the artist is on the label?

I am interested in early jazz as it is one of the few musical genres from this era that I can consistently find pleasurable.

[Edisonfan]

Well, after doing this Poll. It looks like, most people buy records, for booth the label, and the recording. With 50% of you voting for this cateagory.

Paul

[Django]

I recently came into possession of a small stack of 10”, pre dog Monarch records recently, (one actually has a faint image of Nipper). The condition is not great. Are these desirable?

Thanks

[Pathe Logical]

Pre-dog Monarchs are certainly worth something due to their relative scarcity, regardless of artist or content. An interesting title or artist will help in the desirability of a certain record, and condition is also quite important. I really love to find pre-dog Eldridge R. Johnson discs, but pre-dog Victors are also interesting. You've piqued my curiosity by eluding to "a faint image of Nipper" on one of your records. I've been looking for a record with several, faint images of Nipper embedded in the grooves of the record rather than on the label. Is this what you have? If so, that would be something I would be interested in. But I believe these Nippers in the grooves only appeared on some 7" Canadian Berliners, but I could be mistaken...

Sounds like a fun batch of records,
Bob

[Orchorsol]

96.6% recording, 3.4% label - preposterously precise because it's easy for me to total each section of the spreadsheet I have listing all my records.

[Indestructible]

Good Question. I started out for the label pre 1930 and as the years went by now I'm all about the content . I've refined my collection to have some nice examples of early labels and have popular Fox Trot type music to play.

[epigramophone]

My record collection has a separate section devoted to unusual labels, irrespective of the content of the records.
They are mainly for looking at, and if I can match the records with their original covers, so much the better.

The rest of my records are primarily for listening to. I don't really mind if a Caruso for example is on G&T, Pre Dog or HMV.
The earliest pressings are nice to have, but the post war reissues on HMV VA and VB white labels often sound better.

In the case of jazz and dance band records I collect the bands that I prefer, whatever label they recorded on.

[DanP58]

Both . I buy records for the content, but also buy records to go with players ( Columbia , Victor, standard disc) usually a combination of both
Dan

[Django]

Pre-dog Monarchs are certainly worth something due to their relative scarcity, regardless of artist or content. An interesting title or artist will help in the desirability of a certain record, and condition is also quite important. I really love to find pre-dog Eldridge R. Johnson discs, but pre-dog Victors are also interesting. You've piqued my curiosity by eluding to "a faint image of Nipper" on one of your records. I've been looking for a record with several, faint images of Nipper embedded in the grooves of the record rather than on the label. Is this what you have? If so, that would be something I would be interested in. But I believe these Nippers in the grooves only appeared on some 7" Canadian Berliners, but I could be mistaken...

Sounds like a fun batch of records,
Bob

The dog is on the label. On the label, you can see that the artist name and song title are lightly inscribed, (but they misspelled the artist’s as Moyers). There is also a date, 2-6-02. Other examples have either Victor or Eldridge Johnson labels. All are 10”.