The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I see dealers who assign letter grades to their records, Kurt Nauck for example. However I don't know whether each dealer sets up his or her own scale criteria or if there is some sort of industry standard scale somewhere.

Clay

Thanks Clay! I guess I'll just have to watch what sells. I need to get to Wayne and see things for myself in that type of setting!

Wolfe wrote: Hey. If you don't know people that like Billy Murray that's their (your) loss. It's got nothing to do with being "crusty." Billy Murray is less crusty than any of these also-rans that make popular records these days.

Wolfe, I think we're gonna be buddies, whether you like it or not. A good conversation is often owed to those who are willing to rattle the cage a bit.

Note the switch of my icon to Maria Callas; I don't scare easily.

Okay, on to Billy Murray. I give him his due: he had a great voice, intonation, diction--and was a pretty good musician. But the trouble is that he was often paired with others who were clearly superior musicians, like Ada Jones. Ada Jones had great artistry; Murray did not.

Ralph

P.S. When people compliment Murray, it's usually a masked variant of "Isn't that voice ideal for acoustical records?" One can allow that. But does he ever tug at your heart strings? Make you feel like it was HIS song? Of course not. It's just "There's Billy Murray, singing somebody else's song very ably." He sang well for the recording horn; too bad he didn't reach through to the heart of his listeners.

P.P.S. Along those lines: I can't "lose" what was never given to me by the artist to begin with. I wish he was at least "crusty" as that's a genuine personal trait. You know what I meant. He's not crusty; you're crusty

pughphonos wrote: P.S. When people compliment Murray, it's usually a masked variant of "Isn't that voice ideal for acoustical records?" One can allow that. But does he ever tug at your heart strings? Make you feel like it was HIS song? Of course not.

Of course he does. His In The Land Of Harmony with the American Quartet and plenty of others I instantly identify with Murray. He's like a sip of a nice tawny port.

Who else was an appreciator (and champion) of Murray was the late, esteemed Jim Walsh, who for years authored the Pioneer Recording Artists column for Hobbies magazine. He wrote well on many aspects of Murray's life and career.

Back to the thread topic...

Among "Recording Artists," Murray was without a doubt the ultimate "Pioneer." Sure. So much so, that by the late 1920s some recording artist (as quoted in reminiscences published years later) was mortified that a studio had paired him with Murray, whom he characterized as already a "dinosaur" by that point. I'll give the citation once I come across the article again.

Aren't we still on topic, given that it's been changed to CRUSTY?

Oh, if I have to sip a tawny port so as to endure listening to Murray, I'd still rather not.

Thanks, guys, for the fun.

Not that this has anything to with cartoon clowns, but I ended up identifying 90 different selections spanning from ~1902 to 1911. A bit less than half are Indestructibles and the rest are Edison GM's except for 2 or 3 Columbia's that look like brown wax. I have 3 different Edison box printings, and 3 different Indestructible prints, most being blue label. I wound up with about 40 matched boxes, cylinders and covers. It was a big jigsaw puzzle.

Of the GM's only about a dozen are any good to play. I know, big surprise.

I guess considering most of these haven't seen the light of day in about 60 years, it's nice to let them out, even if they're crap.

I entered everything onto a spreadsheet, next I'm going to play every single one, rate their condition and record the good ones just for the [crap] of it.

Fran

Fran, those 2m Indestructibles are especially nice--and with so many original boxes. Good for you for creating such a list. I've never mastered Excel, etc.; am just content with Word documents.

Glad your thread is back in your hands, BTW; it became a romper room there for awhile.

Ralph

Clay, most record collectors have adopted a grading system that more or less adheres to the construct known as the "Goldmine" grading system. It is supported by the Goldmine music collectors' magazine and is described in detail in this link:

http://www.goldminemag.com/collector-re ... rading-101

Most collectors also use the "E" (excellent) grade and its +/- variations which is just below the M- (mint minus) category and just above the V+ (very good plus) category. Nauck gilds the lily in using gradations such as E-- to further distinguish a record just slightly worse than an E- grade. There is considerable picking of nits among collectors who use this system. Each grader has his own specific criteria that he follows when assigning the letter grades, so you have to be familiar with each grader to understand their tiny variations. But they generally follow the Goldmine guidelines.

gregbogantz wrote:Clay, most record collectors have adopted a grading system that more or less adheres to the construct known as the "Goldmine" grading system.

Thanks for that link. I've added it to "favorites."

Clay