DISCOGS RATING SYSTEM

[ripblade]

Absolutely true, but then again, goldmine (and thus Discogs) says that even a near mint record has likely never been played. So how is one to grade it any way other than visually? This would logically seem to leave mint and NM records open to the possibility of having skips. Seems like a conundrum to me.

Yep, that's why some people caution against buying sealed records. I myself got burned that way...bought 5 records from a vendor (not through Discogs) that were supposedly sealed and sold as mint. Every single one of them was defective in some way, enough to suspect they were all resealed and not mint in the strictest definition of the word. One or two...maybe...but not all 5.

Buying online is risky business, especially when international shipping is involved. This is where knowing the reputation of the vendor is just good sense. Also look at their return/refund policy....who pays the return shipping?

 

[doctor fuse]

A general rule I use is that if the record is rated VG or VG+, and it is a very popular item for a not outrageous price (Sgt. Pepper for $14.99 - no skips or really any bad pops or clicks, but a high noise floor due to wear), then it is probably just Fair. If it is a lesser known or desired album, it is usually quite excellent sounding. Just my experience with Discogs.

 

[Wildcat]

My last couple of Discogs purchases with NM graded vinyl were VG at best. Prior to that, I had much better luck. At least with sealed records, I've had the best luck, nothing resealed by a dishonest seller. Except for one. It was a mid 60s release, one of my most-wanted items. The shrink wrap was intact, but had a small patch missing on the spine. The record was pristine...until I realized that the missing patch of shrink wrap was plastic that had shrunk. Somehow the record had gotten overheated at one spot, and it created a type of "pinch warp" on that side of the record. And it's audible throughout the record, albeit to a lesser extent the closer it gets to the label. Did I complain to the seller? No. It was a genuine brand new sealed LP from the 60s, and I knew it could be a crap shoot. It's not his fault. And it was still a thrill opening a record that was sealed nearly 50 years prior!

I just received two sealed LPs and they are flawless. I have two more on the way. I'm pretty much done buying used records. I feel the average condition overall during the past several years has declined greatly. Even on records I buy locally, I'm finding probably at least half are unacceptably noisy or worn, even though they look OK. In the 90s I had way better luck--just about everything was a keeper.

 

[Bourbon]

I've had mostly good luck on Discogs...with the exception of one overseas seller. Fortunately, it was a small sale, so I didn't lose much. I typically don't buy less than NM albums, just to be on the safe side. I usually costs a few bucks more, but I'm buying them for me and not to resell - so I want albums in the best condition that I can afford.

I've also found that most of the used records today are in noticeably poorer shape than those I bought 3-4 years ago. I suspect this is because people are trying to take advantage of the resurgence of vinyl album popularity and will exaggerate the condition of the records. I'm definitely glad I picked up almost all my favorite albums a few years ago, before the selection was picked over.

 

[mprince]

Agree with Wildcat, I use Discogs primarily now to buy new/sealed records, if there is something really rare that I could only get used I will look there, but my used purchases on Discogs have declined as I have grown tired of buying NM rated stuff that is VG in reality. Have not complained to sellers or returned anything as I've learned that's how DIscogs is, I just buy less from there now.

 

[parman]

I've also found that most of the used records today are in noticeably poorer shape than those I bought 3-4 years ago. I suspect this is because people are trying to take advantage of the resurgence of vinyl album popularity and will exaggerate the condition of the records.

Totall agree, the amount of used record has shrunk so now people are selling the bottem of the bin stuff and bumping up the rating to get more money. I also see records being called rare that aren't rare pressings.

 

[DustyOldPile]

A good Discog'er will under-estimate the condition, not over-estimate it. Get your money back.

 

[Lapslah]

Maybe it's people trying to dump stuff, but I think it also might be that the vinyl resurgence has resulted in more people on Discogs who aren't the serious collectors that used to be the norm, and they honestly don't know any better. I'll admit that when I first started cataloging my collection, I graded things "by the seat of the pants" without knowing what the criteria were. I've since "evolved". Then again, I've never sold anything there and don't plan to, so my grading is for my own reference.

 

[Wildcat]

I've also found that most of the used records today are in noticeably poorer shape than those I bought 3-4 years ago.

I truly feel the heyday of quality used vinyl ended within this decade. Even back in the mid 2000s, I could still find used records (even locally) that were for the most part keepers. It was maybe one in ten or twenty which would be unsatisfactory, and they were inexpensive enough that I could easily get another copy to try. Lately my stack of rejects is growing, and I have to much of a conscience to want to bother trying to sell them.

Part of the problem is visual grading vs. play grading. Dealers don't have time to play grade, but many who do that seem to have stone ears since I've purchased play-graded records that arrived here with noticeable wear (aka "groove burn") or more than "a few ticks and clicks here and there." But mostly for me, it's the wear. I will handle a few minor ticks here and there, but listening to the last half of an album side which has been shredded into distortion pretty much guarantees I won't be listening to it ever again. My last trip to a local store, where I bought eight or nine titles, resulted in four that looked nice but were unsuitably worn.

 

[DustyOldPile]

I wonder how many of those of you with complaints have a RCM?

Sellers of large lots of records don't have time to clean them all and/or play them all and use the same quick visual look to grade them that you use in record store yourself when considering buying one. It's an imperfect system.

Since getting an RCM, I have found 'budget' records that end up sounding way better than they visually have a right to more often than not. Noise *can* be due to wear but *usually* is mostly due to filth. Get rid of the filth = get quiet records, despite -- to a degree -- what they look like.

 

[patient_ot]

I wonder how many of those of you with complaints have a RCM?

I have an RCM. I also use strong enzyme cleaner, not weak one step. And I've received overgraded records from buying online. Not just at Discogs but other places too. In general, I don't like to buy used vinyl online.

 

[patient_ot]

Yep, that's why some people caution against buying sealed records. I myself got burned that way...bought 5 records from a vendor (not through Discogs) that were supposedly sealed and sold as mint. Every single one of them was defective in some way, enough to suspect they were all resealed and not mint in the strictest definition of the word. One or two...maybe...but not all 5.

Buying online is risky business, especially when international shipping is involved. This is where knowing the reputation of the vendor is just good sense. Also look at their return/refund policy....who pays the return shipping?

There are a few dealers out there that specialize in selling resealed cutouts from the 70s and 80s. You do have to be careful with those, because depending on how the record was stored over its lifetime, it may be quite warped. I've been lucky with sealed NOS and have had others that I've had to return or get a refund on. It's a gamble.

 

[Wildcat]

I wonder how many of those of you with complaints have a RCM?

Ultrasonic first, then clear water rinse and vac on a record vacuum. It's helped some of the noisy vinyl (not all), but for worn grooves it will do nothing (as expected). One of my classical purchases took a couple of cleanings before it cleaned up suitably, although too much ultrasonic will dull the highs on a record.

 

[Condorsat]

IMHO ... buying online requires some experience ... from the school of hard knocks. But ... it can still be rewarding.

Agree that the legacy Vinyl market is not what it used to be ... however I had really good Vinyl hunting year in 2017 ..
which included some really nice pressings purchased online and some titles I've been looking to get for some time.

In the words of the Peter Gabriel song "Don't Give Up".

 

[DustyOldPile]

although too much ultrasonic will dull the highs on a record.

Which is why I'm still not totally sold on ultrasonic. A good quality record cleaning fluid and a good RCM are hard to beat. Ultrasonic still requires the RCM to clean it off, and/or it suffers the same fate as the spin clean, the cleanest wash is the first one -- as the bath becomes more and more contaminated. Not to the same degree as Spin Clean, but... Point is, if you don't vacuum it off, you're left with contaminants from the bath, or that's my understanding.

I'm still a huge fan of Nitty Gritty / Record Doctor V type cleaners because nothing ever touches the grooves after they've been cleaned, until you put the record on your turntable. There's no flipping the clean side over to the platter that just previously held the filthy side.

I can't be happier with the combination of record cleaning fluid, a paint pad, and the Record Doctor V. It will take quite a sales job and a lot of evidence to budge me.

 

[kermit z]

My experience on Discogs has been good. The grading has been about right. My only surprise was 1 seller out of Japan and the cost was the highest I had seen, and it was not listed in the ad. But I do agree, as soon as I get them they go on the RCM.

 

[Ken Boyd]

I have had no problem with Discogs, anything that I was not happy with was given a complete refund, including new seal records. Most of the sellers don't even ask you to send back the item in question, not worth the cost of shipping. I received a sealed copy of a Evansence record the other day, the problem was in the pressing, so it had nothing to do with the sellers grading, as the record was still sealed. Even beyond my request the seller refunded my money.

As far as Barter Town, I am not interested in buying music there, first how do you search for specific pressings or specific releases. IMO Bartertown is more for someone who just wants some records and happens to see something that they might like. And then most of what I see, I can find better copies for less money. Much of what I have seen I have seen at thrift stores for 50 cents or less, and I don't even have to pay shipping. I am sure there has been some good items sold thru it, but it has to be when it comes up for sale rather then when I am wanting to buy something. On discogs or even eBay I can type in the release number and come up with choices to pick from.


For the most part sellers don't do play grading, they do a visual grade. So if a record has some issues that can only be identified via playing the entire record, they wouldn't know of that problem. Just request a refund if your unhappy, most of the time you they will comply, and the ones that won't don't buy from them again. And you have to be honest as well, don't expect more than your paying for. Most of the sellers tell you of spits in the seams of the covers or bent corners, in the description. A seller that just list a grading, offers no other description and has it priced at the lower end of the price range, you might think twice about purchasing from that person.