Slight addendum re OJCs: the series begins in 1982, and barcodes arrive on the back of OJC record jackets circa 1985-86. I am not sure how well-aligned the sought-after early OJCs are with pre/post barcode eras. The chatter tends to be that the pre-barcode ones are reliably AAA but I have not researched that to any meaningful extent. Comments welcome/solicited from those who know more.
The back covers look exactly the same is the originals. Here in Europe, as the pressings were made by Bernard Mikulski in Germnay, they put the name of the company and the address, which was really ugly and not appropriated, to me.
Great points, especially the parts at the end about curation. For most people I think it’s important to not get sucked into compulsively hoarding thousands of records. I’ve heard some people say “don’t buy more records than you have time to listen to.” I think that expresses it very well.
I clean second hand records with a micro fibre cloth which I wet with distilled water then I spray some record cleaner and wipe gently with a lint free soft cloth then use an antistatic carbon fibre brush to finish off. About 5 mims and mostly removes the pops and crackles which are embedded grime.
Great tips! That was twelve really great lessons, and I learned a lot of things that I didn't know before. Also, I couldn't agree more on two points that you made: (#1) "it's a hobby, not a retirement plan" and (#2), "trust your own ears". All in good fun, hey? I'm looking forward to your next video. Cheers!
As time has gone on in my record collecting experience I’ve definitely chilled out on trying to find mint LPs. I love finding original copies still, but now I really don’t care much if they are in VG- or VG shape. I have learned to just mentally block that out and enjoy the music. Loud skips and pops are a no no however. Having a nice cartridge and preamp are far more important than chasing the cleanest vinyl out there. Just my advice.
SUBSCRIBED AND LIKED. JUST STARTED COLLECTING VINTAGE RECORDS, SERIOUSLY, BEFORE THE START OF THE PANDEMIC, THOUGH I HAD A SMALL COLLECTION SINCE THE EARLY 70S. I COLLECT DIFFERENT GENRES, BUT I AM MORE FOCUSED IN JAZZ. I HAVE A SIZABLE CD COLLECTION, AS WELL, BUT MY RECORDS ARE CATCHING UP. I AM VERY PICKY IN BUYING LPS, MAKING SURE THEY ARE NOT SCRATCHED AND ARE CLEAN. LOOKING FORWARD TO WATCHING YOUR FUTURE VIDEOS.
Great video, Alan. I am in lock-step with you, regarding being a VG+ used record buyer. There are instances when a VG copy plays better than graded and I’m good with that. I recently scored a super cheap, deep groove, first press record from one of the marquee Jazz labels. The seller graded the album as G+ and when I got it on the turntable, I could verify the grading. It’s not louder than a “Girl Scout Campfire” as S’mores are roasting and it plays through without any skips. It’s okay, the surface noise doesn’t completely overwhelm the music, but during the quiet passages, and between tracks, you can hear the crackle. it’s not to up to my usual audio standards, but maybe after a deep cleaning, the sound quality could improve. I’ll keep it until I can upgrade to a cleaner copy or when the label reissues the title, I’m sure I can double my money when I decide to resell it.
Thanks. I find there is crackle, and then there is crackle. Sometimes it is unbearable yet on another record a seemingly equivalent amount of noise may seem only a minor issue. Possibly something to do with the way certain pressings are in physical terms, possibly the nature of the music. Who knows? But we've all got a G+ record we're hanging onto.
ZERO Lies Detected regarding: “there is crackle, and then there is crackle.” I placed the cheap heat in the HumminGuru, thinking I could satisfy my OCD, hoping it could tame some of the crackle, but it is what it is, sir. My buddy told me: “Enjoy the win of getting a G+ classic under $15.”
A really great analysis. As a CPA, I agree that probably about 25% of median value is about what you might get. And that's if you have a good collection.
Great video with some really incisive commentary. Hear hear on McLaughlin and Weather Report. I must do some pruning of my collection this summer. It's getting out of hand!
Another informative and great video - Thank you. Wirh a little over 3.000 records, I’m approaching “the point of curating” so thanks for the push and encouragement. And “A power-sanders convention going on” made me laugh out long and loud... wonderfull.
Thanks Alan, very helpful. I heartily agree about opening your mind and I am always exploring the edges of the jazz I enjoy. To that purpose I will often take advantage of a listening station to not only assess quality but fit for my tastes if it's an album I don't know. In addition, I've learned the hard way that buying in a rush is a bad idea as I have ended up with some duds due to urgency/ lack of research. Time to take your advice about curating my collection...
Superb video Alan! Well done, very well said. One of the most useful YT videos that compelled me to watch from start to finish! So true on all counts, especially the 'true value' from discogs. Thanks again. I'll want to add a link to this video on my next YT video. Cheers
This was a great video. It has inspired me to trim down the fat! I have been putting everything in a spreadsheet beside Discogs. How do you file your records? I am in the middle of doing so know. I have a lot of audiophile (tone poets, AP prestige series etc…) and used recordings. I shelf my used by alphabet and genre (all my jazz together and rock etc..). I shelf my audiophile by series. I also use a color label (mono,stereo,45 Rpm series etc) I am far from being a nerd but this has come about gradually as I tried to make sense of my collection. I only have about 1500 records so I want to get a Handel on it now before it is too late. What say you!
Interesting question. I used to think the answer to how to file your records was more obvious than I think it is now. I've gone through a couple of approaches and there may be a third one on the horizon. For context, my interest in collecting records is 90% for the joy of listening, 5% because I love holding and reading record covers, 5% out of interest in music history, and 0% for investment value (I'm a realist on that score; the destiny of my collection is almost certainly just as a headache for my kids). Records only stay in the house if there's a reasonable chance I'll play them in the next year or so. That means 1500-2000 is probably the max. I'm not setting up a Library of Congress shadow collection! My first system: alphabetical by artist. That worked until I had about 750 records. Then I began to forget I had certain things. Some stuff didn't get played and I also ended up buying records I already had. My second (current) system: separate by album genre, then alphabetically by artist. My genres are: Latin, Jazz, Brazilian, Reggae, Rock Pop & Folk, Soul & Hip-Hop, Country. There are at least 100 in each genre except for Country where I only have a few dozen classic records. There are about 1000 in Jazz, and about 450 in Rock Pop & Folk. This has worked OK until recently, but now the same issue which appeared in the general collection when I had about 500-750 records is happening within the Jazz category. And that's about the only area where I'm buying records these days. The solution I'm toying with, within the Jazz category, is by label and then by artist. In years past I would have thought that was a ridiculous idea. Why would I separate my Prestige Coltranes from my Atlantic Coltranes from my Impulse Coltranes? But it's become more accessible as a strategy as I have learned more. In particular doing these label guides has taught me a lot about the different phases of certain artists' careers. I don't think that strategy is possible for someone who doesn't know quite a lot about jazz labels: not that I'm any great shakes, but I've put in the hours in recent years and that's one of the benefits. I don't think personally I would ever separate out audiophile pressings or 45rpm 12" pressings or what have you. All very well for some but for me it either sounds good or it doesn't, and if it doesn't then I'm not keeping it, and if it does it goes in with everything else. Plus usually I'd rather have a slightly crackly OG than a pristine new version, but that's just me. A longer reply than I thought I'd give! Clearly I've thought about this too much lol.
@@TenMinuteRecordReviews Thanks for answering. It is very hard to come up with a doable system. I like you enjoy the music, my nephews will have to figure out what to do with it when I’m gone. My wife will not touch it since she says it is “elevator music”!
It is crazy how much tastes can change in a short time. Gone from obsessing over guitar hard bop to Latin jazz and vibes to bossa nova in a couple years. And to add on to lesson 3, there are plenty of 80s Japanese reissues of Blue Note albums that sound fantastic. There are even some 90s reissues from the US that are great and can be significantly cheaper than older pressings. For example I got a '98 pressing of Grant Green's Street of Dreams NM for 40 Euros total
Yes, the bargains are there to be had. As rich and pristine as the sound of early pressings are, I don't really feel like refusing to pursue them is some sort of compromise on quality, because frankly at today's prices original Blue Notes can cost as much as a nice vacation. Not really in reach for 99% of listeners. One needs magic ears and deep pockets to make it worthwhile.
I have only regretted getting rid of two jazz records - Now He Sings, Now He Sobs and Bright Size Life. Both were records I found super cheap when I was first discovering jazz, and had seen on a few 'best of' lists. Both were far too abstract for me at the time. As my tastes developed I started to love Chick Corea and was thankfully able to get the Tone Poet of Now He Sings. I still don't love Pat Metheny but I've been falling into the ECM rabbit hole and that Bright Size Life, which I bought for $4, is now nowhere online for less than $40. Hoping to find it languishing on a budget bin again someday. But I do agree with getting rids of records you don't listen to. And also on John McLaughlin - don't love him in general, but would recommend his album Extrapolation which is much more post-bop rather than fusion.
Interesting! Thanks for the tip re JMc. For me, it’s the Conte Candoli/Shorty Rogers record put out under the group name The Five. Got it in an auction lot, and in my early days as a collector I turned my nose up at most things West Coast. Gave it away. Years later, heard it playing at a friend’s house, and thought: “what’s that, it’s incredible!” Since repurchased for more than that original lot of records cost me lol.
'Always a nice surprise to get one of your longer form videos, Alan. Thanks. And as for your thoughts on curation, I'm with you. I've moved from "warehousing" mode, to more of a "gardening" analogy; adding, yes, but weeding and pruning are essential to effective management and ultimately, enjoyment as well. These days, I'm trying to stick to the "one in, one out" rule, and luckily for me there's an in-house auditor of this rule ;-)
The other day a colleague used a great term I hadn't heard before for the practice of bettering copies in ones collection, "up-minting." I like that; "up-minting" the LPs you love best.
Crown Records back in the day was literally made fun of. The saying around town was, when you bought one it would break on the ride home. Great looking covers but terrible vinyl. There weren't even made out of PVC.
Interesting! Can't say I'm surprised. There's a Chet Baker on Crown which I've nearly bought about ten times but then changed my mind based on prior experience. Tampa, which has a fair amount of west coast stuff, is also terrible.
Be careful with assuming under 99% is a concern. You can get unlucky with some buyers and Discogs moderation is erratic. I've only had about 15 nightmare buyers, sometimes scammers, usually just unaware of grading criteria, out of 6000 or so, but one could easily get these 'types' early on.
That's a good point. I will often look to see if there was some sort of pattern that happened early on and was resolved (as in the seller made some mistakes); or, as you say, whether it's a small sample. But still it's the only information one has as a buyer.
Most general auction houses will have modest record collections show up in their catalogue with some regularity. They may occasionally have speciality sales - one local place here has an “analogue sale” now and then where they feature things like records, stereo components etc. But in some respects you’re better off at a non-speciality sale where a few lots of records are available. Unless there are items of serious collector/retailer interest (like a big concentration of 50s jazz, or high profile rock bands) you are unlikely to face much competition. And retailers have a different price point: they are buying to resell at a profit. A collector, if he or she resells, would typically be happy to recoup cost. The upshot is that retailers will bail out of the bidding earlier. You have to do a bit of research, to check out when the sales are and what is available. Usually you can review the lots a day or so in advance. I should also have mentioned garage/yard/car boot sales. A bit more random but it’s amazing what turns up.
Brubeck and Getz would put most people off. It's a shame Jazz is still linked to sounds more common in the late 50s and 60s. Blue Note prices were allegedly elevated by Russian Laundering a few decades back, a lot of the catalogue is very average, but goes for silly money. Dynaflex tend to sound great!
@@TenMinuteRecordReviews I can see you find this type of music appealing, or some of it from your reviews. But many people don't who, when exposed to other types of Jazz, are surprised it exists, or is even called Jazz. I speak from experience as I ignored Jazz until I was 18/19 as I assumed it all sounded much like Armstrong, Parker, Ellington, Rollins, Mulligan, Evans, Brubeck, early Davis/Coltrane, etc sounds which for me were annoying, superficial and very tedious. These names are still the folks who get most of the hype, publicity.
@@brucevair-turnbull8082 If you receive royalties from this 'quality' of sound. It's a real shame so often the inferior products get so much traffic- same with rock/pop, classical, soul, etc.
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
Slight addendum re OJCs: the series begins in 1982, and barcodes arrive on the back of OJC record jackets circa 1985-86. I am not sure how well-aligned the sought-after early OJCs are with pre/post barcode eras. The chatter tends to be that the pre-barcode ones are reliably AAA but I have not researched that to any meaningful extent. Comments welcome/solicited from those who know more.
The back covers look exactly the same is the originals. Here in Europe, as the pressings were made by Bernard Mikulski in Germnay, they put the name of the company and the address, which was really ugly and not appropriated, to me.
Great points, especially the parts at the end about curation. For most people I think it’s important to not get sucked into compulsively hoarding thousands of records. I’ve heard some people say “don’t buy more records than you have time to listen to.” I think that expresses it very well.
That’s as good a rule as any. Though easier to say than to put into practice :-)
@@TenMinuteRecordReviews definitely easier said than done!
You are so right about how your tastes can and will change over time
Not change but progressed, the type of preference still the same and more.
Great advice, especially about trusting your own taste.
It's the only taste we have!
Never had a dynaflex record warp ever.
I clean second hand records with a micro fibre cloth which I wet with distilled water then I spray some record cleaner and wipe gently with a lint free soft cloth then use an antistatic carbon fibre brush to finish off. About 5 mims and mostly removes the pops and crackles which are embedded grime.
Great tips! That was twelve really great lessons, and I learned a lot of things that I didn't know before. Also, I couldn't agree more on two points that you made: (#1) "it's a hobby, not a retirement plan" and (#2), "trust your own ears". All in good fun, hey? I'm looking forward to your next video. Cheers!
Glad it was helpful - thanks for watching.
As time has gone on in my record collecting experience I’ve definitely chilled out on trying to find mint LPs. I love finding original copies still, but now I really don’t care much if they are in VG- or VG shape. I have learned to just mentally block that out and enjoy the music. Loud skips and pops are a no no however. Having a nice cartridge and preamp are far more important than chasing the cleanest vinyl out there. Just my advice.
This is excellent advice. Thank you.
SUBSCRIBED AND LIKED. JUST STARTED COLLECTING VINTAGE RECORDS, SERIOUSLY, BEFORE THE START OF THE PANDEMIC, THOUGH I HAD A SMALL COLLECTION SINCE THE EARLY 70S. I COLLECT DIFFERENT GENRES, BUT I AM MORE FOCUSED IN JAZZ. I HAVE A SIZABLE CD COLLECTION, AS WELL, BUT MY RECORDS ARE CATCHING UP. I AM VERY PICKY IN BUYING LPS, MAKING SURE THEY ARE NOT SCRATCHED AND ARE CLEAN. LOOKING FORWARD TO WATCHING YOUR FUTURE VIDEOS.
I used to listen to Jazz all night on NPR when I was a night owl. It is music to put on in the background while doing other stuff.
Great video, Alan. I am in lock-step with you, regarding being a VG+ used record buyer. There are instances when a VG copy plays better than graded and I’m good with that.
I recently scored a super cheap, deep groove, first press record from one of the marquee Jazz labels. The seller graded the album as G+ and when I got it on the turntable, I could verify the grading. It’s not louder than a “Girl Scout Campfire” as S’mores are roasting and it plays through without any skips. It’s okay, the surface noise doesn’t completely overwhelm the music, but during the quiet passages, and between tracks, you can hear the crackle. it’s not to up to my usual audio standards, but maybe after a deep cleaning, the sound quality could improve.
I’ll keep it until I can upgrade to a cleaner copy or when the label reissues the title, I’m sure I can double my money when I decide to resell it.
Thanks. I find there is crackle, and then there is crackle. Sometimes it is unbearable yet on another record a seemingly equivalent amount of noise may seem only a minor issue. Possibly something to do with the way certain pressings are in physical terms, possibly the nature of the music. Who knows? But we've all got a G+ record we're hanging onto.
ZERO Lies Detected regarding: “there is crackle, and then there is crackle.”
I placed the cheap heat in the HumminGuru, thinking I could satisfy my OCD, hoping it could tame some of the crackle, but it is what it is, sir. My buddy told me: “Enjoy the win of getting a G+ classic under $15.”
A really great analysis. As a CPA, I agree that probably about 25% of median value is about what you might get. And that's if you have a good collection.
Indeed! All the more reason to prioritize listening over other reasons for collecting.
Great video with some really incisive commentary. Hear hear on McLaughlin and Weather Report. I must do some pruning of my collection this summer. It's getting out of hand!
An evergreen challenge, I find.
Great video - enjoyed it. Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it.
Another informative and great video - Thank you.
Wirh a little over 3.000 records, I’m approaching “the point of curating” so thanks for the push and encouragement.
And “A power-sanders convention going on” made me laugh out long and loud... wonderfull.
Oh I think you’re there ;-). And thanks.
Thanks Alan, very helpful. I heartily agree about opening your mind and I am always exploring the edges of the jazz I enjoy. To that purpose I will often take advantage of a listening station to not only assess quality but fit for my tastes if it's an album I don't know. In addition, I've learned the hard way that buying in a rush is a bad idea as I have ended up with some duds due to urgency/ lack of research. Time to take your advice about curating my collection...
Thanks. And that curation advice, gotta say I am lecturing myself as much as the viewer lol.
Superb video Alan! Well done, very well said. One of the most useful YT videos that compelled me to watch from start to finish! So true on all counts, especially the 'true value' from discogs. Thanks again. I'll want to add a link to this video on my next YT video. Cheers
Thanks for the kind words Mark. Much appreciated.
Nicely done!
Thank you.
This was a great video. It has inspired me to trim down the fat! I have been putting everything in a spreadsheet beside Discogs. How do you file your records? I am in the middle of doing so know. I have a lot of audiophile (tone poets, AP prestige series etc…) and used recordings. I shelf my used by alphabet and genre (all my jazz together and rock etc..). I shelf my audiophile by series. I also use a color label (mono,stereo,45 Rpm series etc) I am far from being a nerd but this has come about gradually as I tried to make sense of my collection. I only have about 1500 records so I want to get a Handel on it now before it is too late. What say you!
Interesting question. I used to think the answer to how to file your records was more obvious than I think it is now. I've gone through a couple of approaches and there may be a third one on the horizon.
For context, my interest in collecting records is 90% for the joy of listening, 5% because I love holding and reading record covers, 5% out of interest in music history, and 0% for investment value (I'm a realist on that score; the destiny of my collection is almost certainly just as a headache for my kids). Records only stay in the house if there's a reasonable chance I'll play them in the next year or so. That means 1500-2000 is probably the max. I'm not setting up a Library of Congress shadow collection!
My first system: alphabetical by artist. That worked until I had about 750 records. Then I began to forget I had certain things. Some stuff didn't get played and I also ended up buying records I already had.
My second (current) system: separate by album genre, then alphabetically by artist. My genres are: Latin, Jazz, Brazilian, Reggae, Rock Pop & Folk, Soul & Hip-Hop, Country. There are at least 100 in each genre except for Country where I only have a few dozen classic records. There are about 1000 in Jazz, and about 450 in Rock Pop & Folk. This has worked OK until recently, but now the same issue which appeared in the general collection when I had about 500-750 records is happening within the Jazz category. And that's about the only area where I'm buying records these days.
The solution I'm toying with, within the Jazz category, is by label and then by artist. In years past I would have thought that was a ridiculous idea. Why would I separate my Prestige Coltranes from my Atlantic Coltranes from my Impulse Coltranes? But it's become more accessible as a strategy as I have learned more. In particular doing these label guides has taught me a lot about the different phases of certain artists' careers. I don't think that strategy is possible for someone who doesn't know quite a lot about jazz labels: not that I'm any great shakes, but I've put in the hours in recent years and that's one of the benefits.
I don't think personally I would ever separate out audiophile pressings or 45rpm 12" pressings or what have you. All very well for some but for me it either sounds good or it doesn't, and if it doesn't then I'm not keeping it, and if it does it goes in with everything else. Plus usually I'd rather have a slightly crackly OG than a pristine new version, but that's just me.
A longer reply than I thought I'd give! Clearly I've thought about this too much lol.
@@TenMinuteRecordReviews
Thanks for answering. It is very hard to come up with a doable system. I like you enjoy the music, my nephews will have to figure out what to do with it when I’m gone. My wife will not touch it since she says it is “elevator music”!
It is crazy how much tastes can change in a short time. Gone from obsessing over guitar hard bop to Latin jazz and vibes to bossa nova in a couple years. And to add on to lesson 3, there are plenty of 80s Japanese reissues of Blue Note albums that sound fantastic. There are even some 90s reissues from the US that are great and can be significantly cheaper than older pressings. For example I got a '98 pressing of Grant Green's Street of Dreams NM for 40 Euros total
Yes, the bargains are there to be had. As rich and pristine as the sound of early pressings are, I don't really feel like refusing to pursue them is some sort of compromise on quality, because frankly at today's prices original Blue Notes can cost as much as a nice vacation. Not really in reach for 99% of listeners. One needs magic ears and deep pockets to make it worthwhile.
I have only regretted getting rid of two jazz records - Now He Sings, Now He Sobs and Bright Size Life. Both were records I found super cheap when I was first discovering jazz, and had seen on a few 'best of' lists. Both were far too abstract for me at the time. As my tastes developed I started to love Chick Corea and was thankfully able to get the Tone Poet of Now He Sings. I still don't love Pat Metheny but I've been falling into the ECM rabbit hole and that Bright Size Life, which I bought for $4, is now nowhere online for less than $40. Hoping to find it languishing on a budget bin again someday. But I do agree with getting rids of records you don't listen to.
And also on John McLaughlin - don't love him in general, but would recommend his album Extrapolation which is much more post-bop rather than fusion.
Interesting! Thanks for the tip re JMc.
For me, it’s the Conte Candoli/Shorty Rogers record put out under the group name The Five. Got it in an auction lot, and in my early days as a collector I turned my nose up at most things West Coast. Gave it away. Years later, heard it playing at a friend’s house, and thought: “what’s that, it’s incredible!” Since repurchased for more than that original lot of records cost me lol.
'Always a nice surprise to get one of your longer form videos, Alan. Thanks. And as for your thoughts on curation, I'm with you. I've moved from "warehousing" mode, to more of a "gardening" analogy; adding, yes, but weeding and pruning are essential to effective management and ultimately, enjoyment as well. These days, I'm trying to stick to the "one in, one out" rule, and luckily for me there's an in-house auditor of this rule ;-)
The other day a colleague used a great term I hadn't heard before for the practice of bettering copies in ones collection, "up-minting." I like that; "up-minting" the LPs you love best.
@@mortofon brilliant! I’m stealing that.
Great video!
Glad you enjoyed it
Crown Records back in the day was literally made fun of. The saying around town was, when you bought one it would break on the ride home. Great looking covers but terrible vinyl. There weren't even made out of PVC.
Interesting! Can't say I'm surprised. There's a Chet Baker on Crown which I've nearly bought about ten times but then changed my mind based on prior experience. Tampa, which has a fair amount of west coast stuff, is also terrible.
Be careful with assuming under 99% is a concern. You can get unlucky with some buyers and Discogs moderation is erratic. I've only had about 15 nightmare buyers, sometimes scammers, usually just unaware of grading criteria, out of 6000 or so, but one could easily get these 'types' early on.
That's a good point. I will often look to see if there was some sort of pattern that happened early on and was resolved (as in the seller made some mistakes); or, as you say, whether it's a small sample. But still it's the only information one has as a buyer.
You mention auctions. Curious. Where do you go for live record auctions?
Most general auction houses will have modest record collections show up in their catalogue with some regularity. They may occasionally have speciality sales - one local place here has an “analogue sale” now and then where they feature things like records, stereo components etc.
But in some respects you’re better off at a non-speciality sale where a few lots of records are available. Unless there are items of serious collector/retailer interest (like a big concentration of 50s jazz, or high profile rock bands) you are unlikely to face much competition. And retailers have a different price point: they are buying to resell at a profit. A collector, if he or she resells, would typically be happy to recoup cost. The upshot is that retailers will bail out of the bidding earlier.
You have to do a bit of research, to check out when the sales are and what is available. Usually you can review the lots a day or so in advance.
I should also have mentioned garage/yard/car boot sales. A bit more random but it’s amazing what turns up.
Wow! Great stuff, I just discovered your channel and subbed you up! I talk about vinyl on my channel too, Thanks for sharing, Peace!
Likewise Mike, and thank you.
For me, crackles yes. Pops no 👍
Yeah, I agree. That repetitive click on an otherwise glossy vintage platter is a downer!
Brubeck and Getz would put most people off. It's a shame Jazz is still linked to sounds more common in the late 50s and 60s. Blue Note prices were allegedly elevated by Russian Laundering a few decades back, a lot of the catalogue is very average, but goes for silly money. Dynaflex tend to sound great!
I can't agree wrt Getz. But my rules for Brubeck are nothing with an orchestra, nothing without Desmond, and not too much of him in general.
@@TenMinuteRecordReviews I can see you find this type of music appealing, or some of it from your reviews. But many people don't who, when exposed to other types of Jazz, are surprised it exists, or is even called Jazz. I speak from experience as I ignored Jazz until I was 18/19 as I assumed it all sounded much like Armstrong, Parker, Ellington, Rollins, Mulligan, Evans, Brubeck, early Davis/Coltrane, etc sounds which for me were annoying, superficial and very tedious. These names are still the folks who get most of the hype, publicity.
@@blombidobadila8084 And the 'hype' is mostly fully justifiable.
@@brucevair-turnbull8082 If you receive royalties from this 'quality' of sound. It's a real shame so often the inferior products get so much traffic- same with rock/pop, classical, soul, etc.
Just to let you know that the colour is very washed out in this video
Yes, experimenting with a filter - but may not repeat!