Thursday, 8 December 2011

Drug Test Numbah One

Is it true that when you pick up numbered records, a low number is more desirable?

My opinion is that it depends on what the record is, and how many it's numbered out of. A lot of time the answer would be no. For example, a test press is so limited that if you get any number you've struck gold. But if you get a low number of a large numbered range (e.g. number 8 of 300) then that's kinda cool and possibly slightly more desirable than (say) number 368. But it depends on the band and the record too. However, the one thing I am pretty sure nobody would dispute is that owning a number 1 is pretty much always going to be more desirable than any other number, to the point where it would probably make that one copy more valuable than any other.

Well, if that's true then it would seem that any other copies of the records I just bought must be pretty much worthless...

I recently won these three copies of the DRUG TEST / R'N'R Split 7" on eBay for the grand total of $18. I'm not entirely sure of the history of this record, but I think that there were only 100 copies of this split 7" made back in like 2003 or whenever and that was that. Then five years later or so, once both bands had broken up and disappeared into the mists of time, a different label (Words of War Records) decided to reissue it. The three copies I have just picked up are from that second (reissue) pressing.

First up is the 'Newsletter Edition'. Not sure why it's called that, but that's is what it is called. This is on light blue vinyl and the record has a small hole. I got number 1 of 52. What happened here is that there were 52 of the original sleeves leftover from the original 2003 pressing that got numbered and used to house this version. A cool way of bridging the gap between the original pressing and the reissue. Sell a reissued record in an original sleeve.

Next up is the pre-order version. Light blue vinyl with a small hole in the record. Number 1 of 50. Also features really crap cover art. Some dude with a load of needles stuck in him throwing up some green sick. Or maybe he's eating spinach a la Popeye. I'm not sure. I can't bear to look at it long enough to make my mind up.

And finally the 'regular' version. This one is on dark blue vinyl, has a big hole in the record and is not numbered. It comes in the same awful sleeve that the preorder version comes in, but the photo shows the back of the sleeve instead.

If anyone happens to have the mp3s for this then let me know. I need them & can't find them on the internet.

3 comments:

Lecky said...

I always like certain numbers over others, like #88 ala Youth Crew 88, or #138 ala Misfits but #1 is always a cool number to own.

Alternate 1995 said...

Personally I think it's more about the number of digits, not how high or low the number is. For instance 3 is not more desirable that 7, but 7 is more desirable than 10. 30 is not more desirable than 99, but 99 is more desirable than 100.

But yes I agree that number 1 is most definitely the holy grail.

Flanders Fury said...

I'm just thinking this about early numbers: isn't it so that many labels keep the early ones for themselves, and therefore if you have a earlier number it might suggest you are closer to the label than one with a later number.
Or if you are faster in pre-ordering you also get an earlier number (first come, first serve most of the time) and somehow it gives a feeling of being earlier in knowing you want it and so smarter or more into a band than the later numbers...