Monday, 13 March 2017


So yeah, as I was saying, I had picked up four ALL albums and had them go missing in the mail, so a few months later went to buy them again. One that I didn't manage to pick up last year, however, was the band's major label release on Interscope Records, 'Pummel'. Released in 1995, at a time when major labels were starting to severely cut back on the amounts of vinyl they pressed, this remains the hardest ALL record to find... and is therefore the most valuable / expensive. So imagine how stoked I was recently to find a sealed copy.

I don't believe in keeping records sealed. I don't believe that there is any benefit to doing so. If a record is rare and sought after, it will be so whether it is sealed or not. So I did what I always do, and I opened it up.

There's something really quite satisfying about opening a record that has been sealed for 20 years. I can't explain why, exactly. But this isn't the first time I've done it.

It's not easy getting into a band and records many years later and understanding the history and the context. If I were a betting man, I'd put money on the fact that ALL were signed by Interscope after Green Day got huge, in an attempt to find bands with hardcore / punk credentials and a lot of melody. The sixth LP from the band, it sounds less poppy and more angry than the previous (and subsequent) records. After reading around a bit, it feels as if this is not overly liked by ALL fans, although I think there are some truly brilliant songs on this record.

It's funny, but just as I've managed to bag an original pressing copy of this record, it is about to be re-issued on vinyl for the first time since it's release. So look for pictures all over instagram in about a month's time.


Willem RWHAF said...

I would prefer to buy a sealed record above an opened one, just to be sure of the condition. But once I have them, I also open it. Great post by the way Marcus, should be checking this out, as I like Descendents.

geoff said...

sealed or to open, the inner torment continues! hahaha back in the late 90s i got into a phase of buying 2 records, one to open, one to keep sealed. did this for a while too. slowly but surely i have been opening my sealed records over the years. i agree, there is something very satisfying about it. i do have some records that are still sealed, gb and judge. they are both on color vinyl too. one day i will open them, hopefully finding out that they are some weird rare pressing mishap!

mcs said...

I actually think that sealed copies of some records can be worth LESS. When it's a limited color vinyl pressing, you obviously can't verify 100% what is inside. I've bought a couple of sealed color records which sold for significantly less than the same color record which was not sealed. So I just think some buyers are slightly wary of sealed records.

Nico said...

Doubles, I liked to keep sealed, especially if there isn't a rare/colored version.
How cool is to have sealed Flex Your Head LP with wheat cover from 1982.
Also there is no point opening my copy of the 2nd Kraut LP, especially if I have an openend copy to play and enjoy.

Willem RWHAF said...

I concur with Marcus on opening the records when there is mentioning of "colored vinyl". It would be stupid to sell a colored vinyl record sealed that might have a rarer color than initially presumed. Also a buyer would like to have the record opened to be sure.
But for a record that I have on another format, I would keep the vinyl sealed.
Also if it's a black regular pressing that you bought for collection purpose only and you are sure there are no limited versions I would persist in keeping them sealed.