Everyone has seen them, everyone owns them, and there's not really much to say about them at this point. I'm sick to death of them now, but still buying them, although I'm literally months behind everyone else. Doesn't matter though. It's not a race. Here are my latest additions to my now overstocked Rev collection...
I don't think that even I could have ever guessed that I would one day own three different colour copies of the Rage Against The Machine 10". Lucky me eh?
6 comments:
REV has officially burned me out on vinyl repressings. There are only a select few that I'll bother with at this point. What used to be a fun chase has been turned into a chore. Way to go REV...you ruined it.
I completely agree. They ruined it. I now believe that everything in their catalog will end up being repressed. And even though this sucks, I cannot stop the habit of a lifetime (or, more correctly, half a lifetime).
This post in a nutshell is why I quit the repress game.
I don't agree with this. REV does what a record company should do as long as it exits: (re)press records to keep music available for people to listen to. People (including myself) collect records because they choose to do this. No one really needs more than one copy. One is enough to listen to, right? So if you decide to collect records for the sake of collecting, that's your decision. It might turn into a problem indeed if a record company decides to do repress after repress, but it's not like you're forced to buy repress after repress. It’s still your decision.
A record company shouldn't be there to cater for the 'needs' of collectors and refrain from repressing records just to keep the originals as exclusive as possible. Not very hardcore in my book. Actually, I think it's pretty awesome that REV keeps pressing the old records so people nowadays, especially younger people, can still buy the music on vinyl at affordable prices.
Having said that, I can still feel sympathetic towards everybody's gripes from a collector's point of view.
You're right - Rev should repress records and keep them in print. However, they are clearly exploiting collectors. They COULD repress them all on black... or all on the same colour. But to repress things on different colours every few weeks seems a little too much. And making multiple colours is out of step with their past. But yes, you're also right, nobody is making me keep buying and I do not have to.
WHat we are all saying though is that this was fun at first and now it's not. It proves you CAN have too much of a good thing.
Okay, I had some time on my hands and browsed through the Rev represses 2012/2013. That is admittedly an insane amount of records. So everyone who tries to maintain a complete Rev collection (or even only Rev 1-23) has both my deepest sympathy and admiration. Still, how many people doing that are there? 10, 15, 20? I don't really think Rev's business tactic is to exploit collectors as there aren't enough to make serious money off of. Unless you figure in the shipping costs for overseas customers ;). Maybe Rev is just adapting to the brave new world of releasing records that is multiple colours in smaller runs?
However, even if Rev was to repress the back catalogue on black vinyl or one colour only, there'd still be people who would go out of their way to find small differences, like different inserts or lyric sheets, small colour variations on the sleeves, the weight of the records etc. and I'm pretty sure people would still buy the represses despite the fact that there are only minor differences. But I guess that's what record collectors do.
Post a Comment