steventangent

Thanks for sharing, that is really cool. I've read about the process before but never seen it.

It makes me curious how they were made in the days before computers, and also how some of the more interesting color combinations are made.

By "collecting", I mean, of course, buying lots of them, and before long I owned a pretty huge "collection". I don't mean collecting them in the same fashion that I collect records.

I have collected CDs ever since before I was a teenager, and now I'm thinking of dumping them off to buy vinyl. The crappy thing about CDs is that they rarely hold their value like records do. I have had a few over the years that are worth a decent amount, though.

I know kids that have 50 or 60 gigs of music but they barely even know any of it. It's like a contest to some people or something, a badge of honor.

Owning same amount of music on vinyl would be a real badge of honor!

I'm about in the same boat as everyone else, except with the good fortune that sometimes there will be a record my wife wants and therefore ends up on her budget of discretionary spending. Good thing too, otherwise I'd have not been able to get that In Bocca Al Lupo double.

Simply not true. Not even close to true. Besides, how would the RIAA know that you have a copy on vinyl before you get a letter from their lawyers?

how they can sue you for posessing files that you have purchased a licensing agreement to posess? When microsoft does an audit, they don't care where installed files came from, just as long as you have paid for the copy installed on your machine.

I love that I have been karma'd down for this! It's not like I've insulted anybody. I'm just trying to give people the simple fact that if you get sued for downloading files and your defense in court is that 'you bought the vinyl', you will lose. I don't think it's fair to expect people to pay for something twice, either.

The courts have made abundantly clear that when you purchase something, you have the right to own it and to make one copy for backup purposes. You do not have the right to share files or to download them illegally.

As to your question, how can they sue you? "They" can sue you for anything. Most of the RIAA lawsuits so far have been from people sharing files, not downloading them. Some of the time, when people go through the cost and effort of fighting the RIAA, they win, which should say something about their practice of suing everybody.

Copyright law is a pretty complicated thing, and in the last few years there have been a number of lawsuits and a lot of legislature bandied about that can change things drastically.

You have to keep in mind that there is MORE THAN ONE copyright involved here; the songwriters hold the copyright to the actual song while the record company may own part, none, or all of the copyright to the physical media. This is why it's such a big deal who keeps the 'master tapes' in a recording contract. Sometimes vinyl records are sub-licensed to other labels, for example, the ETID set. Even though the license was legally obtained and paid for, do you think Ferret Records is OK with people just downloading the albums?

Don't try to make it sound like I'm defending these practices, or that I think it's right. I have, on more than one occasion, been guilty of ripping a friend's CD because I bought the vinyl. My copy of Jimmy Eat World's Clarity fell victim to CD rot and I had to download a few tracks off of it. That doesn't change the fact that it was illegal.

how can they prove its not your rips of the song?

They can't just root around in your hard drive. If you are downloading it from someone else, they know it isn't your rip, and if you are connected to a file-sharing network and one of their spies is able to download it successfully from you, you will get sued for sharing it.

now i could be wrong here but isnt that how they justify letting any copyrighted files be on the internet legally... to download files that you have a licensed agreement to posses.

But there is all kinds of illegal stuff on the internet! And keep in mind that you don't "own the rights" to music you pay for. You basically pay for the physical media and royalties in exchange for a license to listen to it.

I would prefer it if the vinyl collective messageboard did not become a forum for album leaks. I realize that album leaks happen for every release no matter what rules get established in this forum, but I don't want to encourage it.

As a small label owner, I know that file-sharing has affected my business. As a vinyl collector, I realize that people should not be expected to buy two copies of an album in multiple formats. I guess I find myself in the middle of the argument.

We have been trying to get the ok's from labels about putting download codes into our vinyl, but so far, we have gotten all negatives. We plan to put download codes into our own vinyl releases.

I know that people are going to download the new Against Me, but please don't make Vinyl Collective a portal for file-sharing.

Kudos for this post, and I think it's awesome that you plan to include download codes. I am more more inclined to buy records that have them as I do much of my listening away from home.

I guess the part that bothers me the most about this entire argument is that I see where Flood is coming from and agree, but I also realise that it doesn't NECESSARILY work that way in the eyes of the law. And I got karma-killed for it :'(

yeah, that swirl looked good for PMFS Mercy because it matched the cover art. It looks like ass for everything else.

im pretty sure they can't sue you for downloading a record that you own a physical copy of, i own pretty complete discographys of all of my favorite bands, and ive been downloading them to save me the hassle of having to rip all of them from either cd or vinyl.

Simply not true. Not even close to true. Besides, how would the RIAA know that you have a copy on vinyl before you get a letter from their lawyers?

yah im pretty sure its not illegal either. you are allowed to have your songs backed up on your computer or whatever... you own the right to that song if you own it on vinyl.

It is a civil tort. It's copyright infringement. You don't ever own the rights to any songs. You may rip songs from your own media onto your computer, but file trading is still verboten.

I wish record companies across the board would give you download codes, like Sub Pop, Saddle Creek, etc do.

I don't see it happening much though, just because vinyl is often put out by different labels than the CD version is on. When labels do it in-house, they should provide download codes.

No matter how you look at it or try to justify it, downloading an album is just as illegal if you own the vinyl as if you don't. Still, I don't blame people for doing it.

$90 for Hum's Downward Is Heavenward on blue and the Comin' Home b/w Puppets promo.

edit : and I'd never do it again. I was just feeling really bad at the time and that is one of my favorite records, so my wife decided to win it for me while I was at work.

hah. I sense a new forum rule coming on.

I think mine is seafoam green...

Agreed, and I find that No Idea's recent presses have had way too much grey!

You know, that Planes Mistaken For Stars - Mercy splatter was really cool because the vinyl used the same flecks of color as the cover art. I thought that was pretty sweet.

Of course, a few months later I saw Against Me! and bought "Reinventing Axl Rose". I was not impressed by it being the exact same vinyl.

It makes sense that clear vinyl doesn't sound or hold up as well as other colors. Colors (such as the carbon added for black vinyl) add to the density of the vinyl.

jesus, talk about nitpickery. the point is, when you have more than one, you don't call it 'vinyl'.

I call them 45s.

7" is generally more correct, just because most punk 7"s are 33rpm these days and not 45rpm

and yeah anyone who pluralizes vinyl with an "s" just makes me cringe.

me too, I was just being a smartaleck/contradicting myself, haha.

What about 7"s?

Who calls them 45's?

I just call everything "records" even cd's

Old people call them 45s. The vinyl industry did go through a format war at one time. In fact, "78s" weren't even called "78s" until "33s" came out and there was a need to distinguish.

the plural of "vinyl" is "vinyl"

Virgil,

Any chance you could appoint a mod to clean up the spam? It can be rather tedious for one busy person to handle... just a thought.

I really think bear vs shark had a lot left in them, more so than most bands. Even though many of my favorite bands have broken up, they are the only one I'd really care to see reform.

when did In Bocca Al Lupo happen and where can I get it?

2 I can think of off the top of my head would be Brand New's The Devil and God... and Neko Case Fox Confessor Brings The Flood.

and I guess, as long as I'm dreaming, a domestic release of Coheed & Cambria's albums (I think the LPs were only available as imports, and for completely unreasonable prices!), or some Further Seems Forever, or how about Water & Solutions by Far?

and Ghost Buffalo.