Collecting one artist collection

[daegor]

I had to come in here and catch up because I saw someone had managed to annoy Derek, well done frutiger75, this basically never happens (as far as I noticed).  Congrats on being a pretentious douche.

 

 

To answer the OPs question, and indirectly frutiger75's.... I used to collected all of Josh Scogin's work (The Chariot, '68).  When I was unemployed I ended up selling a couple of the more valuable copies then shrugged and sold the rest of my duplicates and haven't looked back.  But my collecting of his work was specifically in order to do my part in showing that there was a market in vinyl for his releases, and now (most) of his work is on vinyl.

 

What you're asking about is generally referred to as variant collecting, and A LOT of us do it.  But rarely does someone variant collect just a couple of artists and nothing else.  Which is kind of what your question implied, I'm not sure if that's what you meant or not, but that's definitely how it was read, and apparently how frutiger75 read it too.

 

Basically none of us only variant collect and don't also have a general collection of releases we like.

[Derek™]

36 minutes ago, frutiger75 said:

(a) you suffering from tinnitus?

 

(b) i am not surprised people buy from a variety of artists; my points (and OP's inquiry) pertained to a collection largely comprised of one artist.

 

(c) never once have i visited thesaurus.com.

 

(d) by the way, take a look in the mirror: you who puts an effin' trademark symbol next to his username.

 

(e) i'm not on this board for discussing grammar, nitwit.

 

(f) (although, upon further review of my posts in this thread, my grammar and syntax are actually quite on fleek).

(a) Do you know what tinnitus actually is?  Because I feel like if you did, you wouldn't ask me that.  You could maybe save that sassy comeback for a verbal argument, but logically speaking it makes zero sense in an online debate.  I think that much more than just your hearing is shot, friend.

 

(b) Okay, perhaps not "surprised" – but you legitimately said that you found it "interesting" that people collect records from multiple artists instead of just honing in on "one (or a select few)".  That's remarkably close to my paraphrasing.  If anything, I could change the figure of "2-3" to "1-3" to more accurately match your post.  Either way, your post suggests that you're caught off guard to see others buy music that can't be categorized under "one (or a select few)" artist umbrellas.

 

(c) No need to lie.  You're in this deep; I say you embrace it and go for broke.

 

(d) Trademarking a name is absurd, hence the irony.  You should spend less time on Thesaurus.com and try out its sister site, Dictionary.com.  There you can learn about the wonders of intimidating words like tinnitus and irony.

 

(e) Of course this isn't a grammar board, but you can't really expect anyone to bother taking your posts seriously if you can't be bothered to hold the Shift key to capitalize your sentences like your average 2nd grader.  That's all I'm saying.

 

(f) The more I read this sentence, the more it makes my heart hurt.  I think this may be the most insufferable thing I've read for the month of February.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Derek™

[youspinmeround]

I used to have a pretry complete guided by voices collection and about 75 percent of the rest of pollard catalog. I gave it up and sold off a ton of releases. It was a nice burden relief.

 

I currently have full collections (at least 1 of every release) from

Superchunk

Man or astroman 

Cows 

 

I have a ton of other artists full releases but usually if they have under 10 or do releases,  I don't call it a collection. It drives me nuts when people say look at my (insert band) collection and they have 4 records