New Collector - Need Advice on Defintion of "First Pressing"

[dlc3172]

Hello,

I'm brand new to vinyl and trying to figure it all out. I figure there are a lot of experts here who can provide advice on a specific question I have about what consititues a "first pressing."

So, here's the situration:  I just bought a record on Ebay advertised as a "first pressing."  It's Metallica's 1983 debut "Kill Em All."  

Here's what I see on discogs.com (https://www.discogs.com/release/1259481-Metallica-Kill-Em-All😞

 

• Matrix / Runout (Label Side A): MRI 069 A
• Matrix / Runout (Label Side B): MRI 069 B
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 1, Runout Groove Side A): MRI-069-A STERLING A-1 ↔
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 1, Runout Groove Side B): MRI-069-B STERLING A-1 ↔
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 2, Runout Groove Side A): MRI-069-B STERLING A- ↔
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 2, Runout Groove Side B): MRI-069-B STERLING A- ↔
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 3, Runout Groove Side A): MRI-069-A STERLING A-1 ↔
• Matrix / Runout (Variant 3, Runout Groove Side B): MRI-069-B STERLING A- ↔
• Rights Society: ASCAP

 

On my record, the labels looks good. It has MRI 069 A and MRI 069 B

However, what I see on the dead wax has me a little worried. 

 

Side A has:

MRI-069-A STERLING A-2 ↔ and

Side B has:

MRI-069-A STERLING A-5 ↔

 

So, I'm not clear about whether this constitues a "first pressing" or not.  Is the A-2 and A-5 significant?  In this case, is a true first pressing really only A-1 and A1?

They guy who sold it to me on Ebay claims it's a true first pressing, although he admits he didn't even look at the dead wax.

I'm sure there has already been a lot of discussion on the subject of "first pressings" in this community, but any advice or insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

 

[LIGMA_BALLZ]

[N8TRU]

I could be wrong but you're going to have to go through every other vinyl listing to look at the runouts listed because if yours is different that the listing you ordered it from, you have a different pressing. And keep in mind these are all community submissions so there's plenty of listings out there that have wrong information or are missing information.

[Tommy]

[mitchard]

https://www.discogs.com/release/4365559-Metallica-Kill-Em-All

This looks like the pressing you have. 

 

[youspinmeround]

https://www.discogs.com/release/4365559-Metallica-Kill-Em-All

 

Literally could have put the matrix in search bar

[phillybhatesme]

Welcome to the site @op. Some good info in here despite it looking like it's a bit aggressive. At least you now know that you can use discogs's search function to lookup runout matrices. 

[dlc3172]

1 hour ago, phillybhatesme said:

Welcome to the site @op. Some good info in here despite it looking like it's a bit aggressive. At least you now know that you can use discogs's search function to lookup runout matrices. 

Yes, I didn't even realize you could search like that.  As I said, I am brand new.  I didn't even know what "matrix" was until yesterday (laugh all you want - you have to start somewhere). Unfortunately, I am getting answers to my original question that I find hard to decipher based on my limited knowledge of the lingo and the actual process of manufacturing a record.  However, my original question still hasn't been addressed by anyone.  Is the record I have considered a "first pressing"?  Is there even an agreed-upon definition for "first pressing"?  Someone else told me I do indeed have a "first pressing," but not a "first, first  pressing" because I have A-2 and A-5 instead of A-1 and A-1.  (By the way, I don't even know what these numbers mean in regards to the manufacturing process. I assume they are different "runs" of the first pressing of the record. I also don't understand why the same record would have different numbers on each side (i.e., 2 and 5).  Again, just trying to figure it all out. That's why I came to this forum.

[wiscodeman]

13 minutes ago, dlc3172 said:

I assume they are different "runs" of the first pressing of the record. I also don't understand why the same record would have different numbers on each side (i.e., 2 and 5).

That has always been my assumption/understanding as well. For albums that have a ton of copies pressed, over time the stampers (the two plates that press the ball of wax to create the vinyl record) wear out, so they have to make additional stampers to switch out after a certain amount of copies created. Additionally, there could be multiple manufacturing plants producing copies of the same album at the same time, which are sometimes indicated in the matrix info as well.

 

A very detailed documentation of this process can be seen on the Pink Floyd Archives website. The link here is the list of all known US presses of Dark Side Of The Moon, which you can see are listed with many matrices at different pressing plants over different issue periods. Sometimes it can be worth it to search out a 'true 1st pressing' but a lot of times the '1st issue' is basically a grouping of 1st presses and is just as acceptable.

[Han Solo]

27 minutes ago, dlc3172 said:

Yes, I didn't even realize you could search like that.  As I said, I am brand new.  I didn't even know what "matrix" was until yesterday (laugh all you want - you have to start somewhere). Unfortunately, I am getting answers to my original question that I find hard to decipher based on my limited knowledge of the lingo and the actual process of manufacturing a record.  However, my original question still hasn't been addressed by anyone.  Is the record I have considered a "first pressing"?  Is there even an agreed-upon definition for "first pressing"?  Someone else told me I do indeed have a "first pressing," but not a "first, first  pressing" because I have A-2 and A-5 instead of A-1 and A-1.  (By the way, I don't even know what these numbers mean in regards to the manufacturing process. I assume they are different "runs" of the first pressing of the record. I also don't understand why the same record would have different numbers on each side (i.e., 2 and 5).  Again, just trying to figure it all out. That's why I came to this forum.

If a record is released internationally, often it will be created at multiple pressing plants (factories). Each pressing plant can have its own unique code, which is why you might see different matrixes on different records, depending on where they were made. For example, a record pressed in Canada can have a different code than one in the states, but because they were released at the same time, its still considered a first press. Honestly, don't worry about it too much. I cannot think of any record collector really getting hung up on matrix numbers. 

[phillybhatesme]

Understood. I don't know anything about those numbers either and can't really help you in deciphering what you have, sorry. 

[phillybhatesme]

10 minutes ago, Han Solo said:

If a record is released internationally, often it will be created at multiple pressing plants (factories). Each pressing plant can have its own unique code, which is why you might see different matrixes on different records, depending on where they were made. For example, a record pressed in Canada can have a different code than one in the states, but because they were released at the same time, its still considered a first press. Honestly, don't worry about it too much. I cannot think of any record collector really getting hung up on matrix numbers. 

Regarding the bold, I feel like a Metallica album from 1983 is going to have a larger population of those that would care vs. something like Turnstile's Glow On, but I'm weeding into hypotheticals here. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by phillybhatesme

[lexicondevil]

I would absolutely care if I paid a premium for a record. 

OP, your question was not quite as stupid as the usual ones we get from people, some who are looking for us to write their term paper for them, etc... I didn't even know that you could search using a matrix number. Good to know. Good luck in your search.

[Han Solo]

1 hour ago, phillybhatesme said:

Regarding the bold, I feel like a Metallica album from 1983 is going to have a larger population of those that would care vs. something like Turnstile's Glow On, but I'm weeding into hypotheticals here. 

Yeah thats why I said "I" haha! I personally do not have any friends who care about that. Either way, two different matrix numbers could still be a part of a first press, which is what this guys question was on 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Han Solo

[Derek™]

Not to hijack OP’s thread, but.

I get that people chase first presses, so I’m not trying to rain on any parades with this post.  But for those that do, I’ve never really understood why they do… unless that OG copy happens to sound the best or has some unique packaging / art / content that doesn’t make it onto future presses.

Maybe it’s just me but being able to say “yeah I own a 1st press” has never been a massive flex in my books.  I guess it’s nice when it happens but for releases that are just standard black vinyl and basic packaging, printed again and again over the years, I feel no additional satisfaction knowing that I bought a record 10 years before someone else bought an exact copy at their local shop for $22 or whatever.

In fact, I’ve often sold OG presses for a really nice profit, and then turned around to buy an expanded edition, or repress with better sound quality, or a cool variant.  So long as the sound quality is the same or better, I’ve personally thought of that as a win… but to each his own.

I have at least 1 friend who is always on the hunt for OG presses, even if they sound inferior or are scuffed to hell and back from being handled for the last 20+ years.  My guess is that for those folks, there’s something appealing about having a “relic” that’s been around since day 1 of the album being on the scene.  And I suppose I kinda’ get that.  Chalking it up to different priorities for different collectors.

Edited November 8, 2023 by Derek™

[phillybhatesme]

What's bolded below is at the crux of OP's post. If you pay a premium (or conversely, if you potentially got a great deal) for a First Press, you'd like to be able to verify that. To add some hyperbole, especially when we're talking about a 40 year old album from one of metal's most popular acts. 

1 hour ago, lexicondevil said:

I would absolutely care if I paid a premium for a record. 

OP, your question was not quite as stupid as the usual ones we get from people, some who are looking for us to write their term paper for them, etc... I didn't even know that you could search using a matrix number. Good to know. Good luck in your search.

Regarding the underlined: I've only been here for a couple of years (I'm part of the problem and got into the hobby recently, sorry) and I've seen everything from literally term paper requests to developers asking to test their apps. This place must be high-ranking on google to get so much new traffic for a fuckin invision forum. 

[Tommy]

23 minutes ago, Derek™ said:

Not to hijack OP’s thread, but.

I get that people chase first presses, so I’m not trying to rain on any parades with this post.  But for those that do, I’ve never really understood why they do… unless that OG copy happens to sound the best or has some unique packaging / art / content that doesn’t make it onto future presses.

Maybe it’s just me but being able to say “yeah I own a 1st press” has never been a massive flex in my books.  I guess it’s nice when it happens but for releases that are just standard black vinyl and basic packaging, printed again and again over the years, I feel no additional satisfaction knowing that I bought a record 10 years before someone else bought an exact copy at their local shop for $22 or whatever.

In fact, I’ve often sold OG presses for a really nice profit, and then turned around to buy an expanded edition, or repress with better sound quality, or a cool variant.  So long as the sound quality is the same or better, I’ve personally thought of that as a win… but to each his own.

I have at least 1 friend who is always on the hunt for OG presses, even if they sound inferior or are scuffed to hell and back from being handled for the last 20+ years.  My guess is that for those folks, there’s something appealing about having a “relic” that’s been around since day 1 of the album being on the scene.  And I suppose I kinda’ get that.  Chalking it up to different priorities for different collectors.

Yeah, I think it mainly boils down to the person being able to flex that they are "more of a fan" for owning the OG. Tickles the same nerve as owning a colored copy vs std black I assume

[Derek™]

3 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Yeah, I think it mainly boils down to the person being able to flex that they are "more of a fan" for owning the OG. Tickles the same nerve as owning a colored copy vs std black I assume

Gotta' be something along those lines, yeah.  Which gets skewed when someone becomes a brand new fan of an artist but immediately takes it upon themselves to track down a 1st press, even if the prices are steep.  I've seen that happen quite a bit.

For color vs. black vinyl... I won't speak for everyone else out there, but I'll say that for me it just comes down to what I'm gonna' enjoy seeing and interacting with the most.  Which is why I'll always pass on ugly variants /100 and go for nicer or "more fitting" ones /2,000 if given the option between the two.

[lexicondevil]

39 minutes ago, Derek™ said:

Not to hijack OP’s thread, but.

I get that people chase first presses, so I’m not trying to rain on any parades with this post.  But for those that do, I’ve never really understood why they do… unless that OG copy happens to sound the best or has some unique packaging / art / content that doesn’t make it onto future presses.

Maybe it’s just me but being able to say “yeah I own a 1st press” has never been a massive flex in my books.  I guess it’s nice when it happens but for releases that are just standard black vinyl and basic packaging, printed again and again over the years, I feel no additional satisfaction knowing that I bought a record 10 years before someone else bought an exact copy at their local shop for $22 or whatever.

In fact, I’ve often sold OG presses for a really nice profit, and then turned around to buy an expanded edition, or repress with better sound quality, or a cool variant.  So long as the sound quality is the same or better, I’ve personally thought of that as a win… but to each his own.

I have at least 1 friend who is always on the hunt for OG presses, even if they sound inferior or are scuffed to hell and back from being handled for the last 20+ years.  My guess is that for those folks, there’s something appealing about having a “relic” that’s been around since day 1 of the album being on the scene.  And I suppose I kinda’ get that.  Chalking it up to different priorities for different collectors.

Sometimes it is definitely sound and sometimes it is collector prestige. It is the same reason why I would love to have a first printing of For Whom the Bell Tolls by Hemingway, rather than my 27th printing. My first pressing of Blue Train is far superior to any other pressing I have bought.

[phillybhatesme]

Oh, I just got into reading...like books. I don't even know the language to ask the questions I have lol. 

wtf is 1st/1st? 

what is cloth bound?

where can i get a copy of rage without paying 800 bucks?

Edited November 8, 2023 by phillybhatesme

[stl_ben]

Yeah first pressing could have easily have 100s of different matrixes.  Between being pressed at multiple plants and/or just being pressed on multiple machines in one plant.  

[lexicondevil]

14 minutes ago, phillybhatesme said:

Oh, I just got into reading...like books. I don't even know the language to ask the questions I have lol. 

wtf is 1st/1st? 

what is cloth bound?

where can i get a copy of rage without paying 800 bucks?

I think you've confused this with LiteratureCollective...😉

[dlc3172]

1 hour ago, Derek™ said:

Not to hijack OP’s thread, but.

I get that people chase first presses, so I’m not trying to rain on any parades with this post.  But for those that do, I’ve never really understood why they do… unless that OG copy happens to sound the best or has some unique packaging / art / content that doesn’t make it onto future presses.

Maybe it’s just me but being able to say “yeah I own a 1st press” has never been a massive flex in my books.  I guess it’s nice when it happens but for releases that are just standard black vinyl and basic packaging, printed again and again over the years, I feel no additional satisfaction knowing that I bought a record 10 years before someone else bought an exact copy at their local shop for $22 or whatever.

In fact, I’ve often sold OG presses for a really nice profit, and then turned around to buy an expanded edition, or repress with better sound quality, or a cool variant.  So long as the sound quality is the same or better, I’ve personally thought of that as a win… but to each his own.

I have at least 1 friend who is always on the hunt for OG presses, even if they sound inferior or are scuffed to hell and back from being handled for the last 20+ years.  My guess is that for those folks, there’s something appealing about having a “relic” that’s been around since day 1 of the album being on the scene.  And I suppose I kinda’ get that.  Chalking it up to different priorities for different collectors.

I believe vinyl collectors would want first presses for the same reason that book collectors would want first editions and for the same reason that baseball card collectors want rookie cards.  It's the "first" of something, so for most collectors, it's the version they want.

[stl_ben]

29 minutes ago, dlc3172 said:

I believe vinyl collectors would want first presses for the same reason that book collectors would want first editions and for the same reason that baseball card collectors want rookie cards.  It's the "first" of something, so for most collectors, it's the version they want.

*Some collectors.  Overall though many of the rarest/most valuable/desirable versions aren't the first pressings.

Also rookie card would be more of a comparison to a bands first release, which on many bands is not desirable at all.

[TheGhostOfRandySavage]

1 hour ago, Derek™ said:

Not to hijack OP’s thread, but.

I get that people chase first presses, so I’m not trying to rain on any parades with this post.  But for those that do, I’ve never really understood why they do… unless that OG copy happens to sound the best or has some unique packaging / art / content that doesn’t make it onto future presses.

Maybe it’s just me but being able to say “yeah I own a 1st press” has never been a massive flex in my books.  I guess it’s nice when it happens but for releases that are just standard black vinyl and basic packaging, printed again and again over the years, I feel no additional satisfaction knowing that I bought a record 10 years before someone else bought an exact copy at their local shop for $22 or whatever.

In fact, I’ve often sold OG presses for a really nice profit, and then turned around to buy an expanded edition, or repress with better sound quality, or a cool variant.  So long as the sound quality is the same or better, I’ve personally thought of that as a win… but to each his own.

I have at least 1 friend who is always on the hunt for OG presses, even if they sound inferior or are scuffed to hell and back from being handled for the last 20+ years.  My guess is that for those folks, there’s something appealing about having a “relic” that’s been around since day 1 of the album being on the scene.  And I suppose I kinda’ get that.  Chalking it up to different priorities for different collectors.

 

1 hour ago, Tommy said:

Yeah, I think it mainly boils down to the person being able to flex that they are "more of a fan" for owning the OG. Tickles the same nerve as owning a colored copy vs std black I assume

For a lot of early metal stuff (Sabbath, Maiden, Metallica especially) those first presses really do sound significantly better than most other presses. Usually specifically the European first presses of them.

 

I go back and forth on whether I care about 1st presses or not, but when it's the best sounding it's the one I want.

 

I'd definitely trade off my Baroness - Red 1st press though. Don't care much about that.