Labels that make a ton of "test presses"

[throwgncpr]

I agree with the original post here. By name, test press should be to test the sound and quality of the record - A quality control step before the press run goes full steam.

If you want to do a small variant run, fine, but calling them "test presses" is just incorrect.

what's the difference if it's 5 or 100. they're all tests technically. because that's how you order them before the original run. saying they are variants instead just because volume is just semantics.

It isn't just semantics, it's function. Are these 100 test presses being reviewed for problems with the press? i.e., being tested? No. They are a small run being sold or given away under the name "test"

[shenanigans]

At what point do you consider test presses another variant?

Thoughts?

at what point do you consider variants to be a test press?

i say, who cares? i really see no harm in labels offering several test presses. if there's too many, people won't want them or pay for them.

sometimes small labels need to get creative to keep records coming out.

if a label selling 20 tests means a record i love getting pressed, i'm not going to complain.

people really complain about some dumb shit on here. (no offense).

nobody's complaining. this is a discussion. you know...on a message board for discussing vinyl

[controlthebleeding]

what's the difference if it's 5 or 100. they're all tests technically. because that's how you order them before the original run. saying they are variants instead just because volume is just semantics.

It isn't just semantics, it's function. Are these 100 test presses being reviewed for problems with the press? i.e., being tested? No. They are a small run being sold or given away under the name "test"

ok, example. the painkiller guy ordered 200 tests of the iron age 7" intended to use for their tour and a few to test sample quality. he found a pop and had to have 5 or 6 more tests made to correct the error before going to press with large batch. but it was already too late and they had to have something to sell on tour. hence the rest were sold as tour presses. by your odd sense of equation, none of them were tests because of the quantity and that they were being sold. even though a few were used as such. do you see where i'm going with this? just because a few were used as intended, it doesn't make the rest of them any different than the couple that were rejected. they all had the same pop. (which is annoying by the way). but they were just sold under a different moniker.

as far as your ideology of tests being made in large quantities and being sold as such for monetary value. i agree, it's shitty. but not all labels and bands do it for that reason. most do it for kitchey variant purposes at cost and others do it out of last minute necessity only (see above). usually both. but rarely seldom to do i find out about labels i buy from selling tons of tests for cash to make a profit. just my 2 cents.

[One Hundred Fifty-Two]

what's the difference if it's 5 or 100. they're all tests technically. because that's how you order them before the original run. saying they are variants instead just because volume is just semantics.

It isn't just semantics, it's function. Are these 100 test presses being reviewed for problems with the press? i.e., being tested? No. They are a small run being sold or given away under the name "test"

Well, all of those 100 are used as a test. Maybe not as a test by the label. They may listen to 10. But what better way to get a real test then have 100 different people listen to the first run and if any of them notice something the pressing can be changed before the entire run is completed.

[throwgncpr]

ok, example. the painkiller guy ordered 200 tests of the iron age 7" intended to use for their tour and a few to test sample quality. he found a pop and had to have 5 or 6 more tests made to correct the error before going to press with large batch. but it was already too late and they had to have something to sell on tour. hence the rest were sold as tour presses. by your odd sense of equation, none of them were tests because of the quantity and that they were being sold. even though a few were used as such. do you see where i'm going with this? just because a few were used as intended, it doesn't make the rest of them any different than the couple that were rejected. they all had the same pop. (which is annoying by the way). but they were just sold under a different moniker.

as far as your ideology of tests being made in large quantities and being sold as such for monetary value. i agree, it's shitty. but not all labels and bands do it for that reason. most do it for kitchey variant purposes at cost and others do it out of last minute necessity only (see above). usually both. but rarely seldom to do i find out about labels i buy from selling tons of tests for cash to make a profit. just my 2 cents.

I really don't care what the quantity is, my point is that they aren't being used as TESTS. If 200 people are sitting there listening for issues to get back to the band/label, so be it. I hardly think that is a good way to test a product though.

I don't see how my arguing they aren't used for testing purposes is as you say "an odd sense of equation"

This is mostly an academic debate, as it is obvious that bands/labels use "test presses" a variety of ways, many of which aren't to test the product for quality control.

Also, at no point did I even mention ANYTHING about monetary value or how they are sold. Perhaps you are confusing my comments with someone else's. My only comments were on the nomenclature and function of test presses.

[One Hundred Fifty-Two]

ok, example. the painkiller guy ordered 200 tests of the iron age 7" intended to use for their tour and a few to test sample quality. he found a pop and had to have 5 or 6 more tests made to correct the error before going to press with large batch. but it was already too late and they had to have something to sell on tour. hence the rest were sold as tour presses. by your odd sense of equation, none of them were tests because of the quantity and that they were being sold. even though a few were used as such. do you see where i'm going with this? just because a few were used as intended, it doesn't make the rest of them any different than the couple that were rejected. they all had the same pop. (which is annoying by the way). but they were just sold under a different moniker.

as far as your ideology of tests being made in large quantities and being sold as such for monetary value. i agree, it's shitty. but not all labels and bands do it for that reason. most do it for kitchey variant purposes at cost and others do it out of last minute necessity only (see above). usually both. but rarely seldom to do i find out about labels i buy from selling tons of tests for cash to make a profit. just my 2 cents.

I really don't care what the quantity is, my point is that they aren't being used as TESTS. If 200 people are sitting there listening for issues to get back to the band/label, so be it. I hardly think that is a good way to test a product though.

I don't see how my arguing they aren't used for testing purposes is as you say "an odd sense of equation"

This is mostly an academic debate, as it is obvious that bands/labels use "test presses" a variety of ways, many of which aren't to test the product for quality control.

Also, at no point did I even mention ANYTHING about monetary value or how they are sold. Perhaps you are confusing my comments with someone else's. My only comments were on the nomenclature and function of test presses.

Take two of these and call me in the morning.

Having 200 people listen to a record is an awesome way to find any errors.

Large run test pressings are still being used to test the product.

This is not an academic debate. This is vinylz we are talking about. Dropping nomenclature in a thread doesn't make you sophisticated it means you are a Big Lebowski fan.

[throwgncpr]

sigh, I wasn't getting worked up, not sure what the fuss was about. I was just quoted for stuff I didn't even say. Also, sorry for using words with too many letters : I'll try to misspell stuff to be cool.

Anyway, I disagree that 200 tests is an "awesome way to find errors." Sure it means you have more ears on it, but it also means that you have 200 people with a potentially faulty product.

[kurtz]

The whole idea of having 10+ test presses is a somewhat recent phenomenon. Just another way for labels to cash in on collectors.

If you buy an unplayed test press from a label, is it really a test press? I would say no.

Getting 50-200 tests for a tour or show is a completely different story.

[One Hundred Fifty-Two]

sigh, I wasn't getting worked up, not sure what the fuss was about. I was just quoted for stuff I didn't even say. Also, sorry for using words with too many letters : I'll try to misspell stuff to be cool.

Anyway, I disagree that 200 tests is an "awesome way to find errors." Sure it means you have more ears on it, but it also means that you have 200 people with a potentially faulty product.

You brought Caps Lock into this.

[bearchuck]

If you want to get technical about it, Tiny Engines doesn't approve any records based on the test pressings. But only because we do a reference lacquer with Dave @ Lucky Lacquers first. In simple terms, it's the master test pressing. And usually it's a one-of-a-kind type of thing ... and I've got all of them. Mwhahahahaha!

Having said that, we usually get 34 test pressings from the plant, and yes, we do listen to at least a couple of them. 10 go to the band, 6 go to the label and then usually we give out another 4 or 5 to various people involved with the record. We'll also give away a couple copies for contests or a pre-order bonus.

At the end of the day we'll only have 10 - 15 left over. We'll pair those with limited-edition screen prints (shout out to my man Dustin!) with exclusive art (from artists we pay) and then we sell them for a reasonable price, usually between $30 and $40. Here are some examples: http://tinyengines.limitedpressing.com/product/categories/2482

The reason behind this is twofold. First, as a small indie label, we need every extra dollar we can scrounge up. The other day I was actually breaking down how much we spend / make on each LP and it's definitely eye-opening when you consider all the expenses involved in releasing a record.

Basically, if past mail order + distro sales are accurate and if (BIG IF) we go through 400 copies of a pressing (the band gets 100), we're talking about a profit of about $400 - $500. Probably a little less if you account for all the middling bullshit expenses. I'm not even counting all the time and labor we put into everything, not to mention the fact that our PR firm (Beartrap) does free publicity for each release. Of course, this is a labor of love, so I'm not complaining about it. I'm just saying that we need to sell through a lot of full-lengths before we'd even come close to having enough money to fully fund one single LP. So yeah, digital sales and test pressings are important to us.

The second reason is because it bums me out a little when I see one of our test pressings being sold for some ridiculous amount of money on eBay. I get the concept and I understand the demand, but if it were up to me, I'd give a test pressings to all the biggest fans of each band. I figure that if I up the quantity of our test pressings just a little bit and then sell them via mail order (with the limited prints) at a reasonable price, it gives those fans a legitimate shot at getting one rather than having to shell over a ton of money on an eBay auction somewhere down the line. It's not the ideal situation; I'm just trying to balance the "rare factor" with my desire to give a test pressing to everyone who legitimately wants one (not the flippers).

[controlthebleeding]

ok, example. the painkiller guy ordered 200 tests of the iron age 7" intended to use for their tour and a few to test sample quality. he found a pop and had to have 5 or 6 more tests made to correct the error before going to press with large batch. but it was already too late and they had to have something to sell on tour. hence the rest were sold as tour presses. by your odd sense of equation, none of them were tests because of the quantity and that they were being sold. even though a few were used as such. do you see where i'm going with this? just because a few were used as intended, it doesn't make the rest of them any different than the couple that were rejected. they all had the same pop. (which is annoying by the way). but they were just sold under a different moniker.

as far as your ideology of tests being made in large quantities and being sold as such for monetary value. i agree, it's shitty. but not all labels and bands do it for that reason. most do it for kitchey variant purposes at cost and others do it out of last minute necessity only (see above). usually both. but rarely seldom to do i find out about labels i buy from selling tons of tests for cash to make a profit. just my 2 cents.

I really don't care what the quantity is, my point is that they aren't being used as TESTS. If 200 people are sitting there listening for issues to get back to the band/label, so be it. I hardly think that is a good way to test a product though.

I don't see how my arguing they aren't used for testing purposes is as you say "an odd sense of equation"

This is mostly an academic debate, as it is obvious that bands/labels use "test presses" a variety of ways, many of which aren't to test the product for quality control.

Also, at no point did I even mention ANYTHING about monetary value or how they are sold. Perhaps you are confusing my comments with someone else's. My only comments were on the nomenclature and function of test presses.

all im' saying is it was pressed by the plant for a certain usage, but not used as such and given a different moniker. it's still the same thing. i can buy a test pressing and listen to it for the music, that does not mean it's automatically something else because i'm not listening to it for it's intended purpose. that's pretty much the gist of what i'm saying.

this is what you said: "They are a small run being sold or given away under the name "test"" i was just expanding on that. i wasnt disagreeing with you by any means.

[runforcover]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

[kurt]

This seems to be especially common in hardcore, over the years I've probably owned at least ten records like this. The ones I've had have usually been referred to as a "tour press" or "pre-release".

that's what they consider them, but they are basically tests they ordered in a batch hoping everything would be ok with the pressing. which in slight cases is not (ex: iron age - way is narrow). mind you, sometimes i'm sure they are just a small batch of the regular pressing that was done in a rush.

idreamofpunk, i can't answer that. i'm sure some tour presses are just a small pressing of the larger quantity that's a rush job, but i know there's a good chunk that gets pressed as actual large quantity (50+) test copies. you just pray nothing is substantially wrong with them. but in few cases there is. (read above) i know some of my tour/release presses are either no label, or test press label, but in most cases just blank label.

adam, sometimes labels need records for release parties or tours and the manufacturer can't get the records to them in time because of the length of time it takes to press the tests and then wait for shipping/arrival and then feedback, so labels just cross their fingers and hope for the best with tests since they can order them in small quantity right off the bat, rather than a regular pressing that has a minimum order. at least just enough to hold them over till regular pressing has been done and arrives for sale.

I remember those Iron Age records, at least the cover looked cool as fuck. Yeah those were like a SXSW 2008 exclusive, limited to 100. Does that sound right?

[Guest]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

[controlthebleeding]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

Yes they are. Mostly due to boredom.

And not sure kurt. I wasnt at sxsw that year due to sickness. But i can always ask Jason since i work with him regularly.

[nickheitman]

did it for one release. realized it was fucking stupid. fuck it.

[bearchuck]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

I forgot to mention that sometimes I trade test pressings with Jeff ... and then two years later I get my tests from him.

Sorry, Jeff. I couldn't resist. I love you.

[adamlikesmusic]

adam, sometimes labels need records for release parties or tours and the manufacturer can't get the records to them in time because of the length of time it takes to press the tests and then wait for shipping/arrival and then feedback, so labels just cross their fingers and hope for the best with tests since they can order them in small quantity right off the bat, rather than a regular pressing that has a minimum order. at least just enough to hold them over till regular pressing has been done and arrives for sale.

I get that. I have a couple such records myself. I just don't consider them test presses in the traditional sense.

My post was mores directed at (for example) how some of the later SH releases were having like 25 tests, all of which were auctioned off on eBay. That is fucking stupid.

[appletree]

I understand a lot of the rare comments and different opinions on test pressings, but I keep asking myself the same question. Why not just do 10 test pressings or whatever is explicitly required, use them to test with and ensure everything is tip top? Then do a friends press variant out of 25 or something once the tests are approved and you ensure that all additional copies are as expected and up to your minimum specifications?

This way tests are actual tests and not ways to make a little extra money, then a small variant can be sold exclusively by itself or given away or auctioned of or snuck in with other orders or whatever you please with.

Not directed at anyone just curious on taking this sort of approach. One thing that always bothered me was that when no sleep was selling test pressings they had some that were only one pressing so far and were for the same album, which had a test pressing out of like 5 then another test pressing out of 20. I kept wondering if they were just ordered 20 test pressings to sell or something. Always confused me. I assume on a re-press one would/should just make minimal tests to ensure things are still good to go.

[runforcover]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

I forgot to mention that sometimes I trade test pressings with Jeff ... and then two years later I get my tests from him.

Sorry, Jeff. I couldn't resist. I love you.

I definitely was't referring to what you said

[travis]

The conversations that go on on this board are insane.

[matt]

Animal Style did their first run of Daggermouth - Turf Wars as 100 tests and screenprinted all the artwork. the press after was normal and had regular printed jackets. i thought it was a cool idea. i guess this is in terms of it being a "variant" like you mentioned though.

Those first 100 was used to salvage the pressing. The band had just broken up and plates were already made. I had no real intention at that time to do more than just those run of test presses. When those sold so quickly I decided to finish off the run so for all intensive purposes those are tests.

[jailhouse]

So what are everyone's thoughts on labels that do 20, 25, 50, 75 "test presses"? At what point do you consider test presses another variant?

I think it's normal for labels to do 5-10 tests, 20 at the max. After that I feel like they're doing it to sell them as a very limited variant rather than the actual purpose of "testing" them to make sure everything sounds go.

Thoughts?

Fuck labels that do that many test's. It completely defeats the purpose of them, and the "special" sentiment of getting a test press from a band you really love. It's nothing more than a greedy cash grab. Test presses on average cost a buck a piece. There is no keeping a label from pressing 100 of em. I've never done more than 10 on any release. For some reason I have a Moral Crux test numbered /15, but it was a boo boo and is actually /10. 10 is a good amount to press so you can give 5 to the band, and hang on to a few of em, give away a few in random orders.

Labels that sell test presses for crazy amounts of money, for a new release test suck.

Every newer label nowdays(and even some older ones) seems to be out for quick money, whatever it takes, kickstarter, licencing a major release, charging more for certain colors/variant.

It's almost like integrity doesn't exist's nowdays.

[jailhouse]

@ Tiny Engines, do you think that is a bit risky, (not being a smartass at all, genuinly wondering) to not get test's and rely on the reference lacquer. It's kind of two totally different animals. Most pressing errors are due to plating or stamper damage. Not the lacquer cut. It would scare the piss out of me personally to do a run with no test pressings. And without test pressings, it typically voids out any recourse if the record comes out with problems.

Again just wondering, not tossing my opinion in there. Interested in if you've ever had problems with the pressing, and if there was any recourse?

[flood]

yeah i recently had a situation where the lacquer sounded great, and the plating got screwed up and i had to reject the first set of tests... it definitely does happen.