Definitive Audiophile pressings

Portland Sheriff said:
Yesterday, when I wrote my initial thoughts about this, I didn’t realize how clear AS’s policy was/is. What I characterized as extortion is actually just applying the terms of an agreement. Ignorance (mine) acknowledged and owned.

Coincidentally, also yesterday, I received a used NM item from a not-small retailer. Visually, it’s NM for sure. But I put it on, and it’s pretty off center with a mild warp that cause the stylus to bob like a boat. I don’t care about that (or visual issues) if the problem doesn’t affect play, but this has a corresponding noticeable swish/static sound with each undulation, and it’s on both sides.

I wrote the retailer and provided a video of the issue asking to return it. I also happened to say that I had no expectation they’d play every record to find this kind of problem but, regardless, this is not a NM record. I’m curious whether you’d return this kind of item (not bc your opinion would change how I handle these situations; I’d return this every time, but I am curious). It wasn’t crazy expensive but definitely not cheap, and I won’t play it in this condition, nor would I have bought it at any price had I known. Here’s the video. You’ll have to trust me on the constant swish/static sounds: iCloud
Click to expand...
With new records, I can almost always get them perfect. While some may stick with the 'for the price I paid etc...' mantra, most of what I buy comes from a real small business, and they have to suck up the cost of each return. These stores aren't deep pockets.

But if it isn't a fixable issue, which is usually pretty obvious, I will return and exchange. I don't like throwing cash away.

Half my collection of about 5,000 records is vintage. I clean 'em, I work 'em, I do everything possible to get them quiet, and in the vast majority of cases, I do. A bit off center or a slight warp is common and doesn't bother me as much as it does the Vinyl Karens. Significant warps are a different story.

If I get a NM record that isn't (allowing some margin of error) and it isn't fixable, I will get the seller to refund. I don't send them back. That just doubles the injury, as no one refunds the initial shipping.

Funny thing is that in most cases where a record is described as NM but very obviously is not, the seller knew full well when he sold it that it wasn't. In most of those situations the seller doesn't put up much of a fight. I don't have a lot of mercy in these situations.

An honest mistake most sellers will quickly fix, knowing that their reputation is worth more than the record value.

Then there are assholes, and some of them know how to get negative feedback removed by discogs. I simply let them know when I will be dropping by, and whether they prefer a broken leg or a broken arm.
 
Lol, what have I done.

@RHANDMJ Rastaman is perfect, said in my first post. all you need to know in my opinion. Cart and turntable are an amazing match, with VTA dialed in. Not a user issue I can guarantee.

To make things funnier they offered my 20% off my purchase If i send proof of defect.. so just use that money and mail me a replacement? Appreciate the feedback from everyone, but AS is just running me in circles and not being too helpful. I'm sure i'll get this sorted.
 
MikeH said:
The AS destroy before we send you a replacement thing is so awful. It’s also really inconsistent—sometimes they ask you to destroy it, other times they just send a replacement and let you keep it. I’ve seen it happen on the same titles with different people. Makes zero sense
Click to expand...
Aside from the environmental issue (and I'll admit, that's big enough I probably shouldn't just ignore it), I don't think the "destroy before we send a replacement" policy is that bad. I was first asked to do that with a Pearl Jam Fan Club 7" 10 years ago or something. I was appalled. But it makes sense. Otherwise, in cases where the issue is a little noise or nonfill, the buyer may just list the record on Discogs as VG or even VG+ and say it's "near perfect . . . except for the click that persists through 7 revolutions of Song X" or "except for the 5 seconds of static noise at the beginning of Song Y." I always wonder how those descriptions line up with the description of the same issue the buyer provided the customer service rep when they asked for their replacement.

When you buy a copy, you're entitled to a single copy of an album. It sucks if it's defective, but that doesn't mean you should get a perfect copy and a slightly-less-than-perfect copy that you can pass on to a friend, PIF, or sell on the second-hand market as a less-than-perfect copy--especially when it's a very expensive record. If a seller thinks it's more cost-effective for them to ask you to destroy an item than to have you send it back and destroy it or resell it themselves at a discounted rate, then I think it's reasonable request. I wonder how many fewer VMP records would be on the second-hand market if they implemented a similar policy.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to wade into the debate that's been going on over the last couple of pages, I'm just saying that I see people complain about the destroy-policy fairly regularly, and I think it's a defensible one.
 
Last edited:
grendel627 said:
Aside from the environmental issue (and I'll admit, that's big enough I probably shouldn't just ignore it), I don't think the "destroy before we send a replacement" policy is that bad. I was first asked to do that with a Pearl Jam Fan Club 7" 10 years ago or something. I was appalled. But it makes sense. Otherwise, in cases where the issue is a little noise or nonfill, the buyer may just list the record on Discogs as VG or even VG+ and say it's "near perfect . . . except for the click that persists through 7 revolutions of Song X" or "except for the 5 seconds of static noise at the beginning of Song Y." I always wonder how those descriptions line up with the description of the same issue the buyer provided the customer service rep when they asked for their return.

When you buy a copy, you're entitled to a single copy of an album. It sucks if it's defective, but that doesn't mean you should get a perfect copy and a slightly-less-than-perfect copy that you can pass on to a friend, PIF, or sell on the second-hand market as a less-than-perfect copy--especially when it's a very expensive record. If a seller thinks it's more cost-effective for them to ask you to destroy an item then to have a buyer send it back and destroy it or resell it themselves at a discounted rate, then I think it's reasonable request. I wonder how many fewer VMP records would be on the second-hand market if they implemented a similar policy.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to wade into the debate that's been going on over the last couple of pages, I'm just saying that I see people complain about the destroy-policy fairly regularly, and I think it's a defensible one.
Click to expand...
Sensible.

The only ones complaining about the very logical policy to destroy the supposedly defective record are those who seek to sell the 'defective' copy.

The policy prevents that and benefits both the seller and the broader buying public.

Inevitably, the purchaser of a resold defective copy will whine to the manufacturer to try to get a good copy.

It also minimizes fake complaints or weak complaints. I suspect VMP is too lax about this, and facilitates a fair bit of trade in perfectly good copies that a subscriber obtained through a false claim.

It's not just a defensible policy, it is a good one.
 
RHANDMJ said:
The only ones complaining about the very logical policy to destroy the supposedly defective record are those who seek to sell the 'defective' copy.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t sell it as I would feel guilty in doing so with a defective copy. I would likely just give it away to someone… though let’s be honest, if you give me an excuse to break out some of the leftover M-80s from the 4th of July and blow some shit up, I am gonna take it.

@ranbalam almost got to “Field Destroy” a television. I was kinda disappointed that it didn’t come to that resolution.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
I wouldn’t sell it as I would feel guilty in doing so with a defective copy. I would likely just give it away to someone… though let’s be honest, if you give me an excuse to break out some of the leftover M-80s from the 4th of July and blow some shit up, I am gonna take it.

@ranbalam almost got to “Field Destroy” a television. I was kinda disappointed that it didn’t come to that resolution.
Click to expand...
I once went to one of those "destroy shit" rooms where you pay to just trash the ever loving hell out of a room full of stuff. Taking a baseball bat to a giant Office Space-esque printer was so cathartic.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
@ranbalam almost got to “Field Destroy” a television. I was kinda disappointed that it didn’t come to that resolution.
Click to expand...
I wanted to do that so bad.
Mather said:
I once went to one of those "destroy shit" rooms where you pay to just trash the ever loving hell out of a room full of stuff. Taking a baseball bat to a giant Office Space-esque printer was so cathartic.
Click to expand...
A coworker went to one of those and he absolutely loved it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top