the price of CDs

[MajorFubar]

CDs were over priced then, vinyl is now.

Probably more true to say that vinyl was cheap for a while, but it certainly didn't start off cheap. Last year there was a 1963 mono copy of the Beatles' Please Please Me LP on eBay with its original price-tag on. Just out of curiosity I pushed its price through the Bank of England's online inflation calculator and it ended up at something like £33. God knows how much more money the stereo version would have skinned the poor original buyer; they were always even more expensive!

 

[Freddy58]

CDs were over priced then, vinyl is now.

Probably more true to say that vinyl was cheap for a while, but it certainly didn't start off cheap. Last year there was a 1963 mono copy of the Beatles' Please Please Me LP on eBay with its original price-tag on. Just out of curiosity I pushed its price through the Bank of England's online inflation calculator and it ended up at something like £33. God knows how much more money the stereo version would have skinned the poor original buyer; they were always even more expensive!

Early Beatles, I think I would prefer mono anyway

 

[MajorFubar]

More proof of the fact was the proliferation of cheap soundalike LPs on labels like Hallmark (Top of the Pops) and Stereo Gold Award (12 Tops). As a kid in the 70s my record collection was full of them because original LPs by the original artists were darn expensive!

 

[Freddy58]

More proof of the fact was the proliferation of cheap soundalike LPs on labels like Hallmark (Top of the Pops) and Stereo Gold Award (12 Tops). As a kid in the 70s my record collection was full of them because original LPs by the original artists were darn expensive!

Hence the importance at that time, of singles. 3 minutes of vinyl magic

 

[MajorFubar]

Quite. EPs too, for those seeking slightly longer indulgence without raiding a bank. Though there were quite a few of those which were covers as well.

 

[the record spot]

Shopped at Fopp for years. Excellent store and pricing was bang on. HMV is pretty good to these days. Just bought a load of Kate Bush CDs, her Fish People label remasters, yesterday and I'm happy to support both shops. Edinburgh has a good range of record shops still thankfully.

 

[Coll]

I find shops are no good for classical they have no choice assuming they have the piece in the first place.

On amazon and some other online shops you can buy several versions of the same piece by different artists and orchestras and can then make a choice.

 

[DIB]

I'm another Fopp Records fan. The store in Manchester is a great store to visit, with lots of cheapo bargains strategically placed to catch my eye. I can't go in there without buying some £3 compilation or two, as well as what I've gone in for originally

Everytime I go in the vinyl section has grown in size, and I believe its been moved from downstairs in the basement, up to the more prominent ground floor area. The majority of the new vinyl is still too expensive for me though.

.

 

[VinylRush]

Unfortunately it seems that the price of CD's is on their way back up. Anybody else noticed that Amazons CD's have gone up in price now they've eliminated the competition.

Yep I have noticed that as well. Amazon CD's are on the way up for sure. I always shop around for 2nd hand stuff now on ebay or go with an Amazon seller like Zoverstocks and I can usually get a coupld of quid off Amazon prices by going that route.

I remember getting my Bowie collection on CD from Andy's records in town in the mid 90's. I paid about £15,99 for some of those CD's. Crazy prices!

 

[Covenanter]

More proof of the fact was the proliferation of cheap soundalike LPs on labels like Hallmark (Top of the Pops) and Stereo Gold Award (12 Tops). As a kid in the 70s my record collection was full of them because original LPs by the original artists were darn expensive!

Hence the importance at that time, of singles. 3 minutes of vinyl magic

My uncle had a record shop and I worked there from age 14 until I left Uni. For most of the 60s and early 70s singles were 6/8d, ie 3 for a £1, and albums were about 32/6d, ie about £1.63. That was an awful lot of money back then and most young people bought singles. Retailer margins were very high. I was lucky enough to be able to get all my music at cost but even so an album was an investment.

Now CDs are really very cheap, well classical ones are, unless you want something special that's no longer being made. Moreover there are lots of re-releases of high-quality performances and recordings at very low prices. For example the "Mercury Living Presence" box of 50 CDs costs about £75, so roughly £1.50 per CD. I buy most of my CDs from Amazon as there are now no shops in Birmingham with anything like a decent selection of classical CDs.

Chris

PS I agree with Matthew that Gramophone is much better under its new ownership. I've even bought a subscription! Haymarket nearly killed it but I hope enough people sign up to keep it going as it is back to what it did best, serious reviews. Andrew's equipment section is good too with more in-depth reviews then you get here.

 

[FennerMachine]

Not sure I agree that CD's are too costly.

I've had a quick check of some POP albums on iTunes then searched for them on CD.

Not a great difference in price. CD can be ripped to iTunes or whatever you use plus you still have the physical media. You can pass on physical items, but not usually licenses.

 

[MajorFubar]

Yet that's a separate but clearly-related topic. I've never ever been tempted to download any album because there's never been a time where I've not been able to find the CD at least a couple of quid cheaper, especially if we include the proliferation of used CDs on the market.

 

[shep1968]

Unfortunately it seems that the price of CD's is on their way back up. Anybody else noticed that Amazons CD's have gone up in price now they've eliminated the competition.

Yep I have noticed that as well. Amazon CD's are on the way up for sure. I always shop around for 2nd hand stuff now on ebay or go with an Amazon seller like Zoverstocks and I can usually get a coupld of quid off Amazon prices by going that route.

I remember getting my Bowie collection on CD from Andy's records in town in the mid 90's. I paid about £15,99 for some of those CD's. Crazy prices!

interestingly i've just joined ebay and sold my old hifi kit and looked around for some albums i fancied on there. Of the five albums i looked for three were more expensive on there before postage than on amazon. In the mid to late 80's a man i knew made a decent living buying and selling 2nd hand cd's. Before postage he sold the basic ones at £7.50. That was nearly thirty years ago.

 

[shep1968]

CDs were over priced then, vinyl is now.

Probably more true to say that vinyl was cheap for a while, but it certainly didn't start off cheap. Last year there was a 1963 mono copy of the Beatles' Please Please Me LP on eBay with its original price-tag on. Just out of curiosity I pushed its price through the Bank of England's online inflation calculator and it ended up at something like £33. God knows how much more money the stereo version would have skinned the poor original buyer; they were always even more expensive!

Early Beatles, I think I would prefer mono anyway

Think this album would have been mono only, no stereo was released at the time.

 

[Al ears]

Not sure I agree that CD's are too costly.

I've had a quick check of some POP albums on iTunes then searched for them on CD.

Not a great difference in price. CD can be ripped to iTunes or whatever you use plus you still have the physical media. You can pass on physical items, but not usually licenses.

Amazon CD prices appear to have risen after the advent of AutoRip. Admittedly you do get a rather lo-res mp3 available to you so you could then flog-on the CD itself but I prefer to rip the CD to some kind of lossless file anyway so the AutoRip mp3 function is not of much interest to me.

 

[MajorFubar]

Think this album would have been mono only, no stereo was released at the time.

There was. The mono version was released in March 1963 and the stereo version came a month later. There were (and are) official mono and stereo mixes of every core Beatles album upto and including the White Album

 

[shep1968]

Think this album would have been mono only, no stereo was released at the time.

There was. The mono version was released in March 1963 and the stereo version came a month later. There were (and are) official mono and stereo mixes of every core Beatles album upto and including the White Album

I've been hit by a zombie stat. Always thought that the albums were mono only but they weren't.

 

[MajorFubar]

You may have been misguided by the fact that until 2009 the first three Beatles albums were only available on CD in mono and the rest were only available in stereo. But the LPs were available in both mono and stereo. Well, initially anyway; the mono mixes haven't been available on LP for many a year.