Lately, I’ve been looking and dreaming about getting a true stereo audio system like what I used to have.  A bit of research showed me that dedicated stereo systems aren’t dead, they’re just brands I am unfamiliar with.  So, I’ve been spending lots of time reading and thinking and drooling over the idea of having a listening space.

And my CD purchases keep going.  Completing my collection of the MCA Master Series wasn’t the end of my music collecting.  Even though I’m not into modern music, there still remains a wealth of older music available for me to purchase.  There are benefits to this.  First, the music is cheap, because it’s old and used.  Second, there is a chance of getting a collectable for cheap.  A collectable CD?  Worth more than a drink coaster?  You’d be surprised.  Especially in the era of music I purchase, there are a couple specific things to be on the watch for in order to get a CD that has collector value. 

The thing to know is that when CDs first came out, in the mid-1980’s, the primary goal was to get as many titles available for sale as possible.  In order to do that, record companies made glass masters of CDs straight from the master tapes used to create records of that time.  Later on, when there was more available time, the record companies would remaster those original master tapes.  The remastering process would include different EQ and effects, sometimes an improvement, sometimes not, but always different than the original.

Knowing that, when I say that there is an audience that insists on having the pure, original sound (defined as being the LP version), and that CDs that contain that sound are limited to early, early pressings, you can easily see the scarcity-to-value premise.  Yes, the original pressings of CDs are more prized by audiophiles.  That’s not to say they are always superior.  As engineers’ mastering and remastering skills became better, CDs got better sounding, with better stereo separation and more dynamic range, but the “purity” of the original sound is still prized.

There’s a couple of simple clues to finding a first-run CD, and naturally, there’s a ton of subtleties that I can’t get into.  But, if you want to get one of these CDs, you need to be looking for an album recorded pre-1990, and manufactured in either Japan or West Germany.  One sure clue that you are getting a first-run CD is that the case spine is frosted smooth, instead of ribbed.  Another sign, and one that raises the CD’s collectability, is if the CD is printed with a “target” design.  Search for Target CD if you want to know more about these.

Yesterday, The GF and I made an impromptu stop at a local CD store.  I was hoping to pick up an Ultradisc or two (Ultradiscs are gold-plattered CDs with highly-reputed remastering and are very desirable).  Not finding any, I bought a couple of CDs by The Cars.  $3 and $5 – not bad at all.

We stopped at Sonic and I took a closer look at my purchases.  One CD I was immediately disappointed in myself with.  It wasn’t a retail CD; it was a CD Club pressing.  These are easily identified and I should have passed on it.  Slightly depressed, I opened up the other CD and was shocked to see a target CD inside.  I quickly closed the case and checked the case edge.  It was frosted.  I just got a target CD for $5, which would be sold by a knowledgeable seller for $15-$20.  Mood immediately elevated.

I had discounted the thought of ever getting any rare CDs from my local CD shops, because I assumed these guys knew what they were selling.  They should have identified that disc just as I had and sold it on the Internet for 3x what they sold it to me.  But, since I had recently bought an Ultradisc for $22 (valued online at $45-$50) and now finding a target CD for $5, this gives me hope for finding other collector’s items.

As I’ve previously noted, I have finished the acquisition phase of my CD collection.  I have also completed the scanning of the cover art.  The results of this have been added to Flickr and also as a series of pages for other’s benefit.  To increase the benefits, I decided to contribute to a music metadata website.

I think I’d been through this before, and I had a big internal debate as to whether to use MusicBrainz or Discogs.  Initially, I chose Musicbrainz, but something didn’t sit well with me during that experience and I gave it up pretty quickly.  Recently, I submitted some missing information to Discogs and it went a lot smoother.  So I think I’ve found my home, there.  History shows I’ve said that before and ended up disappointed.  We’ll see.

Discogs seems to be more of what I want anyway, because they focus on collectors, which is more and more how I view myself and my CDs.  So, not only do you simply submit information, you also consume that information by tracking which CDs you own.  I started doing that sporadically.  I’m about half-way through with over 300 of my 600+ albums logged.

The problem is, when you are logging a collectable, you have to be very specific as to which collectible you have.  In the case of albums, each album can be released under different labels in different countries under different catalog numbers.  So as I was logging my collection on the website, I was pretty much choosing the most likely candidate from the multiple choices.

To be the most accurate (and there is a benefit to being accurate), I would have to have the CD in front of me to make sure I was choosing the right one, with the right label and catalog number.  Instead of doing that, I decided I should record the Label, Barcode, and Catalog Number in the files’ metadata, so I can refer to them as needed.  So, for a little while each day, I sit in font of my CD rack with my laptop and record that data into the files.

I had previously used Windows Media Player’s metadata feature to try and add all missing info using their metadata services.  As I was going through and adding the actual info from my CDs, I discovered how inaccurate the results really were.  How could an application determine what label the CD was on, when all it has is a ripped audio file?  For every album I had to change from Sony to Columbia or anything else, I got really irritated.  Not so much that it was wrong, because I understand how it could be wrong, but more because I could have been put in a position of giving bad information.  I insist on being as truthful and accurate as possible.

One of the benefits of being accurate is that Discogs can value your collection based on prior sales of the same item.  Of course, if you have a common or a rare release of an album, that can make a big difference in its value, so accuracy is important.  Being about half-way through my collection, and with moderate accuracy, my collection has a median value of $1500.  I have some CDs worth $60 and some worth $.75.