I currently have about 500 albums (counting double albums as one). I wonder if or why I should increase that number to, say, 5.000 albums, which I would call a really big collection. If you're a collector, then it makes sense. Real collectors don't care so much about specific items in their collection, but rather if the collection is complete, if the items are particularly rare, etc. My problem is that I'm not really a collector, I simply love listening to good music. So I'm more an addict than a collector

My point: If you're really into the music aspect of the collection (you own the records because you intend to listen to them), it makes no sense to aquire thousands of records. I'm convinced that there aren't 1000 masterpiece albums out there, that you simply HAVE to own in order to make your life complete. Imagine that you would listen to two albums a day, then it would still take you more than a year to listen to 1.000 records.

So for me the conclusion is that I will start to agressively sell off records that I don't like, and try to keep my collection at around 500 items ... it still looks pretty impressive, yet is not entirely over the top. This way I have a definite goal for my collection: It will be quite perfect when I really can't think of a record that I would sell.

Are there any people out there who have, say, 1.000+ records and would say that each one of them is vital in a musical and not completional sense?

abyssyinfinity wrote: Also I have 1600 cds, but I'm not a collector, simply prog & psych music are a perpetual and pleasant surprise...

And you still listen to all of them? I mean, I recently sold 40 cds, because they just don't appeal to me anymore. I think that your musical taste is constantly changing, and you have to accept that. For example, I find myself buying Tom Waits records, stuff that I would have thrown out of the window 10 years ago ...

con safo wrote: I don't like spending money on albums i dont like. I don't see the lure to do so, but i guess if you have to own every album by a certain band, go for it.

I did that recently, bought Van Halen III on ebay to complete my Van Halen collection, even though I don't really love that music anymore (I still like it, but when I listen to it, I get bored). Maybe it will grow on me (wishful thinking).

I have about 2,000 vinyl LPs and around 1,000 CDs.

I usally get around to listening to most of them more than once, and if I detect that there's more bling than bang after a few listens, it goes on eBay.

I do collect somewhat - but only because first pressings of vinyl LPs sound so much better than any other format. So I collect early pressings of albums I already own, and sell the most recent. I'm not into label collecting - although it is very tempting when you think of the quality of much of the music on, say Vertigo, Harvest or Atlantic.

Certif1ed wrote: So I collect early pressings of albums I already own, and sell the most recent. I'm not into label collecting - although it is very tempting when you think of the quality of much of the music on, say Vertigo, Harvest or Atlantic.

I fear the day they publish older CDs as digipacks/books, I love them and would replace my jewel box versions by digibooks until my bank told me to stop

As far as labels are concerned, my InsideOut collection is quite unintentionally becoming more and more complete ...

I have never collected all of a bands' albums just to have them all. I try my best to buy only albums that I will enjoy listening to and will want to play at least occassionally. Not always successful of course, but this site has helped with that a great deal. Many thanks to the collaborators and forum members.

Snow Dog wrote: You don't have to say it! We know your mad, Flowerchild.

I know

I don't think an album as to be a masterpiece for you to buy it. As long as you like the band, or the style of music, then buy away.  

I'm not a collectionist, but i will buy the one album i don't have if i have the rest (ie. Genesis's Trespass. I had no hopes to get this album, i got it because i had all the rest [the "classic" ones].)

In terms of how many CD i own, i don't know for sure, but i'll guess 200-300. This includes all my albums not just prog. I've haven't taken inventory lately, so that figure might be wrong. Also, i buy often, so that number will grow

Man With Hat wrote: I don't think an album as to be a masterpiece for you to buy it. As long as you like the band, or the style of music, then buy away.

My pocket book kind of limits the number of cds I can buy, so I have to restrain myself and select 1-5 cds per month. Unfortunately, knowing good records from bad ones (even in a subjective way) requires extensive listening, which one cannot do in a record store. So if there is no other way of obtaining some samples of the record (file sharing, progarchives mp3 download, band's website), one has to buy the cat in the bag (don't know if that proverb exists in the english language). This means that after some time, a growing number of records in your collection will be stuff that you bought, but after some time "shrunk" on you, and now you wish you hadn't bought it in the first place.

I think that in big collections a fair share of the collection are records that fall into this category. I'll check my collection this weekend for stuff that I don't like anymore, I'm curious to see how many of those are prog records. At least I'll have some material for writing bad reviews, which could counterbalance my 4/5 star ratings

I'd buy an album for one track if the album cost less than a single...

(the advantage of 2nd hand vinyl!)

Of course I'd buy an album for a single track, if I can get it on ebay for 1-3€. But as your taste and experience improves, so does the price for your desired albums on ebay ...

The last bargain I'd be proud of was Ron Thal: Hermit for 6€. I follow many auctions on ebay, but for most of my desired items the price is little less than what I would pay on amazon.com. 

I have been accumulating records and CDs since the early seventies, with an accumulation now of about 500 CDs and about 2000 LPs and 45s (the most vinyl I ever had at one time was a little more than 5000), and I have listened to every second all of the music I currently own.

My current rule of thumb is to trade a CD for a different one if I do not listen to it twice, in its entirety, within a two month time period (with numerous 'chestnuts' being exceptions) after I have obtained it. Using this rule keeps the accumulation about the same size, and it also keeps me in new, or at least different, music.

I don't like to get stuff to be a completist (with a few exceptions), nor do I like to get stuff simply because it is rare (the old collector's curse). I have found unlistenable some supposedly venerated items, such as Group 1850 (which I thought was unbearably boring), and found silly to be a completist for completists sake (just how many Ozric Tentacles or Grateful Dead Dick's Picks do I really need?). Of course this is subjective.

On the other hand, I won't think twice about paying quite a bit for an earlier pressing of an LP I already paid handsomely to have.

It comes down to, of course, buying what you like or being ready to be experimental with your money. I used to own a comic bokk store, and when perpetually asked for advice on what to buy, I alway said to buy what you enjoy and you will never lose your investment.

Cheers and thanks for always interesting articles!

I guess I'm rare, having under 200 records (CD+LP) altogether, about 70% of it prog (but those I've sold away are probably over hunderd too).  I borrow records - and tape only the best parts - much more than buy them. Hail to Finnish libraries - especially "HelMet" = Helsinki area!   As younger I bought albums more haphazardly, but nowadays very selectively. Sometimes it's hard to find enough listening time for even all the library cd's.

Moreover: I think I would more easily lose my cd's than my radio (and its classical music) if I had to choose between them.

This is a big problem with me ... my collection (which I share with my wife) once went up to over 5,000 original CDs and I've trimmed it down to under 3,000 CDs most of which are excellent ... we have a very wide range of tastes ... and both my wife and I have spent time as CD reviewers, so we once got them by the truckload (I did a lot of trading too, ya know ... sell a Britney Spears and a Sum 41 and use the money to buy a Yes CD)

But sometimes I really miss the days when my collection was around 200 tapes ... when I knew the order of every track on every album and figured out the lyrics (most of them) by myself. Nowadays I can go up to the 4 cupboards housing our collection, wanting to listen to something and half an hour later still be standing there not having chosen a thing ... there are great albums I own that I love, but haven't heard in more than 3 years ...

I try to go through phases ... and in a sense doing reviews for progarchives is partly about me being disciplined in listening to my own collection ...

MER,

Some women would tell you that size does not matter it is how you use it!

Regarding the record collection, your problem (if you consider it as such , but the size of my collection is not so much a problem as much as the space it takes and the health of my wallet) , but I generally tend to get rid of what I considser not essential after having made a track selection for my compilation. I still have some 400 cassettes (mostly Maxell XL-IIS) and now that I have a HiFi CD burner , I keep doing this. I am somewhat reluctant on always acquiring new albums but always find the my curiosity too strong to resist and do so still on a rate of 5 cd/month , some of which I trade and resell .

Martin/Trotsky's two points are also very common points of mine (not really knowing what I want to hear , tooooooo much choice and the fact that some albums I have not heard in years) and I also do miss the times when I knew my collection by heart - track listings and all.

Sean Trane wrote: MER, Some women would tell you that size does not matter it is how you use it!

Those women would also tell you that they don't need a big shoe collection

I have only 190 CD's and 55 LP's, but the collection is still growing....mva-ha-haa!!

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Sean Trane wrote: MER, Some women would tell you that size does not matter it is how you use it! Those women would also tell you that they don't need a big shoe collection

Yup ! I actually had to offer a pair to the girlfriend because she is not into shoes much and her collection is down to five, including the winter ones.