Page 1 of 1

'Rare Records Mostly Dreadful'

PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 6:22 pm
by AndyM

Re: 'Rare Records Mostly Dreadful'

PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 7:31 pm
by Adam Blake
Oooh, bait...

Bullseyes? Not really. It's a funny skit but whoever wrote it knows far less about rare records than you do, Andy. After all, there's a BIG difference between rare and valuable.

The rarest records - yer actual Charley Patton 78s and suchlike - only exist in such small quantities (sometimes only two or three known copies in the whole world), and are so fabulously fragile that even to breathe on them is liable to reduce their auction value. I enjoy winding up the denizens of websites devoted to them by saying things like: "I've got this one on CD" or, "I just found a box of them in a junk shop in Kilburn". Responses are frosty at best.

Wasn't this one of yours, Alan? http://www.tefteller.com/html/rarest_78_record.html

Coat getting time, I fear...

Re: 'Rare Records Mostly Dreadful'

PostPosted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:17 am
by AndyM
I didn't post it as bait. It made me laugh, especially the gags about what might be called 'muso masculinity', it made me think of SOTW, and I thought 'there's a comedy thread nobody posts in much' and I decided to share the love.

Re: 'Rare Records Mostly Dreadful'

PostPosted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 11:10 am
by john poole

Re: 'Rare Records Mostly Dreadful'

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:47 pm
by alister prince
I chuckled. It brought back memories of an 'interview' in the Record Mirror, mid 60s with the head honcho of a group of Blues freaks called 'The Purists'. They rejected anything that became popular. EG destroying their copies of Smokestack Lightnin because it got to No 40. The final comment was they were giving up Blues for Gospel, ' Oh like MahaliaJackson'? 'Who...'
Aly