📜 Feature The ups and downs of record grading

Feature article
Equal parts amusing and frustrating, record grading is one of those issues where there is often more than a little room for interpretation.

What is record grading? This is a rating assigned on a record's condition, with separate ratings for a record's jacket/sleeve as well as the record itself. The gold standard in rating systems might be the Goldmine Grading Guide, as presented by Goldmine Magazine, although Goldmine's own price guides only include a single overall rating that is "averaged" between jacket and record, which to me is a rather worthless rating since I am more concerned with how a record plays, as opposed to owning a collectible piece. (A single average Very Good Plus (VG+) rating for a title could indicate a Very Good Minus (VG-) record in a Near Mint jacket, for example...and I have no patience for poor quality vinyl.)

Per Goldmine's estimates and standards, perhaps two to four percent of records from 1970 and prior are worthy of a Near Mint grade. And they consider Mint to be absolutely perfect, without a single flaw, and that records in this grade are rarely seen.

PXL_20210104_041832877.NIGHT (2)-800x521.jpgYet if we look on Discogs, we find that grading is all over the place. Near Mint records are plentiful, and Mint is perhaps the most abused of all the ratings. Granted, I will freely admit that the slightly more relaxed standards of common record grading make more sense, as it gives a wider range of values to assign to the condition of an album.

The reality of grading, though, is where everyone takes a few liberties. We've heard numerous complaints about records being sold as VG+ or NM, only to arrive with multiple scratches or a lot of wear.

Pictured at right is my "NM" copy of an LP I purchased over a year ago (click to zoom in for a closer look); needless to say, it was returned, and I found a sealed copy from a MusicStack seller for half the price.

In many cases, though, I have been pleasantly surprised, where a seller graded conservatively, and the record exceeded my expectation. One recent purchase (the Charles Bevel record) didn't have a single visual flaw on it, and the record played like it had hardly seen a turntable at all in its life.

I have also been disappointed when a record arrives looking spotless, yet it plays back with a lot of noise. It achieves a high visual grade but play grading it would have resulted in a much lower grade. In this case, though, I can't really blame the dealers. We cannot expect a record store to play each and every record that comes through their doors--there isn't enough time in the day for that. A few will take a moment to give the record a test play to listen for any obvious defects, yet I have had a couple instances where a dealer had played a record, claiming it "plays really well," only to have it arrive noisy. And I don't think many dealers out there even recognize groove burn (groove wear), to be honest.

Then there's the old joke about an "eBay Near Mint" being somewhere in the vicinity of the Fair grade. 😁

The grade that really confuses me is Mint. The term came from coin traders and dealers--a coin that is in the same condition as when it left the mint, untouched by human hands, can only be graded as Mint. By that definition, Mint records should be sealed, never touched by human hands once it leaves the pressing plant. Yet if you go by Goldmine standards, that sealed record may not be "perfect in every way." In my mind, the more generous "untouched" definition better fits the standard of Mint, yet the record inside can still have flaws.

And I have found flaws in sealed "new old stock" records. Luckily, they have been very few in number. A couple were badly off-center. One was cracked. Another couple of records, just by the nature of their era, were pressed on noisy vinyl. Overall, though, I would prefer to pay more for a sealed record and know it was not mistreated by a previous owner or played on low-grade equipment (which causes groove burn), than to buy half a dozen copies of the same album to find one that is acceptable. I would say that among the many dozens of new old stock sealed LPs I've purchased in the past few years only three or four were bad enough that I needed to find replacements.

What really irritates me are the sellers (especially those in Europe, where this problem is more rampant) who grade records as Mint which were opened and inspected, or "played only once." Sorry, but when the stylus hits the record, that instantly disqualifies a record as being Mint, in my opinion. I've also seen listings where someone is selling records for another party, where the seller comes across a record that they claim "looks unplayed." And Goldmine's standard doesn't specify whether that "perfect in every way" Mint grade includes whether or not a record was ever played.

I believe a fairer grading system might be slightly more lax on the Near Mint grade (it has to look like it came fresh out of the jacket and play flawlessly), reserve Mint for those perfect/untouched records (or just eliminate Mint entirely since by Goldmine standards, Mint condition records probably don't exist anyway), and introduce a new grade, Sealed, that implies only one thing--the record inside is still in the same condition it left the pressing plant in, whether it was perfect or not. Sealed would also imply that the jacket could have damage from storage over the years. The only drawback to a Sealed grading is that some distributors or even some dishonest sellers could reseal the albums.

My own personal method of buying records these days is to stick to sealed, new old stock records as often as I can, even if they cost a little extra. Groove wear is a major issue I have with other grades of records, and I would say of records I have purchased locally in the past dozen years or more, I've rejected about 60% of what I've purchased due to groove burn. (Groove burn is impossible to spot visually unless the wear is extreme.) I otherwise tend to stick to NM, or VG+ or worse if the record is that rare. I've had better luck with Discogs sellers than any local stock I've purchased, though, and the selection has been far better than the same tired inventory our local stores have over time.

How has your experience been with record grading, compared to the records you have received? Do you feel the grades have usually been close to the actual condition received, or was the grading a bit generous? Any surprises, good or bad? Let us know!
 
Like most everyone, I've had good surprises and bad surprises, and am probably guilty of over-grading some of my LPs as I add them to the Discogs database. I tend to look at listings and sales there as probably what I would do, which is to over-grade something. So if I choose to buy a VG+ record, if it arrives as a VG, I'm pretty happy.

My success in the used marketplace as a buyer is probably due to the fact that I'll choose a CD in most cases if it exists and is not overly pricey. The durability of CDs means that most will play flawlessly as long as they are in anything from "Good" on up. I at least hope to buy a CD that has all of its inserts intact, whether or not a jewel-case is included. Those are easily replaced. With newer cardboard packs, I'm a little fussier. When a title is only out there as an LP, that's where I really pay more attention to any descriptions or pictures that the seller provides.

I think my biggest "good surprise" came when I bought a "lot" of something like 60-70 Herb Alpert seven-inch singles, mostly Tijuana Brass era, and described in varying condition from good to great. The images showed varying label styles, many promos, and a bunch of them had jukebox title strips. When they arrived, the great bulk of these were in truly superb condition, good enough for me to compile a fairly complete singles collection. I only needed to add a few extra singles that were not included. My guess is that these were old stock that were inventoried for jukebox use, but perhaps never actually used. The seller probably didn't have time to play-grade them, and thus sold them for around a buck apiece. There were only a couple that were disappointing - one was "A Taste Of Honey" as it probably was used in a jukebox and got the most plays, so it was well groove-burned. For my compilation, I should have used the version on the mono DEE JAY SAMPLER.

Having the ability to digitally improve a recording that might have a scratch or two, makes it easier to be forgiving if a record is otherwise in good shape. It's the groove-burn or bad pressing noises that will drive me crazy. I'm still annoyed at Universal for what I consider a bad pressing of STONEBONE. The quiet parts of the record - and there are many - exhibit a whooshing sound that's telltale of bad vinyl. And that was of course a brand new pressing. Was it "Mint"?
 
Over the years I have purchased many lps on Ebay and have decided on several things. Sellers need to use a seperate grade for the record and the jacket. This is the only way to be clear on the condition of each piece. Trying to combine the two in one grade is ridiculous and will only create confusion. Plus, when the seller uses seperate grades, you can see what the jacket looks like and compare what you see in the scan with the grade he assigned to it. If the jacket is beat up and he's calling it NM, then you can count on his grading of the vinyl to be off as well. I also do not trust anyone using Mint (M) on a used record. I would have more faith in a seller using NM rather than M. And I would prefer if sellers never used the "E" grade. Stick with VG and just use + or ++ after it to fine tune your grade.
 
I've only ever bought one LP that was "graded" -- it was Herb Alpert's WARM album, and I don't think it was "officially" graded, it was just the seller's opinion that it was "near mint." The vinyl looked nice and clean and I immediately set about recording it over to cassette tape for in-car listening, and right during one of the quiet breaks during "The Sea Is My Soil" was a loud "scuff" sound.

It was still way better than the cassette-copy-of-an-8-track versions of the album I had previously so I decided to live with it. This was before the days of computer editing, of course, so I had no way to get rid of it and I listened to that scuff at least a few dozen times over many years.

So now even though I hear pristine CD versions (or the excellent needle-drop that I got from a fellow Cornerite), my brain still wants to add "that sound" in at the appropriate moment.
 
Yeah I know that phenomenon well. For years, I played the LOOK AROUND album by Sergio Mendes, and the fifth song on side one, "Tristeza (Goodbye Sadness)" was always a favorite. But right in the middle when Sergio sings:

"Fez do meu coração a sua moradia"

...the sibilant S sounds at the end of "coração" and at the start of "sua" were just too much for my stylus, so a loud distortion there just became part of the song.

To this day, I still miss it when I play a CD or different LP.
 
...the sibilant S sounds at the end of "coração" and at the start of "sua" were just too much for my stylus, so a loud distortion there just became part of the song.
That part of the song was always hard on older record players, and as a result most copies out there have groove burn. Unfortunately the type of stylus that could track it properly wasn't created until the 1980s. I had a lot of records I had the same sibilance on, where I got used to "ththththth" rather than "sssss" for that reason. Michael Jackson's "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough," where he sings "sensation" the second time, always came through as "thenthation." 🙄
 
I also do not trust anyone using Mint (M) on a used record.
That is part of the problem with sellers--in my opinion (and apparently not in the opinion of most record resellers, or Goldmine experts for that matter), "mint" should mean what it does in the coin collecting world, where the coin is in the exact condition it left the mint in--uncirculated, untouched by human hands and presumably, unflawed. So by nature, a sealed record should define mint condition--unplayed, and untouched since it left the pressing plant.

Yet we know that sealed records are not always perfect--some are noisy, some have scuffs and scratches from the pressing plant, some might be warped, some are off-center, etc. So the real dilemma is that if we go with the Mint grade in the traditional sense, even a flawed record could be considered Mint.

I have noticed, too, that there are more Mint gradings with sellers overseas, especially in countries where records were usually sold unsealed (as they did not shrink wrap or otherwise seal the jackets). If it's graded Mint and I were to find that the inner grooves had groove burn, you could rest assured I would demand a complete refund on my purchase. Those sellers would not want me as a customer.

That is also why I prefer play grading over visual grading, as there can be hidden issues not visible to the naked eye. Things like noisy vinyl and groove burn are not visibly detected. And even play grading is flawed--many (most?) record dealers will play a record and say "it's fine" or "plays clean," yet I get it here and it is riddled with scratches. 🙄 I gave up buying used vinyl locally since so many in recent years have had groove burn, much more so than back in the 90s.

It's harder to find new old stock vinyl that is sealed, but it's worth it to get a record that has a much better chance of sounding good and playing cleanly. At least I don't have to deal with the poor handling of any previous owners.

I agree completely, Mint should never apply to a used record, even if it was only played a single time, as that goes against the principle of the grade. If anything, an additional grade should be added: Sealed. That would tell me it's untouched, and I won't have to rely on a seller's sloppy grading practices to tell me a record might not play well at all. Mint can't even be proven, so...is it worth even having Mint as a record grade?
 
I posted this out here some time back, yet it's worth a rerun given its applicability remains intact.

Beware of the Following Types of e-bay sellers who, based on the following actions, clearly don’t adhere to Goldmine visual grading standards:
  • Sellers who grade ANY used LP as M.
  • Sellers who make statements like: "it’s NM…except for _________".
  • Sellers who use hype or non-Goldmine terms (e.g., "amazing", "fantastic", "incredible") to describe LP condition.
  • Sellers who avoid detailing LP condition by hyping the other aspects of the LP (e.g., "wonderful album", "great addition to your collection").
  • Sellers who exclusively use the word "vinyl" and/or were born after 1970.
  • Sellers who clearly don’t understand the music they’re selling (e.g., classifying The Sandpipers as "R&B & Soul").
  • Sellers who also hock items unrelated to LPs (e.g., Motel 6 ashtrays, buddha clocks, three rims from a ’68 Dodge Polara, and assorted sundries pilfered from Grandma’s attic, etc.).
Additionally, the following is offered for general consideration regarding used record purchases based on visual grading…
  • NM 45s only exist in fantasyland.
  • The first time any new C&W or R&B LP is removed from its jacket, its grade instantly plunges from M to FAIR.
  • LP condition is always inversely proportional to the attractiveness of the artist pictured on the jacket.
  • LPs classified as Instrumental — Easy Listening sold as VG+ always have one long scratch that extends from the lead-in grooves to the dead wax (for many of these LPs — particularly 101 Strings and Montovani — this actually enhances the listening experience).
  • Then there's the fun stuff…like the e-Bay seller who listed Bob Dylan/Another Side of Bob Dylan (’64) as "a rare 2-eye issue" — notwithstanding that all Columbia LPs from 1963–1969 were "2-eye".
 
Sellers who make statements like: "it’s NM…except for _________".
He's dead, except that he's still up and walking around the Burger King in Kalamazoo.

NM 45s only exist in fantasyland.
I bought some Esquivel 45s back in the early 2000s that actually were flawless...but I don't recall if they had a grading.


  • LP condition is always inversely proportional to the attractiveness of the artist pictured on the jacket.

This certainly would rate a Mint+++ grading:

1658492293661.png

(I think I just lost my breakfast... 🤣 )
 
There are soooo many variables which boil down to one big subjective hot mess! Being a
vinyl fan for almost sixty years, I have learned a lot, and thanks to all of the research compiled on the internet it has opened up a plethora of information at my fingertips.

I always ask questions before I purchase used vinyl, especially 50's-70's LP's, which could have been played on a poorly maintained Magnavox console with a nickel on the headshell to prevent skipping (I guess you could call it anti anti-skating)! All you need is one spin on that rig and it's trashed, not to mention could be visually NM. This seems to happen more often with collectable stuff that is unscrupulously peddled by some dealers. Conversely, I have seen things that appear to be on the poor end of VG+ that play like a dream. Even if I get a record that is graded NM I will do a basic Nitty Gritty cleaning and play it. If this doesn't confirm the visual grading, I clean it with Audio Intelligent No.15 Enzymatic solution followed by an ultrasonic cleaning in pure distilled water and a final rinse in Nitty Gritty solution. This can work miracles with most records but will separate the garbage from the goods. That being said, I always give the seller the benefit of the doubt because so much microscopic dirt can be pressed down into those grooves.

Mint is silly, unless it is sealed, and older records are subject to potentially adverse storage conditions. Nonetheless, I am willing to take a chance if it is genuinely sealed. I was lucky enough to get a sealed 1st pressing of Brasil 66's debut album. The audio made my hair stand up. Same thing with a sealed 1st pressing (3S 3S matrices) of the Casino Royale Soundtrack on Colgems. It lived up to the hype and I had NM copies before it that were really good, but not like this one.

Record collecting is a hobby that comes with a big question mark and I can't quibble if something isn't what I expected, with few exceptions.

1). If it is grossly misrepresented/overgraded (because I ask questions before I buy if I'm unsure of something).

2). When it's an expensive collectable that I have paid a considerable sum for that has been clearly overgraded.

It's still a lot of fun, and I just wish there was an affordable electron microscope for visual grading so that we could establish a definitive criteria for what constitutes VG+, NM, and the others.

I always opt for 1st pressings from the country of origin when possible, and proceed with caution. If it sounds too good to be true, guess what..............
 
I was lucky enough to get a sealed 1st pressing of Brasil 66's debut album. The audio made my hair stand up
You should hear the MFSL edition of that album. Incredible.
 
There are soooo many variables which boil down to one big subjective hot mess! Being a
vinyl fan for almost sixty years, I have learned a lot, and thanks to all of the research compiled on the internet it has opened up a plethora of information at my fingertips.
Yep, you've nailed it. And a lot of your complaints are similar to my own. Groove burn (wear) is the biggest issue I've found. It doesn't bother some vinyl buyers but for me it is a deal killer.

One thing I noticed is that in terms of records from the 50s and 60s, the stereo records are often in better condition than the mono. As the mono pickups back in the day could be quite heavy (nickel on the tonearm? sounds more like three quarters and a 5-pound anvil in some cases!), they caused a lot of damage. I have a Sinatra LP that someone in the family owned, and you can tell that they really liked "I've Got You Under My Skin" as the sound has nearly turned into white noise! 😁

I also once bought a Nautilus half-speed pressing of the Cornerstone album by Styx. It played well until the third track, "Babe," which was the #1 hit. The groove burn starts at that track! It's a shame that it was never taken care of.

I've had probably 99% good luck with buying new old stock sealed records and thinking back to all those I've bought, maybe two? three? four? ever had a problem. One was off-center on one side. Another, the Roger Nichols album, was heat damaged on the side and has a nasty "pinch" warp throughout. A shame since it is a very nice sounding record otherwise!
 
Yep, you've nailed it. And a lot of your complaints are similar to my own. Groove burn (wear) is the biggest issue I've found. It doesn't bother some vinyl buyers but for me it is a deal killer.

One thing I noticed is that in terms of records from the 50s and 60s, the stereo records are often in better condition than the mono. As the mono pickups back in the day could be quite heavy (nickel on the tonearm? sounds more like three quarters and a 5-pound anvil in some cases!), they caused a lot of damage. I have a Sinatra LP that someone in the family owned, and you can tell that they really liked "I've Got You Under My Skin" as the sound has nearly turned into white noise! 😁

I also once bought a Nautilus half-speed pressing of the Cornerstone album by Styx. It played well until the third track, "Babe," which was the #1 hit. The groove burn starts at that track! It's a shame that it was never taken care of.

I've had probably 99% good luck with buying new old stock sealed records and thinking back to all those I've bought, maybe two? three? four? ever had a problem. One was off-center on one side. Another, the Roger Nichols album, was heat damaged on the side and has a nasty "pinch" warp throughout. A shame since it is a very nice sounding record otherwise!
My experience with Nautilus pressings is one of indifference. Pressings are quiet, but the sound has 70's-80's hifi equalization that usually doesn't come close to the first pressings from the country of origin. Not sure if there is a Monarch pressing of Cornerstone.
Most of the bands I collect are UK based, but it really pays off when you find one in great shape. I have found that early Led Zeppelin are usually better on the Red/Plum UK Atlantic with the exception of the RL cut of II. The George Piros US pressings are damn good and both are better than the sterile Japanese pressings that are disappointing more often than not.
My Monarch stereo 1st pressing of TJ's Going Places is jaw dropping. So tough to find early ones when these were pressed over and over again. Sometimes you get lucky.
 
He's dead, except that he's still up and walking around the Burger King in Kalamazoo.


I bought some Esquivel 45s back in the early 2000s that actually were flawless...but I don't recall if they had a grading.




This certainly would rate a Mint+++ grading:

1658492293661.png

(I think I just lost my breakfast... 🤣 )
Looks like they were eating too much Jesus at Sunday dinner and gave up broccoli for Lent!
I'm relieved to know that the MoFi pressing is all analog.
 
Back
Top Bottom