Recently, I purchased a collection of vintage jukebox EPs dating from the mid 60′s to early 70′s. These EPs differ from regular 45s, in that they had small spindle holes and played at 33 1/3 rpm. They would contain four to six tracks from any given artist’s album and were not sold to the general public. Instead, they were only available to jukebox distributors for machines that could play this speed.

While they should not to be confused with commercially released EPs that were mildly popular in the late 50′s/early 60′s, their basic construction is the same. One of the most notable differences is the way they were packaged. Jukebox EPs were issued in one of three distinct jackets. Earlier EPs were either thick cardstock “LP style” or tri-fold paper sleeves. Both would reproduce the original albums cover artwork on the front in full color. The cardstock sleeves would have totally blank back covers (a sure sign of a jukebox EP), while the tri-fold sleeves would open into two sheets of title strips. In the late 60s, less colorful paper envelope style sleeves (black print on colored paper) were introduced. Some of these have different (or altered) artwork than the LPs they were sourced from.

It should come as no surprise that the Beatles have some of the most sought after jukebox EPs. Any issued for their Capitol albums are in high demand (cover, vinyl, title strips/inserts all factor in to the total value). All of the Beatles EPs would have had the thicker “LP style” jackets with blank back covers. Some other sought after artists include the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan, Johnny Cash and even Dean Martin.

I think everyone who is a collector has something as part of their colletion that they have no real justifacation for owning. For me, it’s old bootleg albums. I’ve accumulated over 250 of these things in the past few years and god knows why…I never listen to them. Regardless, their history and taboo nature in the record collecting field is pretty facinating.

The first rock bootleg is believed to be Bob Dylan’s “Great White Wonder”. Released circa 1969 in a no frills hand-stamped white jacket, it contained previously unreleased studio recordings from the early 60s. It caught the attention of the record buying public via underground magazines and hippie distribution circles. What would follow was a flood of live/demo material by just about any and every band of note. Pink Floyd, the Doors, Grateful Dead, Dylan, the Who, Led Zeppelin, and the Beatles were all heavily bootlegged. Anyone with access to the tapes and a pressing plant could produce their own boot.

The sound quality of many bootlegs is mediocre AT BEST. Tape hiss, excessive crowd noise and cheap pressings were not uncommon. I have one Who boot where you can hear the audience’s chitter chatter ten times louder than the band itself (infact, you can’t really hear the band at all!). However, some boots are considered true classics and held in high regard by fans. Many recordings that originally appeared on bootlegs would later turn up on officially released albums and collections. Tracks from Dylan’s “Great White Wonder” were issued in the 70′s as “Basement Tapes” and Frank Zappa did a whole series called “Beat the Boots” where he pretty much bootlegged the bootlegs!

The vinyl bootleg’s heyday was certainly through the 1970s into the 80s. Early bootleggers would commonly travel across the country selling to local headshops, record stores and at concerts out the back of their vans . Many vinyl (and far more CD) bootlegs continued to be produced through the 90s and some are still being released to this day. Recently, I’ve seen Franz Ferdinand and Modest Mouse boolegs on wax. Even with the ease of finding much of this material for free on online download sites, these new boots show how important it is for a lot of collectors to have this material on vinyl.

While bootlegs are of a dubious and not-so-legal status, they’ve accumulated a solid fan base and legitimacy in the collecting world. Some bands have been friendly (or have at least turned a blind eye to) letting others sell bootlegs of their material. Others monitor online auction sites and pull any offending releases. If you have any old boots collecting dust in the basement, I’d recommend doing your research before trying to sell them in a public forum.

Every once in a while, there is a collector-related story that receives major media attention, yet, gets a collective moan from a majority of collectors that it should be most relevant to. Remember that Velvet Underground acetate that “sold” on Ebay for over $150,000? I do. CNN even gave it coverage. However, did you catch any follow up articles on how the winning bidder didn’t even have enough money in his bank account to buy gas for his car? Numerous others had also made exorbitant bids with no intentions of ever paying. Apparently, it’s a strange ego boost to say you briefly had the high bid on one of the rarest records ever made; sad but true.

Recently, you may have caught a story in the media about the personal archive of Paul Mawhinney, owner of Record-Rama in Pittsburgh, PA. With a modest starting bid of only THREE MILLION DOLLARS, you just might have had a shot at his self-proclaimed “Worlds Greatest Music Collection” (over 3 million LPs and 45s along with 300,000 CDs). With a feature photo of Mawhinny holding one of rock’s holy grails (The Rolling Stones 1969 promotional album) and the auction’s claim that he was once offered over $28 million for his collection, one would assume the $3 million starting bid would be a great investment. Hey, that’s less than a buck each, what a steal! However, there was one catch: at Mawhinney’s request, the winning bidder should be a private collector who has no intention of breaking this collection up. Instead, they should be a philanthropist willing to create, or donate to, a museum dedicated to the “World’s Greatest Music Collection”.

Many found the self-imposed importance Mawhinney had given his own collection pretty humorous, especially when he had made minimal effort to say what was actually in his collection. I mean, do thousands of Nat King Cole and Perry Como-esque records qualify as museum quality? Who am I to say?

Paul seems like a passionate, lifelong collector so I won’t criticize the guy’s selling technique. What had my eyes rolling was the press the auction had received.
It amazed me that many in the media would write, as fact, that the collection had SOLD for $3+ million. The AP even reported that the winning bidder was legit and had already made a $300,000 down-payment. Interesting, considering that within a day of the auction’s end the winning bidder was no longer a registered user. I guess it wasn’t a red flag that the only other item this $3 million bidder had won in the last few months was a $7 memory card.

As of this evening, the AP has corrected the story, revealing that the winning bid was indeed fraudulent. The same story reported that Mawhinney has contacted the other bidders in hopes of finding a buyer. He sounded hopeful, quoted as saying “It’s still going to happen.”

I hope so, Paul. Hopefully those other bidders aren’t the same other bidders that took a shot at that Velvet Underground acetate.

One of the most frequent questions I receive at my shop is how to clean records.

I use a VPI record cleaner, which I recommend to anyone with a sizable collection or resale business. A vacuum- based cleaner like the VPI costs more than $500, so it’s probably not the best option for someone who only has 100 records sitting in the dusty basement.

There are many record cleaning kits that cost $20-$40. I don’t care for kits that use hand-held brushes that require you to use your arm as the fulcrum. In my experience, these brushes just redistribute dust and dirt on the record surface. They also can increase static electricity, which will attract more dust to the dry playing surface. I recommend using a soft cloth like the kind you would use to clean eye glasses. Dirtier records always will require more attention, but I find this method is at least as effective as using a brush.

For any cleaning method, you should use a liquid cleaning solution. There are commercial products available, but many collectors and dealers mix their own. They often recommend a mixture of 50 percent rubbing alcohol and 50 percent distilled water, along with a few drops of Photo Flo or non-abrasive soap (like shampoo or dish soap.) As with any cleaning method, a little trial and error should get you a process that you like. Practice on a few records you don’t care much about.

What about an album jacket or 45 label with an old price tag or radio station sticker that you don’t dare trying to peel off? Believe it or not, these remove easily with a little lighter fluid. Yes, lighter fluid! (I use Ronsonol).

Here’s how you do it: Saturate the sticker and the area around it. Don’t stress about the lighter fluid staining the jacket or label – it won’t. Give it a few seconds and then carefully start picking at the corners of the sticker with your fingernail. In most cases, the sticker will peel off quite easily. If not, be patient and let the lighter fluid dissolve the old adhesive.

This method does not work on all stickers/tape, including those that use water-based glues, but my success rate has been excellent. Words can’t explain the joy of removing old medical tape from a rare Fifties rockabilly 45 and leaving almost no trace of it ever having been there. Once the sticker and glue residue have been removed, allow about 15 minutes for the lighter fluid to evaporate. Again, practice with some records you don’t care about.