Agreed, Ray. I don't think those Bear Family repro's were ever intended to substitute for the real thing, but to be some kind of tribute novelty to make noise for the label that issued them (probably just a passion of the owner). I have one of the repro's, and while the audio quality is decent, it's graphics don't look that great at all, not even half as sharp and detailed as any of the original Vogues I have. But I was curious about them, and now I know.
That collection that was offered in Kurt Nauck's catalog a few auctions ago was stupifying, with all those one-off tests and what-have-you. I don't know how great an investment Vogues are right now either, but I was sure drooling over those pages for a while. Best, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values > Thanks for your interesting comment on the Vogues. I agree with you on > the > reason for the drop in value of the Wurlitzer 1015, but I am not so sure > the > same argument applies to the Vogues. The 1015's were bought and sold as > entertainment devices, and the bars, etc. that bought them for 45s and CDs > could care less if they were original or reproduction machines. On the > other hand, vogues were generally not bought for their music content, but > rather as vintage collectibles. Prior to eBay, collectors considered them > to be "scarce" items, and most record collectors, I would think, would > have > little interest in the reproductions. Once eBay demonstrated to the hobby > that they were rather plentiful, the prices started to drop to the current > low values. I don't know how well the reproduction Vogues are doing these > days, but I don't see them advertised very much (although I don't look for > them). Whatever the reason for the price decline, Vogues don't look like > good investments these days :) > > Ray
