Happy 71st Birthday to the LP!

The 1st ever long playing records. Columbia ML4001

What's the oldest LP record in your collection?  Well, it's for sure that it's no more than 71 years old, since the modern, long-playing, vinyl microgroove record was introduced by Columbia Records in June, 1948.

Cribbing from Wikipedia, Columbia Records unveiled the LP at a press conference at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York on June 18, 1948.  The new 33 1/3 rpm format, which had been some years in development, was initially introduced in two sizes: a 10-inch disk, matching the size of a standard 78 rpm single, and a new 12-inch disk.  At the press conference, Columbia displayed its first 133 LP records: 85 12-inch classical LPs (Columbia catalog numbers ML 4001 to 4085), 26 10-inch classical LPs (Columbia ML 2001 to 2026), 18 10-inch popular LPs (CL 6001 to 6018), and four 10-inch juvenile records (JL 8001 to 8004). Even though all 133 records were made available at the same time, the distinction for the being the first modern vinyl 12-inch LP goes to Columbia ML 4001, since it was listed first in the Columbia catalog.  ML 4001 (above) was Mendelssohn's Concerto in E Minor with Nathan Milstein on violin, accompanied by the New York Philharmonic and conducted by Bruno Walter.  Initially, Columbia only released classical recordings on the new 12-inch format, so the first popular long playing microgroove record was the 10-inch disk, CL 6001, The Voice of Frank Sinatra. 

Four-disk 78 album C-112

The music on CL 6001 was a repressing of a four-disk set of 78s (C-112) released in 1946 (left).  You've probably seen some of these multi-disk 78 rpm album sets, with cardboard covers and multiple sleeves for the various disks.  Which, by the way, is the reason LPs became known as "albums."  Since one LP could hold the same amount of music as a multi-disk 78 album, people began to refer to LPs as "albums."  

Columbia's decision to release only classical works on the new 12-inch LP format was a practical one.  After doing research, the record company determined that about 95% of all classical works were shorter than 45 minutes.  So, the new 12-inch disk -- which could hold 45 minutes of music -- was perfect for the vast majority of classical recordings.  At the time, no one could imagine needing that much time for a popular music recording, so there was no thought given to releasing popular titles on 12-inch disks.  The popular music industry and the record-buying public were firmly focused on hit singles.  Even by 1958, 10 years after the introduction of the LP, singles still outsold LPs three to one.  (By then, of course, 10-inch 78s were rapidly being replaced by the 7-inch 45 rpm disk introduced by RCA in 1949.)  In addition, since the new, larger LPs were very expensive (the list price of the first series of 12-inch disks was $4.85, equivalent to more than $50 in today's money), the record industry figured that only serious (and presumably more well-heeled) classical music lovers would shell out for the larger disks. 

 
I don't collect 10-inch disks, but over the years I have picked up a dozen or so.  The earliest 10-inch disks in my collection are from 1953, and include Stan Kenton's New Concepts Of Artistry and Ryhthm, Nat "King" Cole's Two In Love, and a collection of Mexican favorites called South Of The Border by the Al Sack Orchestra.  I find the 10-inch LP format oddly appealing, though as a practical matter it made little sense to continue having two different long playing formats, since it cost more or less the same to produce a 10-inch or 12-inch disk.  By the mid 1950s the 10-inch disk was already becoming scarce. 

Even though Columbia was in no hurry to release 12-inch popular music titles, other independent labels weren't nearly as reluctant.  In fact, in July, 1949, scarcely more than a year after Columbia's press conference at the Waldorf, Dial Records released the first ever 12-inch popular music LP -- Charlie Parker's The Bird Blows The Blues.  Its catalog number was Dial Records 901.  Dial Records 902, Erroll Garner's By Gaslight, came out shortly after.  Columbia held out until September, 1951 before finally issuing a popular music title on the larger format.  Their first 12-inch title was Columbia GL-500, Benny Goodman: Combos - Benny Goodman Quintet, Sextet, & Septet. 

Dial 901, the first 12-inch popular music LP

The oldest 12-inch LPs in my collection are classical titles from 1951.  I have a couple of early RCA Red Seal releases of Brahms Symphonies played by the NBC Orchestra, conducted by Arturo Toscanini.  Also from 1951, I have the Living Presence High Fidelity Sampler on Mercury, which, as the name implies, was a 98 cent loss leader with selections from Mercury's brand new Living Presence classical music series.  I also have a 1953 album by French singer Jacqueline Francois, American Favorites, released as Columbia ML 4780.  Since it was part of their ML (or Masterworks) series, Columbia regarded this as part of their classical (or at least not popular music) series.

The earliest 12-inch popular music albums in my collection are from 1954.  I have 15 original 1954 LPs, including three by Dave Brubeck: Jazz Goes To College; Jazz At The College Of The Pacific; and David Brubeck At Storyville, all on Columbia Records. Also from 1954 I have a couple of the earliest titles from EmArcy Records (Mercury's jazz subsidiary which was founded in 1954), Sarah Vaughn - Sarah Vaughn, and The Blue Stars of France - Lullaby of Broadway.  The Sarah Vaughn title is fabulous, a seminal early vocal/jazz session.  Among the other 1954 titles I have are volumes 2 and 3 from the eventual 11-part Clef Records Genius Of Art Tatum series, and Cal Tjader's Mambo With Tjader, which was released by Fantasy Records on really cool red vinyl.

Several of Tjader's early Fantasy Records albums were released on red vinyl.  Surprisingly, they aren't that rare or expensive and make great collectibles.  Keep your eyes peeled in the used bins.  And while Mambo With Tjader was one of the earliest LPs pressed on colored vinyl, there are 78s on colored shellac going back to the 1920s, including some bizarre splatter 78s on the Morrison Records label in the 1940s.

Cool splatter 78 shellac records from the 1940s

By the time we get to 1955, I've got more than 50 12-inch popular music LPs, including titles by Frank Sinatra, Julie London, Stan Getz, Ella Fitzgerald, Joni James, June Christy, and Gene Krupa, among many others.  

The Sinatra title from 1955 brings us full circle, because it's the 12-inch version of The Voice (bottom left below) which has most of the tracks from the 1948 10-inch LP (top right below), which was a repressing of the 1946 four-disk 78 rpm album (top left below), which was a compilation of the original four separate 78 disks.  And for good measure, Columbia also released the same tracks as a two-disk set of 7" 45s (bottom right below) in 1952.

Enjoy the music! 

Treasures From The Vault - Newly Discovered Live Jazz Recordings

If you are a jazz fan, you are surely aware of the sensation caused by the release last year of a lost studio session by tenor great John Coltrane. Called Both Directions At Once, the session was recorded at Rudy Van Gelder's studio in 1963. At the time, the bosses at Impulse Records decided not to release the tracks from this session, so the tapes were filed away in the company's vault. By the time anyone went looking for them -- decades later -- the reels were nowhere to be found and presumed to be lost. Then, a few years ago, the family of Coltrane's first wife, Juanita Naima Coltrane, found a copy of the tape among her effects. Apparently, producer Bob Thiele had given Coltrane a copy of the session tape so he could listen to it at home. Naima's family brought the tape to the attention of the label, and the rest is history. Obviously an album of previously unreleased Coltrane sessions was always going to be a huge event for jazz fans, but the story about the rediscovery of 55-year-old lost session tapes made it compelling news even for non music lovers.

While the release of Both Directions At Once received by far the most press attention, the fact is that for a number of years now there has been a growing stream of rediscovered recordings by major jazz artists. For the most part these are live recordings of club dates or concerts. Many were taped and originally broadcast 50 or 60 years ago by European radio and TV stations. After airing, the tapes were shelved and gathered dust for the next half century.

Then, about a decade ago, some small, enterprising record labels began to realize that there was gold in them there tapes. So they began combing through the archives of places like Radio Denmark and French TV and making licensing deals to release these old recordings. 

The first of these new releases that caught my attention was Echoes Of Indiana Avenue, an album of previously unreleased live and studio takes by guitarist Wes Montgomery. It was put out in 2012 by one of the re-release pioneers, a label called Resonance Records.  Resonance was co founded by American producer Zev Feldman in 2008 in California as a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting jazz artists and preserving the art and legacy of jazz music. Resonance Records has released an impressive list of rediscovered recordings by such artists as Scott LaFaro, Gene Harris, Freddie Hubbard, and Bill Evans.

Another important player in the business of finding and releasing classic live jazz recordings is Elemental Music of Spain. Among their discoveries are fabulous live concerts by Dexter Gordon and Woody Shaw in Europe and Japan. One of Elemental's co-founders is - you guessed it -- producer Zev Feldman. Feldman has developed such a reputation for his ability to uncover lost jazz tracks that Blue Note president Don Was recently hired him to dig through the label's vast archives for buried treasures that Blue Note can release.

Lastly, I'll mention Gearbox Records of London. Founded by Darrell Shienman, Gearbox have put out a series of excellent live recordings by artists such as Yusef Lateef, British tenor great Tubby Hayes, Dexter Gordon, and many others. If you're wondering why Dexter Gordon shows up in so many of these releases, it's because he lived and toured in Europe for more than a decade. He played thousands of shows, and there are probably still hundreds of recordings of his concerts gathering dust on the shelves of radio and TV networks throughout the continent. 

However, Gearbox's biggest coup to date was the 2018 release of Mønk, a live recording of Thelonious Monk from 1963. The concert was recorded on March 5 in Copenhagen's Odd Fellow concert hall and broadcast on Danish radio a few days later. As seems to be the case for many of these recordings, it was thought to be lost, but according to the excellent liner notes accompanying the disk, a Danish record producer rescued the original broadcast tape from a dumpster(!) about 20 years ago. Gearbox records negotiated the rights, got approval from Monk's heirs, and then lovingly remastered the tape in their own studios in London. 

To my mind, Mønk is the best of the wave of live concert "rediscoveries." I'm not a die-hard Monk fan, but this is a fun, accessible concert that, as reviewer Chris May of AllAboutJazz.com writes, "Is full throated, stomping and hard swinging." May's full review is here. Gearbox use an all-analog chain to produce their LPs, and the (mono) sound on this one is "you are in-the-room" fantastic.

Overall I have about 15 of these newly discovered releases. While the sound quality varies, most are very good, and some (like Mønk), are excellent. However, the recordings don't always capture a typical performance by the headline artist, since many artists, including Dexter Gordon, usually toured solo and picked up different sidemen in each city. Even still, it is always a treat to be able to hear and compare new recordings by these great artists. 

Related but somewhat off-topic rant:  When did it become a thing to stop putting the track titles on the LP label?  I first noticed it a few years ago when I bought a couple of LPs that not only didn't list the track titles on the labels, but didn't even bother to indicate which was side 1 or side 2. I mention this because Gearbox's Mønk continues this ridiculous new trend. Here are the labels for Mønk:

Which is side 1? You tell me. I had to start the first track before I could tell. Then I had to stop the record and turn it over to start the actual side 1. What exactly is the point of not listing the track titles and side indicators? Is the art director trying to make a statement? Are they just messing with us? I don't know, but please just stop it. 

Enjoy the Music!

DOL, Doxy, Vinyl Passion, Jazz Wax, PanAm, Vinyl Lovers -- Any Good?

[See Part 2 of my listening test here.]

If you collect jazz LPs from the 50s and 60s, you have surely noticed the flood of new reissues by labels like DOL, Doxy, Jazz Wax, Green Corner, Jazz Images, Jazz Time, and many more.  In the past ten years or so, these new EU labels have begun offering repressings of often hard-to-find classic jazz albums at bargain prices.  They offer hundreds of brand new LPs originally issued on Blue Note, Prestige, Riverside, Columbia, Verve, and many other labels, pressed on 180-gram vinyl with nicely reproduced jackets, all for around $15.

In a previous post I talked about a trip to Spain where I bought a few of these EU repressings.  My preliminary reaction was that they look great and sound pretty good, especially for the price.  But there has been so much debate about these releases in the various online music and vinyl discussion groups, I thought it might be useful to take a closer look.

The first thing to understand about all these new labels is that they were created to take advantage of EU copyright laws which (at the time) said that sound recordings entered the public domain 50 years after the end of the calendar year in which the recording was originally released.  Which is to say that a record released in June of 1950, for example, would become public domain on January 1, 2000.  The reason that all these jazz reissue labels began to pop up around 2010, is because the late 1950s were a golden era for jazz music.  Countless classic albums from Take Five to Kind Of Blue were released during this time.  European entrepreneurs quite legally seized the opportunity to release new pressings of these recordings without having to pay a licensing fee or getting permission from the rights holder.  Which meant that they could sell their albums for very low prices.  And as each new year rolled around and new LPs entered the public domain, they could offer more and more classic albums.  It looked like a gravy train that would never end.  

 
But alas, no.  After intense lobbying from the US recording industry, record labels, artists, and other rights holders (and because everyone realized with a shock that the first Beatles recordings were about to enter the public domain), in September of 2011 the EU parliament in Brussels voted to amend the law to increase copyright protection to 70 years.  But the decision was not retroactive and only applied to sound recordings originally released after January 1, 1963.  As a result, any sound recording originally released by the end of 1962 is in now in the public domain in Europe.  The Beatles' first hit single, "Love Me Do," which was released in October, 1962, is now in the public domain.  The Beatles' first album, Please Please Me, released in March, 1963, was saved for the time being.

Despite the fact that these new public domain vinyl releases are completely legal, a number of online commentators have opposed them on moral grounds, comparing them to bootlegs because artists and their heirs will not benefit from sales.  However, it is worth noting that only a relatively small percentage of artists own the rights to their albums.  The vast majority of rights holders are record labels, licensees, or other corporations.  And as this article in the UK's Guardian newspaper from 2011 reveals, the EU decision to extend copyrights will actually harm some artists.  The reason is that a lot of artists who signed away their rights in one-sided contracts in the 50s and 60s (and never made a penny from album sales) could have repackaged their recordings and sold them themselves if the albums had become public domain.  Now, only the license holder continues to profit.  But I digress.


While these new public domain pressings are legal in Europe, I wasn't able to find an explanation for how they can be sold in the US, where sound recordings are protected by copyright for 95 years. Nevertheless, they are readily available at countless brick-and-mortar stores and online sellers in the US, including the likes of Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Not being an international copyright lawyer, I can only speculate that there is some sort of legal loophole (first sale doctrine?) or a trade arrangement that allows them on the US market. Otherwise, I would have expected to see lawsuits and injunctions filed by the US rights holders, which does not seem to be the case.

In my search for EU labels that are repressing vinyl copies of public domain jazz recordings, I came up with a list of ten different labels. They are listed below.  Following the name of each label is the country of origin, and in parentheses are the year the label first began releasing vinyl albums and the number of albums they have released to date, as compiled by Discogs. I didn't include any labels where I couldn't find at least one public domain jazz reissue, which I define as an LP originally released before 1963 that does not list the copyright holder or other licensing information on the jacket or label. I also did not include labels that produce only compilations or best of collections.  Here you go:

Jazz Workshop

-DOL, Russia [2012, 1,074]

-Doxy, Russia (2008, 431) [said to be based in Italy, 
  but Russian owned]

-Green Corner, Spain (2014, 19)
-Jazz Images, Spain (2016, 139)

-Jazz Wax Records, Spain (2009, 91)

-Jazz Workshop, Spain (2009, 95)
-Pan Am Records, Spain (2011, 71)

-Vinyl Lovers, Spain (2012, 102)

-Wax Time Records, Spain (2010, 593)
-Vinyl Passion, Holland (2007, 279)

Elemental Music

I feel certain that this is not a complete list. But bear in mind that I did not consider labels that put out public domain reissues of rock, blues, R&B, or any other genre - just jazz.  I also did not include CD-only labels regardless of the genre.

I will mention one more label, Elemental Music, that occasionally appears (erroneously) in lists of public domain producers.  Based in Spain, Elemental Music's releases include licensing and copyright information on their jackets and labels. They have reissued nearly 50 classic Blue Note titles in Europe, as well a growing list of "new archival discoveries" -- live jazz recordings of (mostly) European radio and concert dates that they have unearthed. One of the co-founders of Elemental, the American producer Zev Feldman, was recently hired by Blue Note as a consulting producer to dig through the archives for unreleased materials from their vaults.

Enough Already - How Do They Sound?

Online opinions are decidedly mixed about the sound quality of public domain reissues. Some posters dismiss all of them out of hand as junk sourced from MP3s.  Since the public domain labels are notoriously tight-lipped about their sources, I'm doubtful that anyone knows for sure. (The only on-the-record information about sourcing I could find is an interview with Jordi Pujol by noted jazz writer Marc Myers, which you can read here. Pujol, founder of Fresh Sounds Records, also several public domain labels, including Jazz Workshop.) And while it's probably a safe bet that EU reissue labels don't have access to the original master tapes, claiming that they use MP3s as a source begs the question of why a label that presumably wants to sell more records wouldn't bother to at least use an easily obtainable commercial CD or high-resolution digital file as its source.  


Regardless of the source, the proof is in the listening.  I obtained at least one LP from all ten of the reissue labels listed above. For each title, I have a fully licensed CD, digital download, or SACD with which to compare them. I did A/B comparisons of the two different copies with levels matched. I don't claim to have golden ears, and I wasn't trying to identify every minute difference. I just wanted to get a feel for the quality of the public domain releases and see how they measure up to licensed copies. And I wanted to see if there is any justification for the many online suggestions to avoid public domain releases because they sound "horrible." Of course this is a limited sample, and it may well be that the quality level of the releases is uneven. No doubt if you were to do similar comparisons using your system and your ears, your mileage would vary. But we have to start somewhere.

Each label is followed by the catalog number, the LP title, the original pressing info in parentheses, and my listening notes:

DOL DOL889H, Jutta Hipp With Zoot Sims

(Blue Note BLP 1530, 1956)

I compared this DOL pressing with the 2008 RVG remastered Blue Note CD. The LP has a touch more warmth, but otherwise the two are nearly indistinguishable. The timbre, the detail, the bass are all so close that I couldn't tell them apart. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that this was the CD used to cut the lacquer for the disk.

Doxy DOX869, John Jenkins With Kenny Burrell

(Blue Note BLP 1573, 1957)

I compared this Doxy release with the 1996 Blue Note/Capitol CD. First reaction: wow! What a great recording.  Both the LP and the CD sound great. The bass on the LP is more defined and punchier. The CD has a little more air around the high end. I could happily listen to either and have no clear preference.

Green Corner 200895, Oliver Nelson The Blues and the Abstract Truth (Impulse AS-5, 1961)

This Green Corner release (with a different cover) is a two-fer, containing both the mono and stereo versions of this release. I compared the stereo disk to the HD Tracks 24-96 digital files. In both, George Barrow's baritone sax, Eric Dolphy's flute, and Freddie Hubbard's trumpet are just right there. A/B-ing the two, I got lost. If you twist my arm, the digital files have a little more detail.

Jazz Images 37053

Jazz Images 37053, Herbie Hancock Takin' Off

Vinyl Passion VP807823, Herbie Hancock Takin' Off

(Blue Note BLP 4109, 1962)

Vinyl Passion 807823

The Jazz Images series (left) have different covers than the originals, using images by the French photographer, Jean-Pierre Leloir, who documented jazz in France during the 1950s and 60s. I initially compared the disk to the 2007 RVG remastered Blue Note CD. This is the first A/B where I heard a fairly big difference. The LP has muddy bass and the high end is rolled off -- the cymbals almost disappear compared to the CD, which is clearly better. But wait! I also have a copy of the same disk on Vinyl Passion as part of a two-fer with Freddie Hubbard's Hub-Tones, so I threw it into the mix. After A/B/C-ing the three versions, the Vinyl Passion disk is the clear winner. More space around the players, more detail and better texture. Clearly there are differences between the public domain releases.

Jazz Wax Records JWR 4552, Today And Now Coleman Hawkins Quartet (Impulse! AS-34, 1962)

I compared the Jazz Wax disk to the stereo layer of  Analogue Productions 2011 SACD CIPJ 34 SA.  OK, this one is night and day. The SACD is phenomenal, with wonderful balance and a "you are in the room" presence.  Hawkins' tenor sounds like burnished gold smeared with honey. The Jazz Wax disk is flat and the top end is rolled off. 

Pan Am Records 9152234, Stan Getz And The Oscar Peterson Trio (Verve MG V-8251, 1957)

I compared this disk to the undated Verve CD 827 826-2. What a cooking session! Getz is on fire. Once again there is very little difference between the vinyl and the CD.  The vinyl is slightly fuller, while the CD has a bit more detail. Peterson's piano sounds more natural in the vinyl version. This one is very close with a slight nod to the vinyl.

Vinyl Lovers 6785472, Sonny Rollins Plus 4

(Prestige PRLP 7038, 1956)

I compared this to the stereo layer of Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab's 2002 SACD. The MFSL remastered files have an almost etched detail. The Vinyl Lover disk has more warmth, but lacks some of the air and space of the SACD. Tough call. The MFSL initially sounds better, but I think it might ultimately be fatiguing. Slight nod to the LP.

Wax Time Records 771816, The Duke Pearson Quintet, Hush! (Jazz Line 3302, 1962)

I have a CD of this somewhere, but couldn't find it. However I did find MP3 files that I had ripped to my computer at 320 kpbs many years ago. This is the only disk among the public domain releases that I bought that is really disappointing. It sounds flat with weak bass and a rolled off high end. In fact, after comparing it to my ripped files (which sound very good), I wish they had sourced it from MP3s!

Jazz Workshop JW-081, Gigi Gryce And The Jazz Lab Quintet (Riverside RLP 1110)

I compared this to OJC CD-1774-2, which was remastered in 1991 by Phil De Lancie at Fantasy. The CD is cleaner with more energy in the mids and high end. However, the LP has better bass definition and better overall balance. Switching back and forth, the difference between the two versions is easy to hear. It's really the difference between a more digital sound and a more analog sound. They are both excellent but I'll take the analog LP every time.

General Notes

All of the ten public domain LPs are pressed on 180-gram vinyl. All are flat and extremely quiet. None of the records is off-center or has a warp. There are a few ticks across the 18 sides, but nothing out of the ordinary, and all of them are as quiet as the average audiophile US pressing. Except for the Pan Am release, which comes in a plain white paper dust sleeve, all the albums have white, poly-lined dust sleeves. All of the jackets are printed on medium to heavy stock. Seven of the ten labels reproduce the original jackets. All of the jacket images are clear and sharp, and the type is clear and legible on all of the releases. Eight of the ten disks were pressed at gzvinyl in the Czech Republic. The Jazz Workshop disk was pressed at MPO in France, and The Vinyl Passion disk was pressed at Record Industry in Holland. Six of the ten (Green Corner, Jazz Wax, Pan Am, Vinyl Lovers, Wax Time and Vinyl Passion) say they were made using Direct Metal Mastering (DMM). 

Conclusions

This is a limited comparison with a lot of different sources. I'm not sure that I was always comparing apples to apples. But my experience with these public domain releases is overall pretty positive. One was not so hot, three were meh, and six were excellent. I wouldn't describe any of them as terrible, although the Jazz Wax reissue of Duke Pearson's Hush! is not going into heavy rotation.

Are public domain reissues worth buying? Well, I paid an average of $15 each for the public domain titles (and two of them were two-fers). As long as you know what you are buying and realize it's a little bit of a crap shoot, then they can be a very good value. With a lot of searching and some luck, you might find a US or Japanese reissue of some of these titles for $15. But not in mint condition. 

You can probably buy a licensed CD of any of these titles for less than $15. But then you won't get the same tactile experience of playing vinyl and enjoying the album art while reading the liner notes.  

My advice? Don't overthink it. These are very nicely packaged, affordable pressings, including many classic jazz albums that are almost impossible to find at a reasonable price. Buy one and see what you think. If you like it, buy more. If you don't, don't.

Enjoy the music!

A Little Love For The Humble LP Dust Sleeve

Capitol 78 corporate sleeves

Let's talk about dust sleeves.  You know, the inner sleeve that protects the record from dust and scratches and goes inside the record jacket.  Unlike long-playing albums, 78s didn't come in a cardboard jacket.  They were simply sold in a brown paper cover, often printed with the label's or the record dealer's logo. When 45 rpm singles were introduced in 1949, they were also sold in plain paper sleeves, often with the label's logo, and later in more collectible picture sleeves that featured images of the artist or a photo to evoke the mood of the music.

My 1959 NM original mono copy of Time Out
in its original glassine dust sleeve

Early paper record sleeves weren't quite the same as the inner dust sleeve which comes inside the cardboard jacket with 12" LPs.  Some of the albums I have from the 50s originally came with an inner sleeve made of glassine, a slightly yellowish paper with some of the properties of plastic.  At right is a photo of my original NM/VG+ 1959 mono copy of Dave Brubeck's Time Out with the original glassine dust sleeve.  Even though it's made from paper, the glassine manufacturing process results in a slick paper that is opaque and water resistant.  If you ever collected stamps you probably used little glassine envelopes to save and protect the stamps.  And in lots of old books, glassine pages were inserted to protect images or "plates" from damage.  While glassine is still around and in use, I don't actually store any of my LPs in the original glassine sleeves.

In the modern LP era, the vast majority of dust sleeves are made from paper or some type of polypropylene.  In the 50s and 60s, some labels used thin, clingy, half-round plastic sleeves.  I have a number of Columbia (and other) issues with those.  A lot of Japanese issues also used these half-round plastic sleeves.  They are notoriously hard to get in and out of the jacket.  You end up putting the bottom in first, leaving the open part of the sleeve at the opening of the jacket, which kind of defeats the purpose of using a dust sleeve to keep dirt and dust off the LP.  [You do store all your albums with the opening of the dust sleeve at the top of the jacket, right?  Right?]

The dust sleeve at left is from a 1950s Capitol release.  Since most people were used to dealing with 78s, Capitol felt the need to explain what "This Protective Envelope" is for, noting that it "keeps your record dust-free and helps guard the grooves against scratches and abrasion."  They also helpfully provide tips for how to insert the sleeve back in the jacket.

MoFi dust sleeve

Overall the most common sleeves are plain paper, with or without a hole to show the label.  While many are just plain white, record labels quickly began to take advantage of the real estate available on the sleeve to advertise their other albums and promote their brand.  Later, certainly by the 60s, the record companies began to create custom inner sleeves with art, photos, credits, liner notes, song lyrics, and the like.  I suspect it tells you something about the label's level of support for the band or performer if they go all out for a glossy custom dust sleeve. And of course custom sleeves are great for the listener, as they provide even more space for art, notes, photos and information about the recording session and the artist. 

There are any number of available after-market

Sleeve City 2 Mil poly sleeve

sleeves to replace lost of damaged sleeves or just to provide better protection for your LPs.  One of the best known is the MoFi (Mobile Fidelity) style sleeves (above), which are made by numerous manufacturers.  While they resemble rice paper - with a smooth, soft feel - they are made from polyethylene.  Essentially a big plastic pouch, the back has a sealed white paper stiffener to support the sleeve and make it easier to insert into the jacket. The MoFi style sleeves are very nice, but somewhat expensive, so I mostly use them for rare and valuable records, not the bulk of my collection.  For normal LPs, I use a type of high-density polypropylene sleeve.  In fact, the first thing I do when I buy a new or used record is wash it on my VPI record cleaning machine and put it in a new poly sleeve.  (I save the original sleeve in the jacket as well.)  I use a 2 mil thick sleeve made by Sleeve City.  I find 2 mil to be the ideal weight -- the sleeves are thick enough to be easy to insert into the jacket, but not so stiff that they can scuff the record surface.  They have a smooth feel and anti-static properties, so the LPs don't cling to the plastic or develop a static charge.  They are also a good value, particularly if you buy them in bulk.

While I don't use them to store my records, I really enjoy looking at the original corporate and promo dust sleeves.  They are often a miniature time capsule from an earlier era, with insight not just about the music of the day, but fashion and hair styles, marketing techniques, the latest hi-fi equipment, social issues, and even the cost of living.  As an example, notice that the RCA sleeve at left offers to send you a copy of their complete catalog if you send them a quarter.  And below is an ad introducing "The Exciting New Way to Enjoy the Music You Want," called, at the time, "RCA Stereo 8 Cartridge Tape," better know as the 8-track tape. 

Dust sleeves can also provide valuable clues for dating a particular pressing or release of an LP.  If your LP is an undated repressing, you can sometimes narrow things down by checking the release date of the albums advertised on the dust sleeve.  If you think you might have a first pressing, be sure that the dust sleeve doesn't advertise any albums that were released after the original pressing date.  If so, then you probably don't have a first pressing.  In addition, some albums have a custom insert - maybe a lyric sleeve or poster -- that was not included with later pressings.  However, keep in mind that if you are buying used albums, you can't discount the possibility that the previous owner put the disk in the wrong sleeve.  On a recent online order I received, about half the LPs were in corporate sleeves that didn't match the label.

Because so many used LPs come with the 
wrong dust sleeve, I have dozens and dozens of extras.  I save them, and from time to time am able to match up an album with the original sleeve, even for releases that are 30 or 40 years old.  

While I always prefer to have the original inner sleeve, it's not a big factor to me when I'm shopping for used vinyl.  When shopping online, you generally won't know anyway, since dealers rarely mention the sleeve in the item description unless it's unusual or damaged.  The exception would be for custom dust sleeves, posters, or other inserts -- like the cutouts from Sgt. Peppers.  And even then, if the vinyl is in prime condition, I figure sooner or later I'll find a cheap copy with a trashed LP but a jacket and inserts in good condition. 

Dust sleeves are just one more reason why I find collecting LPs such an interesting hobby.  Enjoy the music!