SYRO $400 "Limited Edition" 3xLP

[oscillik]

Any thoughts on the following items listed on Syrobonkus?

 

Processing of 12" Lacquer for print

180g Pressing Supplement

that's just the info for the 180g pressing, and print, that are exclusive to this limited edition.

[Guest Papillon]

How many of you take out your caustic window picture disc to admire it? I've looked at my copy a couple of times in the past decade.

 

As strong as my impulse is to buy this I wonder how much I would care after I've actually bought it?

 

It is really cool looking though.

[Joyrex]

it is a lot but just think about how much it will cost on the second-hand market

Considering ancient AFX/Caustic Window can command thousands of quid, I reckon the aftermarket on SYRO Ltd editions (factoring in the edition #) will make it a highly-desired aftermarket collectible.

[elusive4]

If I come up trumps, I'll shell out. If I don't, I know I will beat myself up forever over not taking the plunge on this.

ya reason just took self out of the run

why stress your future self out with the coerced decision especially when you already know what the outcome will be

[fumi]

 

it is a lot but just think about how much it will cost on the second-hand market

 

Considering ancient AFX/Caustic Window can command thousands of quid, I reckon the aftermarket on SYRO Ltd editions (factoring in the edition #) will make it a highly-desired aftermarket collectible.

I don't agree. I do think the batch numbers are important but there is no extra material at all.

 

There is a reason Caustic Window commanded huge sums - mostly because it was unreleased tracks.

 

If these are actually numbered on the sleeve, ie- 45/200 then the early numbers will be worth more. Apart from that, it has no real value apart from the 180g angle.

 

I do think it looks like a highly desirable item purely from an aesthetic view, but after you have looked at it for a few minutes, it's up onto the shelf where it is quickly forgotten until your next master card bill arrives.

 

Then you remember it again. Perhaps in a different way.

 

Just my two pointless cents.

[auxien]

IF I were to get a copy of this, I don't think I'd even take it out of its packaging. Hold on for 10-20 years, profit massively, buy an island, call it SYROLAND.

[modey]

 

 

it is a lot but just think about how much it will cost on the second-hand market

Considering ancient AFX/Caustic Window can command thousands of quid, I reckon the aftermarket on SYRO Ltd editions (factoring in the edition #) will make it a highly-desired aftermarket collectible.

I don't agree. I do think the batch numbers are important but there is no extra material at all.

 

There is a reason Caustic Window commanded huge sums - mostly because it was unreleased tracks.

 

If these are actually numbered on the sleeve, ie- 45/200 then the early numbers will be worth more. Apart from that, it has no real value apart from the 180g angle.

 

I do think it looks like a highly desirable item purely from an aesthetic view, but after you have looked at it for a few minutes, it's up onto the shelf where it is quickly forgotten until your next master card bill arrives.

 

Then you remember it again. Perhaps in a different way.

 

Just my two pointless cents.

 

It's being marketed as an art piece though. It's out of my price range but it'd be a nice piece to have on display, imo.

[KovalainenFanBoy]

I don't know how high the demand is for Aphex collectables, but man, 200 is REALLY limited edition for such a big artist.

 

How much do you think this will sell for? If you bought it just as an investment, would you capitalize on the hype and sell it really early, or wait a couple years or so?

[Hugh Mughnus]

I don'thow high the demand is for Aphex collectables, but man, 200 is REALLY limited edition for such a big artist.

 

How much do you think this will sell for? If you bought it just as an investment, would you capitalize on the hype and sell it really early, or wait a couple years or so?

I think wait a couple years...

 

what happens is lots of investors try and sell early on, and gradually the pieces get to people that want to actually keep it so the market dries up. This is when it gets really valuable (ala drukqs ltd edition).

 

That's been my experience anyway.

[fenton]

I reckon copies will go for over 100% RRP within the first few weeks.

[Guest Papillon]

Buying this for investment purposes is a bit shitty in my opinion.

 

If you have to justify buying it (in anyway) chances are you can't afford it, and probably shouldn't buy it.

 

Signed

 

Your DAD

[Ivan Ooze]

Fuckq Drukqs

 

2014-09-03 12.16.01.jpg

blood on the ieafs

[fumi]

 

I don'thow high the demand is for Aphex collectables, but man, 200 is REALLY limited edition for such a big artist.

 

How much do you think this will sell for? If you bought it just as an investment, would you capitalize on the hype and sell it really early, or wait a couple years or so?

 

I think wait a couple years...

 

what happens is lots of investors try and sell early on, and gradually the pieces get to people that want to actually keep it so the market dries up. This is when it gets really valuable (ala drukqs ltd edition).

 

That's been my experience anyway.

Yes, I agree. I reckon you'd want to hold onto it for a good five to ten years if you were in it to make profits.

People trying to sell this on quickly have to factor in its desirability to a real die-hard fan who simply must own it.

 

But I still think its value is questionable even to fans. You're getting exactly the same material (albeit a 180g edition) and a Perspex box with a stencil on the side plus a die-cut made of card or something.

 

I agree that 200 isn't a lot of copies but it doesn't exactly offer a lot to begin with.

 

There were many ways this could have been a great deal more desirable - signed maybe - although looking at the package itself that may not have sat well with the overall look of it. A bonus track should have been included, maybe a unique mastering just for these copies, DIrect Metal Mastering maybe? If you look at audiophile stuff these days, they are employing all sorts of techniques here to get people to stump up more money. Perhaps the 180g thing is sufficient.

 

It does certainly look beautiful. I don't think anyone can dispute that. But is that enough?

 

This will either go one of two ways: they will sell out immediately or they won't. However, I don't think it's merely coincidence that on Warp's page regarding the limited edition of Syro, there could be as many as four opportunities to buy this. To me, this suggests that Warp maybe expect more than a few winners to get cold feet.

 

Like everyone, I'd dearly love the chance to buy this but there is no way I would pay for a copy a year from now on eBay for twice the price.

Being a fan is one thing, knowing you're just being ripped off by someone is something else.

 

Of course, some people will quite rightly argue the whole thing is exactly that anyway.

[zlemflolia]

The value is really questionable

 

You're buying a TDR piece not an Aphex piece really.

[fumi]

The value is really questionable

 

You're buying a TDR piece not an Aphex piece really.

Yeah, that's a good point. The design, typography etc is very lovely. The 'Aphex' value is questionable.

[modey]

I'm not gonna buy it, but I've entered the ballot and if I win my code is going to bitroast (assuming he's gonna buy it), so at least I'll be able to look/touch/listen, heh.

[MisterE]

i just really think their choice of words is really interesting.

"It’s interesting that some people regard the design in terms of what they can see, designers judging it on craft and typography and fans seeing it in terms of value for money (ironically), for example, when the real message lies in the deconstructive absence of either."

 

the word 'either' in the phrase 'absence of either', must be referring to the 'craft and typography' and the 'value for money', as the two opposing criteria they are saying different groups will judge this thing on. right? ok, but they're saying there is an absence of those things. i don't think i'm using some wacky interpretation or anything when i say that everyone should have to agree that the designers of this package, are themselves saying that this package has an absence of value for money.

 

to me this is just a bit boggling. did they realize that that's what they're saying? because it being what they're saying is imo non-debatable. they said it. did they not really mean to say that? imo the thing does look nice but i dont know if it is equal value to the money in any sense, but of course it's in the realm of opinion and what someone is willing to pay is how much something is 'worth'. but there are other ways of looking at value, and rich himself said that whole thing about putting the figures on there so people know they are paying for a quality product, which seems to go against tDR saying there is an absence of value for the money.

 

i think their choice of words here is a bit bizarre if not outright fuckt, considering that the price of this thing was clearly going to raise eyebrows. you put something out with that kind of price, it just seems kind of weird to me to then say theres an absence of value in it. then there's the part about 'the message' being in that lack of value for money. can anyone explain to me why i shouldn't take that as them saying 'this isn't worth what we are asking, but we know you will lap it up anyway and we're doing it to prove just that.' ??

[modey]

i just really think their choice of words is really interesting.

"It’s interesting that some people regard the design in terms of what they can see, designers judging it on craft and typography and fans seeing it in terms of value for money (ironically), for example, when the real message lies in the deconstructive absence of either."

 

the word 'either' in the phrase 'absence of either', must be referring to the 'craft and typography' and the 'value for money', as the two opposing criteria they are saying different groups will judge this thing on. right? ok, but they're saying there is an absence of those things. i don't think i'm using some wacky interpretation or anything when i say that everyone should have to agree that the designers of this package, are themselves saying that this package has an absence of value for money.

 

to me this is just a bit boggling. did they realize that that's what they're saying? because it being what they're saying is imo non-debatable. they said it. did they not really mean to say that? imo the thing does look nice but i dont know if it is equal value to the money in any sense, but of course it's in the realm of opinion and what someone is willing to pay is how much something is 'worth'. but there are other ways of looking at value, and rich himself said that whole thing about putting the figures on there so people know they are paying for a quality product, which seems to go against tDR saying there is an absence of value for the money.

 

i think their choice of words here is a bit bizarre if not outright fuckt, considering that the price of this thing was clearly going to raise eyebrows. you put something out with that kind of price, it just seems kind of weird to me to then say theres an absence of value in it. then there's the part about 'the message' being in that lack of value for money. can anyone explain to me why i shouldn't take that as them saying 'this isn't worth what we are asking, but we know you will lap it up anyway and we're doing it to prove just that.' ??

 

hmm, maybe it's some kind of statement about the price of printing/finishing? Either a negative statement (ie. it cost far too much to print this), or a positive one (you paid for a high quality print)? I dunno.

[fumi]

i just really think their choice of words is really interesting.

"It’s interesting that some people regard the design in terms of what they can see, designers judging it on craft and typography and fans seeing it in terms of value for money (ironically), for example, when the real message lies in the deconstructive absence of either."

 

the word 'either' in the phrase 'absence of either', must be referring to the 'craft and typography' and the 'value for money', as the two opposing criteria they are saying different groups will judge this thing on. right? ok, but they're saying there is an absence of those things. i don't think i'm using some wacky interpretation or anything when i say that everyone should have to agree that the designers of this package, are themselves saying that this package has an absence of value for money.

 

to me this is just a bit boggling. did they realize that that's what they're saying? because it being what they're saying is imo non-debatable. they said it. did they not really mean to say that? imo the thing does look nice but i dont know if it is equal value to the money in any sense, but of course it's in the realm of opinion and what someone is willing to pay is how much something is 'worth'. but there are other ways of looking at value, and rich himself said that whole thing about putting the figures on there so people know they are paying for a quality product, which seems to go against tDR saying there is an absence of value for the money.

 

i think their choice of words here is a bit bizarre if not outright fuckt, considering that the price of this thing was clearly going to raise eyebrows. you put something out with that kind of price, it just seems kind of weird to me to then say theres an absence of value in it. then there's the part about 'the message' being in that lack of value for money. can anyone explain to me why i shouldn't take that as them saying 'this isn't worth what we are asking, but we know you will lap it up anyway and we're doing it to prove just that.' ??

 

I don't know but you raise some interesting points. In a weird way, this kind of stuff reminds me of art critics arguing over the value of something by Damien Hirst or Jeff Koons and the other side believing only a Constable or a Turner is real value. It is entirely subjective, I guess.

 

Anyone seen Jeff Koons pieces from the late seventies where he just polished hoovers and stuck them in glass cases? They are clearly very mundane objects but they sell for mind-boggling figures. It's like he's deliberately making the statement you mentioned. 'This isn't worth anywhere what I'm asking.'

 

Hirst with his sharks in tanks of formaldehyde, spot paintings, - the list is endless.

 

I think in the end, art is really all about wether it can do something for you. The relationship between you and something - a book, a film, a piece of music or something by TDR. You either relate to it or you don't. You either buy it or you don't.

[jeremymacgregor87]

I think you're on the money, MisterE. This limited edition is a total pisstake of the ultra-deluxe-fetish object, and the lack of bonus aphex content speaks to that, as does the tdr write-up.

[fumi]

I think you're on the money, MisterE. This limited edition is a total pisstake of the ultra-deluxe-fetish object, and the lack of bonus aphex content speaks to that, as does the tdr write-up.

 

But that's just the point I think some artists and designers want to make (rightly or wrongly) - that fact that it could be considered a total piss-take is actual part of the art.

[jeremymacgregor87]

I know, and that fits Aphex very well

[fumi]

Art collectors all over the world buy works knowing they are practically worthless, but they are buying them to make statements maybe about their own personal wealth or because they somehow like being conned.

 

Jeff Koons - Ushering In banality (1988)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_%28sculpture_series%29

 

Derailing the Syro thread a bit. Sorry about that.

[psn]

He's saying that the cover is a comment on how the artistic message of an object as a whole is more important than someone's narrow perception of the object's craft wise skillfulness or monetary value. And that some people let their own hangups get in the way of perceiving the actual message.

 

 

In other words - some people are superficial and simple, some are design wankers and some people are ebay whores, and the artwork is a deliberate play (or provocation, even) on these feeble people's inability to get the artistic message and see real beauty in life.

 

 

Slightly elitist, but I like it.

[fumi]

He's saying that the cover is a comment on how the artistic message of an object as a whole is more important than someone's narrow perception of the object's craft wise skillfulness or monetary value. And that some people let their own hangups get in the way of perceiving the actual message.

 

 

In other words - some people are superficial and simple, some are design wankers and some people are ebay whores, and the artwork is a deliberate play (or provocation, even) on these feeble people's inability to get the artistic message and see real beauty in life.

 

 

Slightly elitist, but I like it.

 

Yes, I think the cover of Syro is just (in my opinon) one of the best I've ever seen. That list of costs is just such a simple but well executed idea. I'm amazed it's never been done before. Maybe it has? I've never seen it before myself.