Dismuke wrote:

> Thanks to everyone for the very helpful and informative replies.  I do
> have a couple of follow up questions:
>> Your best bet would be 11" x 11" x 11" boxes (or 12" x 12" x 12"), the
>> records packed vertically (standing on end) tightly within but without
>> bulging and then use crushed newspaper to pad, as you suggest.
> Is there any particular reason that 11" x 11" x 11" would be better
> than 10"x10"x10"?  The 10" inch box would certainly make for a tighter
> fit.  Is the concern based on the fact that, with a 10" box, the edge
> of the records would be touching the interior walls on all 4 sides?
> The 10" boxes are about 20 percent less expensive than the 11" boxes -
> but since my main concern is that the records arrive in good shape,
> that price difference is certainly not my deciding factor.

The diameter of a 10" record may vary somewhat over or under that
dimension and if the inside measurement of the box is even slightly
smaller than the advertised 10" you're stuck with a bunch of boxes you
can't use. The cardboard boxes I used to ship my collection were 12 x 12
x 10 heavy duty automobile Anti-Freeze boxes which I padded with crushed

>> You can leave the 10" records in the albums, but I cut all the sleeves
>> out
>> with an Xacto knife and tossed the cardboard outers and saved some
>> space and
>> weight.
> I am going to want to keep the storage albums as I have a feeling that
> I will have an easier time getting some of my money back by selling
> them than I will finding someone who wants the records that don't
> match my listening tastes.

You'll also get extra structural support inside the crate from them.

> What is the best way to pack the filled albums?  Yesterday, I
> experimented with a 12"x12"x12" box and found that 10 inch albums fit
> very nicely inside. Obviously, I would want to make sure that the top
> edge of the albums all face in the same direction and that the box is
> oriented so the records are vertical.  My concern is with the safety
> of records that might be in albums that may have only 1 or 2 out of 10
> sleeves filled.  I have not seen the collection in person,  so I am
> not sure what percentage of such albums there may be.  When I look at
> empty or nearly empty albums, I notice that the ends of the covers
> come together at an angel.  Completely filled albums, on the other
> hand, form a perfect rectangle and the records appear to be flat
> against each other. If a partially filled album were packed between a
> bunch of other albums which were completely filled, would the records
> in that album be at extra risk - or is the spine of the album cover
> designed to prevent that from happening?  Is it recommended that, once
> in the box, the spine of the album covers all face in the same
> direction as they would if they were placed on a shelf?  Or is it
> better to alternate the direction of the spine on each album?  I have
> never really trusted albums so I rarely use them.

I'd make sure each album is completely filled and the alternate the
direction the spines face in the box. Also, when 3 to 6 record albums
were originally shipped from the manufacturer they used an odd form of
flexible cardboard (I don't know quite how to describe it - it looked to
be shredded paper pulp between two thin sheets of paper) to protect the
outermost records, and I think to make the album as square as possible.
Maybe squares of bubble wrap would suffice?

I meant to mention that if you get the crate(s) from the shipper many
are already mounted on skids, just like a pallet. There's no way for the
shipper/warehouseman's happy little helpers (like fork lift operators)
to not know which end is up!
Malcolm R