In Portland, Oregon A New Source For Per Madsen's "Rackit" Record Racks

An AnalogPlanet reader let us know about a new source for Per Madsen's "Rackit" record storage units (Per retired). Portland Oregon based woodworker Ryan Tinsel manufactures the record storage racks in his "one-man shop".

Tinsel began producing these last November in solid Mahogany, though they are also available in Walnut and the original Oak. A single unit in Oak costs $129. A 3-pack in oak costs $327 or $109 each. A 4 pack costs $396. These are my "reference racks" and according to customer comments Mr. Tinsel's Rackits are fully compatible with the originals. The Rackit dolly bases, as well as the Oak and Birch CD cases are also available.

Elubow's picture

Yes, these are made from real wood and probably sturdy, but certainly no bargain. An IKEA Kallax is a fraction of the price, less utilitarian looking, and holds a great many more discs. It even comes in colors. Just complete it with a thin plywood backing and fasten to wall, if necessary.

Michael Fremer's picture
I completely disagree.
Elubow's picture

Standards of beauty differ. I’ll stick with my previous comment.

stelios's picture

There's the added bonus of knowing you are buying something built to last rather than something built to be thrown out after a few years which adds to the mountain of garbage and for the construction of which virgin forests were razed in developing countries...
If money is the object, this rack is such a simple design, anyone can make it themselves with a modecum of effort and some basic tools...

Tom L's picture

...between an item made of hardwood by a lone craftsman and something made of "Particleboard, Paper foil, Fiberboard, Printed and embossed acrylic paint, Particleboard and fiberboard with honeycomb paper filling., ABS plastic, Polypropylene" by a multinational corporation. And "less utilitarian looking"? I beg to differ.
To each his own. I built my shelves myself from solid rosewood (back when you could get it), which was quite cost-effective at the time. Now I would go with oak.

stelios's picture

You're a good man! :)

Tom L's picture

For my brain fart-I built a little end table from rosewood, the record shelves are Honduras mahogany. If anyone cares.

Elubow's picture

To me the above looks skeletal, utilitarian and not particularly esthetic. But we all have different conceptions of beauty. My point was there are less expensive choices. I do understand the reasons why these cost more. Whether they’re more functional than the Kallax is another story.

Michael Fremer's picture
They are quite attractive
OldschoolE's picture

While it is true that these units are expensive, they do provide a proper way to store records. Yes, a bit too much for my budget, but it is a one man shop creating these and there is cost of materials and labor, remember, this is one guy doing all the work! He has to keep the lights on and machines humming unless he is Amish.
That said I would not be so quick to dismiss the Ikea units. They work great and with proper care, will hold up (especially with some strategically placed reinforcement).
I personally have to keep my records in stackable purpose-built crates (made of strong milk-crate type plastic) due to space constraints (About $13 each). I have enough of them to equal the cost of two Ikea units, had I the room. The one drawback is that a full crate weighs a good 42 to 45 pounds! This means lifting the crate on top to get to the next one. (I have them stacked 3 high only). Drop it on your foot from even 6 inches and you will be getting a cast!
Had I the facilities I would have built my own shelving. I did build my own shelving for my 900 CDs I also have for music not available on vinyl. (I like to keep my CDs in their jewel cases).

audiof001's picture

So, per this discussion, add the purchase of or rental of proper facilities, machinery, man power, insurances, boxing, transport and shipping... While buying from IKEA makes for a cheaper purchase as a consumer, remember that IKEA is making things affordable by supplying the world by the thousands. I assume this guy is making them one by one. If you have already invested in this storage solution, the continuation of the designs solution makes purchase a no-brainer.

I had an IKEA record rack with 20 openings and it was completely filled. It was also crap, but you didn't notice because it was filled to the brim. Got together with my girl, who hated that rack. We invested in better storage, including custom steel supports to reinforce upper shelves. Nearly 18 years later, I have no regrets. That she's been happy with that choice? I's been a win win.

Elubow's picture

I was specifically referring to the IKEA Kallax and before that the Expedit. Your experience, if indeed you had either of these, is anomalous. Judging by internet feedback, the vast majority who purchased either of those is happy with their racks. If properly set up, they hold up over time.

If you can make your own, kudos to you. And I do not at all diminish the craftsmanship of this gentleman and others like him. I am merely pointing out a less expensive yet durable and functional rack that will last many years.

Tom L's picture

...with you about the appearance of the Rackit system. These racks, although they are widely loved and made of beautiful wood, pretty much disappear when they are filled. Some people like that, but I would rather see the shelves. And they are expensive, as you say. The Kallax is sturdy and a good choice for most folks.

vinyl listener's picture

not sure if the open floor and wire divider meets those requirements.

OldschoolE's picture

due to the way the bottom racks are spaced. If you use good protective covers on your records then no worries at all in that regard. The wire dividers are fine (though not really functional or needed) as long as you don't pack your records too tightly in the rack.

Glotz's picture

It is better constructed with thicker cross-bracing, and it is 90 bucks (!) for an 8-shelf unit.

If I had a bigger budget, these new racks above do look nice!

J. Carter's picture

I like these but they may be a little too rich for my blood. I am curious how high they can reliably stacked however? Would they be able to be stacked five or six high?

vinyl1's picture

Stacking them five high, they are quite stable, particular if you have multiple stacks. My five-high stacks are 71" tall.

In my old apartment, I had to use six high in a single, isolated stack. That looked dangerous, but actually worked pretty well.

marmil's picture

Any idea if there's a source for the units that have the CD drawers on top of the record racks? I had a few but, well, it's a long story...

marmil's picture

I went to the site & to my great surprise found that they're making the CD drawers as well. So I can finally replace the ones that disappeared. YAY!

Jancuso's picture

We must agree with Michael, these are the very best ready-made solution for storing lots and lots of records. We have 20 of them, all full. The most wonderful thing about these beauties is that the are configurable! We've lived in 4 places with these, each house needed a different layout. Per designed them to be 5-high stack-able if you need. At 3 high the tops provide attractive space for displaying other treasures - out of reach by cats or kids.Glad Ryan's carrying on the tradition - We may need more!