How do the 200g and 180g Vinyls sound?

[Sugardawg34]

I'm wondering how many of these newer (200 gram and such) pressings sound compared to the originals. I'm looking at bands like Zeppelin, Floyd, Dire Straits. But mainly old bands. How will these new pressings compare as far as sound quality goes? Is it worth getting these pressings of all my favorite albums?


One other thing. I've seen some that say digitally remastered. How can this be? Are all vinyl LPs truly analog?

 

[lynnm]

"One other thing. I've seen some that say digitally remastered. How can this be? Are all vinyl LPs truly analog?"

No and Yes!

An overally simplified answer follows:

Prior to the LP era :

The performance was recorded directly to the cutting lathe which produced an entirely analogue reproduction of the sound as recorded.Later the performance was recorded in analogue to tape so that multiple cutters could be used to create multiple stampers.

Most early LPs were Analogue to Analogue pressings. By that I mean that the performances were recorded directly to a master tape and the resulting recordings were then used to feed a cutting head ,(usually with a lot of editing etc ),with which to cut the master stamping blank.

With the advent of digital technology many recordings were recorded in analogue and then digitised before being transferred to the master tape.The signal from the now digitised sound would then be converted back to an analogue signal from which a master tape would be created. In theory the digitised master would be superior as the engineer could eliminate background noise and more effectively deal with not only environmental issues but with musician screwups etc.In addition it was believed that digital recording techniques could actually be used to "enhance" the recorded sound without changing the sound originally envisioned by the artist(s).

The reality is that the conversion from analogue to digital and thence back to analogue was often not always pleasing in the final pressing. By that I mean that I have heard "Digitally recorded LPs that sound damned good but on the other hand I have heard other "digitally recorded" LPs that sound somewhat shrill and edgy.

Bear in mind that the last digitally recorded LPs were produced in the early days of digitamania and that digital recording technology has come a long way from those early days.

Given the choice between an original recording and a digitally remastered re-issue I would buy the original in a heart beat even if I had to pay a premium.

I find that the best of my LPs better the average of my CDs but that said theBEST of my CDs,( especially those produced in the last 10 years ) are every bit as good as most of my LPs. I would also mention that most CD re-issues of what were originally LPs sound thin and shrill.This is particularly true of re-issues of LPs by Neil Diamond and Tina Turner,( lighten up guys--I'm past 60 .

 

[WhiteSE]

OK, I am going to chime in in regards to the weight of the LP's....Just like any other marketing tool, so is the weight of the LP.

The only advantage really of the thicker LP, is the elimination of some rumble (maybe) because of the mass...BUT, sometimes if you dont adjust the VTA, it wont sound as good. Also, thicker pressings seem nowadays (ask people who bought a lot of Speakers Corners, etc) heavier re-issues have QC control issues/ They take longer to press, and if not pressed long enough, they warp, develop bubbles, etc etc..

There are extremely quiet and excellent recordings in paper thin vinyl....EMI, Harmonia Mundi, Lyrita, Opus 3, RCA Japan, Reference Recordings, MFSL, Sheffield, Philips, countless Jazz labels all use very thin vinyl and they sound incredible!!!

So basically the heavy vinyl is just a throwback to the old times, when arms and carts were lots heavier, and the production runs werent as massive as it became later. Its nice to feel the heft, but I dont think it makes a difference...

Also, digital recordings that are not remasters, but originally recorded with PCM or SOundstream systems sound darn good to me,,,their DAC's were eons more effective than what you get in CD players...

 

[BlackSwamp]

I'm wondering how many of these newer (200 gram and such) pressings sound compared to the originals. I'm looking at bands like Zeppelin, Floyd, Dire Straits. But mainly old bands. How will these new pressings compare as far as sound quality goes? Is it worth getting these pressings of all my favorite albums?

I wish the answer was as easy as the question.

Album weight is probably the 87th factor to consider. Mastering process, pressing run, digital influence, country of orgin, original tapes or copies, and many other factors go into sound quality of a vinyl pressing.

As with audio, the actual product doesn't always meet the hoopla.

A huge generalization that is still not always right is: Original pressing from country of orgin is probably the best bet.

AK is my primary internet stop but when I'm looking at spending real money on a piece of vinyl I swing by the SteveHoffman forum and do some searching. It's no guarentee but it does offer some clue as to what to look for and what to avoid.

Had I done so before I bought the dreadful audiophile pressing of Village Green Preservation Society I would have saved $30 hard earned dollars to put towards a decent version of that most excellent album. This one sounds like it was ran through a shrill machine.

Do your homework on the stuff you hold dear and you'll be much better off.

 

[DanTana]

I have a couple 180gr records and I don't have any complaints as of yet. They are not quite MFSL quality but they do sound very good.

 

[Mark B]

It seems that the audiophile record companies like heavy vinyl, so it may be marginally better than an equally well engineered lighter pressing. In my experience, Japanese pressings are about as good as anything else I've heard (DCC, Nautilus, MFSL) and JNP vinyl is usually average weight.

IMO the most important factors are the quality of the master recording used, followed by engineering, pressing quality, and vinyl quality.

 

[House de Kris]

One other thing. I've seen some that say digitally remastered. How can this be? Are all vinyl LPs truly analog?

Aren't all vinyl LPs truly analog? Since the early 80s, even before CDs came on the market, virtually all vinyl has been digitized. If you want to be sure your vinyl is pure analog, you must buy discs that were pressed in the 70s or before. No re-issues, no re-masters.

 

[styler]

heavier LPs

Ditto what WhiteSE said, and thats coming from a thoughtful collector. However, my all time favorite vinyl are the Classic Records reissues on Quiex-SVP 200g vinyl. In this case the record is truly flat. Most LPs are actually slighly convex due to the pressing process. If you are buying high end 200g vinyl, get the Classic Records, I've yet to have one with a flaw and I have several MOFIs with flaws... but regarding thin LPs, I've plenty and they sound fine. I agree with earlier sentiments that vinyl weight is probably the least improtant factor. Not all reissues are "digital," since the 60s nealrly all music was recorded to tape, then transfered. Many of the reissue companies use the original masters: Sundazed, MoFi, Classic Records, Chesky, Sheffield, et al. It may not matter all that much but I sure like holding the 200g LPs

 

[House de Kris]

Not all reissues are "digital," since the 60s nealrly all music was recorded to tape, then transfered. Many of the reissue companies use the original masters: Sundazed, MoFi, Classic Records, Chesky, Sheffield, et al.

Even if Classic Records obtains an original analog master tape, and cut a record from it, the vinyl you buy from them has been digitized.

 

[Mark B]

Even if Classic Records obtains an original analog master tape, and cut a record from it, the vinyl you buy from them has been digitized.

Do you know for a fact that that is true, or is that your opinion? I'd like to hear your explanation for that claim.

When an analog master is available it doesn't make any sense to digitize the recording and then cutting the master from the digital source.
-

 

[styler]

Classic Records

no digitizing other than rerecording the master tape:
http://www.classicrecords.com/frames/behindthescenes_frameset.htm

 

[Mark B]

Cool link! That's an amazing process. Doesn't say anything about creating a digital master tape, so I think that the process is analog all the way.
-

 

[House de Kris]

No one said anything about making digital master tapes. But, the pure pristine analog signal will get digitized and then reconverted to analog by the auto-lathe that virtually ALL discs have been cut with since it was introduced in the early 80s. Lots of lathe operators got their walking papers when these machines came out.

Here is a quote from the Classic Records website:
"The cutter head is suspended on a motorized carriage, which moves linearly across the lacquer disk. Its speed is computer-controlled so that the resulting grooves do not run into each other." The way them computer-controlled auto-lathes work is that they digitize the audio, delay it for a rotation or two, the ship it back out. Viola, digitized vinyl, and pretty poor digitizers by todays standard at that.

 

[Mark B]

No one said anything about making digital master tapes. But, the pure pristine analog signal will get digitized and then reconverted to analog by the auto-lathe that virtually ALL discs have been cut with since it was introduced in the early 80s. Lots of lathe operators got their walking papers when these machines came out.

Here is a quote from the Classic Records website:
"The cutter head is suspended on a motorized carriage, which moves linearly across the lacquer disk. Its speed is computer-controlled so that the resulting grooves do not run into each other." The way them computer-controlled auto-lathes work is that they digitize the audio, delay it for a rotation or two, the ship it back out. Viola, digitized vinyl, and pretty poor digitizers by todays standard at that.

I disagree with your conclusion.
-

 

[styler]

a conclusion without support

and you know they do this how? didnt see anything in their behind the scenes about what your describing nor were there any photos... having something computer controlled does not necessarily make it digitized.

ps: i like to argue, no offense or insult intended

 

[Sugardawg34]

I dont buy it either. BUT, some LPs are digital??? Why? Doesn't that seem like a retarded thing to do. I mean, if you're going to press onto vinyl anyway, why not keep it analog! THATS THE POINT!

 

[Nat]

This discussion is interesting, but the poor poster asked how they actually sound, not whether digitizing is a good or bad idea or whether lighter records can handle the energy put into them by the cartridge. I haven't a strong opinion, other than to suggest that like everyother thing in audio, how its done is often more important than what is done.
Having said that, I think the answer to how they sound is sort of a mixed bag. A couple of the MSLs that I bought long ago are quieter and perhaps more dynamic than the originals, but sometimes the remastering changes the frequency balance so much that its intrusive -- I thought the standard version of the first Fleetwood Mac white album sounded better (even though it didn't sound as good, if you get what I mean) than the remastered one.
On the other hand, the Sundazed Psychedelic Pillow beats the stereo dynagroove version to a bloody pulp, and probably is also a lot better than the original mono version, if only because every mono one I've heard has been played to death (by a bunch of dope crazed nuts using things like old Silvertone changers). If you like the album (or at least the good songs on it, or even just Somebody to Love), and you don'thave a mint mono, its well worth the expense.

 

[lynnm]

In the final analysis whether a recording is digitised or is purely analogue takes a very remote: second place to the question: How does it sound ?

As far as I am concerned If a recording has great sound I could not care less what technology went into its making.

 

[Audio Flynn]

Album weight is probably the 87th factor to consider. Mastering process, pressing run, digital influence, country of orgin, original tapes or copies, and many other factors go into sound quality of a vinyl pressing.


========

Agreed

Duetsch Gramophon makes pretty awesome pressings that are quite light in mass. Great thrift stoe buys for getting into classical.

I have only 12-14 heavier LPs, nice but can be pricey.

Just bought a reissue of John Barleycorn Must Die by Traffic last weekend.

Waiting for an afternoon with low risk for distractions to play it for the first tiem.

 

[Mark B]

If you've got the money to spend on it, it's worth getting reissues of your favorite old albums on 180g & 200g vinyl.

Most high-end vinyl is as good or better than the originals in every respect: from the master tape that is used (the original session tapes if available), to engineering, cutter mastering, pressing, and vinyl.

This doesn't mean that the original vinyl releases did not have good quality - most of them were very good to excellent.
*