• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Recording Artist with questions about vinyl

just an opinion from someone who has has gone back to listening to vinyl and ditched cds and mp3s for about a year now and who enjoys music listening but is not very technical. i'd go with a 33 with good production and get the price as reasonable as possible to make the music more accessible. i have a number of 180gm records, but for me it's really more about the music and i can't really tell a difference with regards to the sound quality of different weights.
 
Welcome!! It's really cool to see a recording artist who cares about sound quality and then actually seeks advice from audio nerds... on releasing on vinyl. Kudos to you! :thmbsp:

spartanmanor said:
I am with Fopp on this one as far as putting it out on 33.3 as apposed to a collection of 45's. The sound quality diff would be insignificant to 99% of your audience but the convenience of not having to flip all those sides not to mention clean the records is a bigger draw. When I get into a grove of spinning full length albums I am less likely to pull the 45's.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself. I like SQ more than most but I doubt I'll ever want a 45 album for the reasons above.

Going beyond 180g -- can it be done with low defect rate? If so, by who and what is their track record. I think 180g may be worth it so long as the sq of the pressing/mastering/etc backs it up.

Michael
 
Hi Ben. Welcome aboard (by the way...love love love the album you did you Shatner). Anyway...

The kids these days DO care about sound quality. I hang out with a bunch of young vinyl fans and they're getting frustrated by bad pressings and poor quality control overall. They may not have the best record players but they still know a bad pressing from a good one.

I'm personally not a fan of 45 for anything over the length of a 12" single. I hate getting up to flip the record just when I'm really getting into it.

Whoever has done Joanna Newsom's or Andrew Birds records has done it right...they are examples of current excellent pressings, at least to my ears.

Good luck with it..your music will really shine on LP.
 
Thanks all again. I'm enjoying checking comments on layovers today.

DoDog thanks for the Scientology tip! BrocLuno - thanks. We'll watch the quality control!

Basically I'm willing to take the steps to retain the integrity of the recording but the question is will the LP buyers put up with the price, the side split, playing at 45. I'm gathering its not cut and dried. I wonder how the 'demographic' of we vinyl lovers is laid out? Some people only buy wine that is more expensive because they feel its a sure bet. Others brag of buying the cheapest and find better wine that way. No label is dying to put out vinyl these days - its almost out of nostalgia as its not a money maker. So its a bit of a risk for me to ask for a process that raises the price of the album with such a small part of music buyers even owning a phonograph! Many won't hear the difference - I'm only going with options I've been assured actually make a difference.

RTI will be pressing the records - that has been fairly unanimous so far.
DMM gets thumbs up from the best in the biz and it doesn't appear to make a price difference yet.
180 gram is a little more dubious though seems to make a subtle difference in say, a dynamic piano classical recording - and does raise the price in my situation.
My album is 45 minutes - a bit long for two sides (over 21 minutes a side becomes noticeably compromised so Mr Ludwig tells me) But can DMM make up the difference that I might lose by cramming the grooves a bit, thus keeping people happy about not having two disks? AHHHHH hahaha. I'll figure it out. Thanks again for the input. And I do realize that if my record sounds like ass it doesn't matter, and that if we make a fine master and its pressed poorly etc. Its all helpful before we press the button in a couple of weeks. Off to gate 35a...
Ben
 
re: Christian Science... the Mother Church (and its' adjacent Sanctuary) are architectural masterpieces, and the Aeolian-Skinner pipe organ is a destination in and of itself for the organ fan.
Harvard University's page on the structure (and church.) http://pluralism.org/profiles/view/71807

Don't know whether they rent out their studio space, tho! ;)


(Oh, welcome! And I'll be hitting Newbury Comics on the way home tonight.)

--Edit: It's in Boston, for those in the neighborhood or traveling through. Click the pic on the Harvard Pluralism project page for a bigger photograph.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the forum Ben !

I think it speaks volumes when an artist really cares about the sound of their work. So much recent music - forget being unavailable on vinyl - is just not well recorded or produced. I would agree with what most others have said in this thread regarding your current project. I think 33rpm is the way to go, and 180g is nice but not necessary (especially if it raises costs too much).

One thing you might want to consider would be reaching out to the larger online record retailers to really get a sense of what people are buying and why. I've had some great conversations with Seth over at soundstagedirect.com on this exact topic. He steered me away from some 45rpm jazz recordings because the bang for the buck just isn't there (they are mostly $50 or over). I also took his advice on some old Bill Evans recordings, foregoing the 180g for the much less costly standard records. They sound superb and I'm glad I listened to him.

Can't wait to hear your new record !

jblnut
 
Hey Ben,

We haven't met, but I live a block off of Belmont. There's lots of good insight being offered here (as usual), but if you're in town I'd also suggest going over to Grimey's on S. 8th some afternoon and picking their brains. They know the current market, plain and simple.

cheers and good luck

michael
 
Regarding the 45 minute length -- what about a 12" LP, and a "bonus" 7" 45 for the overflow? They could both go in the same package. Just a thought!!
 
Last edited:
benfolds said:
3. Any thoughts on 180 gram vinyl?
Click to expand...

Hi, Ben. I work at Shout! Factory, which released that album you did with William Shatner.

Re the 180g, as a consumer, I don't see the value. I don't mind a 180g pressing, but I've got 140 g (and even 70g!) pressings that sound just as good. From a marketing standpoint, you'll be able to charge a higher price for 180g, but I think a lot of that will end up absorbing the extra cost from the pressing plant.

What I'd do (if I were the product manager at your label) would be to research 180g vs. standard weight pressings from similar artists released in the past year or two and see a) what the typical MSRP is for each and b) what sales are like for each. It's difficult to make money on records despite the vinyl resurgence, unfortunately, so it's possible that going standard weight will save you enough money to make the whole effort financially viable.

You might also consider your fanbase--are you going for older well-heeled fans who wouldn't blink at buying a blinged-out pressing for $25 or $30, or are you trying to reach people in their teens and 20s who might prefer to spend $15 to $20 and who don't care about such niceties.

Anyway, hope this helps--it's great to see musicians caring about this kind of stuff!
 
benfolds said:
Hello. I'm new here and just introduced myself on the newbie page.

I play piano, make albums and tour etc. My career began in the CD era and labels haven't given much time to vinyl.
However I've just made my newest recording with vinyl in mind from the first steps to the mastering and I wanted to get some feedback before forging ahead with the label because there are a few choices on how to cut. Its a quality/price thing.

Here are my questions for those who are passionate about records:

1: Its not easy or cheap to do Direct Metal Mastering and it needs to be done at Abbey Road because there seem to be only 2 DMM lathes left - none in the US. When you think on your record collection do you feel the quality of DMM is worth the few extra bucks the process will add at the record shop?

2: I have a few LPs cut at 45rpm and I think they sound great. Do most high end turntables play at 45? I'd hate to push for 45 to find out that many vinyl fans aren't even able to play the record!

3. Any thoughts on 180 gram vinyl?

Thank you in advance for your time.

Ben Folds
Click to expand...
Hey Ben!

1. DMM is just another tool. I find the quality of the vinyl and pressing to be more important than DMM vs. "regular" LP mastering.

2. 45 RPM does sound better, but as others have said, it can be a pain to have to keep switching sides. The same even goes for 33 1/3 LP's cut today. "Songs For Silverman" would have fit and sounded great as a one-LP disc "back in the day", but it seems the people who could have cut it to one disc with amazing fidelity are far and few between these days. All modern turntables, even the most expensive, "costs more than a house" modes like the Walker Black Diamond II "do" 45 RPM.

3. 180 gram vinyl pressings seems to be the best compromise these days. All the 200 gram discs I have seem to suffer from poor fill at the edges and are noiser than an equivilant 180 gram disc.

All the precieved quality of vinyl goes out the window though, if the LP is cut from a 44.1kHz/16 bit source. 192kHz/24 bit masters sound great on vinyl though. A pure analog master would be THE s**t, in my view. And...yanno...as long as the dynamics haven't been squashed to nothingness during mastering. The last 3 LP's I bought sound no better than the CD's because of the "brick wall" loudness garbage that predominates today's music.
 
benfolds said:
My album is 45 minutes - a bit long for two sides (over 21 minutes a side becomes noticeably compromised so Mr Ludwig tells me) But can DMM make up the difference that I might lose by cramming the grooves a bit, thus keeping people happy about not having two disks?
Click to expand...

While I certainly don't want to argue with Mr. Ludwig (a God in my opinion), I think that staement needs a caveat. Back when vinyl was king, 22+ min sides were quite common, and they still sounded *great* (Think, The Beatles "Abbey Road", "White Album" (UK pressings) or old RCA Victor Red Seal classical recordings.)

The problem today is that since the loudness wars, because everything is mastered at one (loudest) level, it's hard to cut past 20 mins a side with quality because there's no wiggle room for the mastering engineer to play with groove spacing and depth of cut. On Bob's end, mastering a modern rock LP is no doubt pretty much like cutting a 1kHz tone at 100% level across a lacquer blank. Not much "play" in the side length/maximum quality ratio. All you can do is lower the global level of the cut, which decreases the overall S/N ratio of the finished record making it that more suspectible to clicks, pops, and the quality of vinyl used.

20+ minute sides of high quality can be done, there just has to be some semblance of dynamic range in the music being cut.
 
Last edited:
Someone who can really help with extensive knowledge and insider status with recording pros aswell as pressers is Michael Fremer over at Stereophile (magazine and website) and his review site................http://www.musicangle.com/
He is extremely smart, kind and surely could help you with contacts and information, and he is by far Vinyls number one fan.
Keep pumping out your music.......and if you end up here often post whats gloing on with your new album Cheers
 
Last edited:
I love 180 gram vinyl; back in the 70’s vinyl’s weight was more robust between 110 – 170 grams you really could feel the weight of the records. In the 80’s the pressings started to get really thin, I have a bunch from that era 80 - 100 grams. Anything to save a buck… I guess… At this weight I have found records warp more easily even stacked correctly over time. Some people say 180 grams tracks and sounds better…Maybe it does, but I haven’t done any double blind testing to confirm this. I would keep the speed at 33 1/3 because this will ensure compatibility to everyone in your fan base.

Have fun on your venture…
 
Hi Ben -

I've been digging your music ever since hearing your first album playing at Tower Records in Tokyo, back in '96 or so. Shortly afterwards I saw you perform at Bottom of the Hill in San Francisco, and I remember you and the band were struggling to get your piano up on the stage, LOL.

You and I actually met once, backstage at the Warfield in SF in '98. My pal Doug Edmunds of Gladhands hooked me up with a backstage pass.

Welcome to AK!

Regards,
Glenn
 
Last edited:
Welcome, Ben!

I'm thrilled to see a recording artist doing some serious legwork in an effort to improve the quality of his product for potential fans!

You might seek out another AK member named Len Horowitz. He may have some insights that would be relevant.
 
Hey Ben,
Have you considered releasing two versions of the album, one 33.3, standard weight single LP and a 45 rpm, 180 gram double LP? I'm not sure if this would skyrocket costs on your end, but it might be a way to please everyone at once. You could even limit the 45 rpm double LP pressing to a few thousand copies, while making the more affordable single LP as widespread as you feel appropriate. This way, people more interested in higher fidelity (myself included) have the choice if they want to shell out the extra bucks for a higher quality package.
 
Some suggestions:

For mastering use a better conventional USA mastering house. Ideally keep the LP at under 40 minutes. Put the loudest songs at the side beginnings and the songs with the lowest bass on those outer tracks to keep volume at it's best. Use 140 gram pressings on good vinyl which is thick enough not to warp easily but thin enough not to be difficult to press on the automated pressing equipment found at most plants. Put the quietest tunes at the last tracks on the sides. And look forward to seeing how your project comes out.
 
Any of the above options offered would be wasted on a recording that wasn't properly engineered to take advantage of them. Some of the best sounding records are from the '60s when recordings were simple affairs often done in one take. They sound great even without being DMM, 180gm 45RPMs.

Is the master digital or analogue? In what venue was the music recorded, What mikes, placement? How much post production, remixing, compression, etc? IMO, all these things affect SQ far more than what happens at the cutting lathe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom