• 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

Who presses or did press the best LPs

S

Sunshine99

Active Member
So I just got into vinyl and I have noticed a huge difference in the quality of my LPs.

I have older, scratched up LPs that are offering better sound than my new/newer LPs.

So far two have stood out to me:

Decca

Deutsche Grampahon

Are there any other record companies that produce just amazing sound?
 
Register to hide this ad
glamajamma said:
So I just got into vinyl and I have noticed a huge difference in the quality of my LPs.

I have older, scratched up LPs that are offering better sound than my new/newer LPs.

So far two have stood out to me:

Decca

Deutsche Grampahon

Are there any other record companies that produce just amazing sound?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are many. A lot depends on what you want to listen to. Genre, age, etc.

Following recommendations given me, I have found that EMI Angel, RCA Victor Red Seal, and Columbia Masterworks are nice pressings, generally speaking. A lot of classical there.

Also do yourself a favor and don't turn your back on monophonic recordings. Some of the best are better than stereo releases of the same original recording; it happens. And many shun monophonic pressings, which makes them often more available.

Enjoy your journey; there's a lot of fun to be had.
 
For my money, back in the day, if it said "Mastered By Capitol", you just knew it was going to be dead silent and excellent sound.

RCA before Dynagroove was pretty decent too.

Can't say I've ever liked Columbia pressings much...
 
1tumbleweed said:
For my money, back in the day, if it said "Mastered By Capitol", you just knew it was going to be dead silent and excellent sound.

RCA before Dynagroove was pretty decent too.

Can't say I've ever liked Columbia pressings much...
Click to expand...

I'm sure it's to each their own, but I just got my first Dynagroove recordings, and I've liked what I've heard. And I definitely like the few Columbia Masterworks pressings I have; I put them in nearly the same class as RCA Victor Red Seal; and I love the weight and general feel of them as well. This is an aside, but I've also noticed that when I find LPs at thrift stores with no paper liner and generally abused, the Columbia Masterworks tend to clean up pretty well; surprisingly well. Some of the 'other' brands, not so much.
 
for rock... I like Chrysalis, Electra, late 70's WB, late 80's A&M... that's just off the top of my head.
 
glamajamma said:
So I just got into vinyl and I have noticed a huge difference in the quality of my LPs.

I have older, scratched up LPs that are offering better sound than my new/newer LPs.

So far two have stood out to me:

Decca

Deutsche Grampahon

Are there any other record companies that produce just amazing sound?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to point out that the question is too broad: the answer is that there many labels that delivered very good sounding records, but the listing depends on the particular music type you consider. I am only familiar with classical music labels, though. For this realm, I generally enjoy the sound of some labels (mainstream type, not specialized audiophile-type, like Sheffield Labs or Chesky) like RCA, Mercury, Philips, Deutsche Grammophon, EMI (UK and German pressings in paricular), Decca/London, Everest, Westminster, Vox and a few released by smaller size companies.

PS: I would add to the above listing Telefunken/Teldec, Vanguard (thanks Wigwam James!) and Archiv, a superb baroque/early-music label owned by Deutsche Grammophon. More recent labels: Telarc and Denon.
 
Last edited:
guiller said:
I'm sorry to point out that the question is too broad: the answer is that there many labels that delivered very good sounding records, but the listing depends on the particular music type you consider. I am only familiar with classical music labels, though. For this realm, I generally enjoy the sound of some labels (mainstream type, not specialized audiophile-type, like Sheffield Labs or Chesky) like RCA, Mercury, Philips, Deutsche Grammophon, EMI (UK and German pressings in paricular), Decca/London, Everest, Westminster, Vox and a few released by smaller size companies.
Click to expand...

What are your thoughts on the Vanguard label for classical?
 
guiller said:
I'm sorry to point out that the question is too broad: the answer is that there many labels that delivered very good sounding records, but the listing depends on the particular music type you consider. I am only familiar with classical music labels, though. For this realm, I generally enjoy the sound of some labels (mainstream type, not specialized audiophile-type, like Sheffield Labs or Chesky) like RCA, Mercury, Philips, Deutsche Grammophon, EMI (UK and German pressings in paricular), Decca/London, Everest, Westminster, Vox and a few released by smaller size companies.
Click to expand...

+1.

The answer is every label had its high and low points. LP quality is a situational type of topic - better dealt with on an album by album basis.
 
Wigwam Jones said:
What are your thoughts on the Vanguard label for classical?
Click to expand...

Sound-wise, I like it a lot, in general. However, some of the musicians that recorded for them never succeeded in turning me on (for example, during the 70's I bought the by then new releases of Maurice Abravanel conducting the music of Mahler, which were a source of frustration for me at the time). On the other hand, the Ives' symphonic cycle conducted by Farberman or the recordings of The Bach Guild remain today as some awesome musical performances, at least IMHO.
 
poppachubby said:
+1.

The answer is every label had its high and low points. LP quality is a situational type of topic - better dealt with on an album by album basis.
Click to expand...

I tend not to agree with that. While there are always exceptions, typically one house or another has or had higher standards or better equipment than another. If you want to talk engineering or recording standards, I totally get what you're saying. But you can often depend on a shaded dog to sound terrific, regardless of what is being recorded. There were some 'budget' houses that just could not make it happen in those terms. Record by record, release by release for some things, yes. But in general pressing terms, I do think some were better than others. The era matters also, I am told. Some tell me that DG is not what it was, which is a shame if true. I have only experienced older DG releases and I do not have a complaint with any of them.
 
guiller said:
Sound-wise, I like it a lot, in general. However, some of the musicians that recorded for them never succeeded in turning me on (for example, during the 70's I bought the by then new releases of Maurice Abravanel conducting the music of Mahler, which were a source of frustration for me at the time). On the other hand, the Ives' symphonic cycle conducted by Farberman or the recordings of The Bach Guild remain today as some awesome musical performances, at least IMHO.
Click to expand...

You bring up another interesting point. Some labels had the 'good' or at least the 'popular' orchestras and conductors locked up under contract, with a few exceptions or when the band or leader in question jumped labels from time to time. Smaller houses that focused on quality and could not get the 'big names' could and did find real gems and real stinkers out there. I am thinking of Golden Crest, Vox (previously mentioned), Bach Guild, Counterpoint, Esoteric, and Period in this sense. Thoughts?
 
Really depends alot on the time frame also I believe. Seems like alot from the 60's 70's are much better than the pressing in the 80's on the same labels. MCA has some really good pressing and some not so good. Just starting to look at the differences, engineering, mastering, producing, recording studio's also seem to play a big part. More so than the label I think?
 
Wigwam Jones said:
You bring up another interesting point. Some labels had the 'good' or at least the 'popular' orchestras and conductors locked up under contract, with a few exceptions or when the band or leader in question jumped labels from time to time. Smaller houses that focused on quality and could not get the 'big names' could and did find real gems and real stinkers out there. I am thinking of Golden Crest, Vox (previously mentioned), Bach Guild, Counterpoint, Esoteric, and Period in this sense. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

There is host of great performers that performed for smaller labels, for a number of reasons. Some of the names that come to mind are Novaes (Vox), Brendel (Vox) -in the 50's before becoming famous-, Scherchen (Westminster), Leinsdorf (Westminster) -before signing for RCA, Horenstein (Vox), Erich Kleiber (decca, telefunken, but definitely an outsider), Klemperer (Vox) -in the 50's, before he signed for EMI, Leonhardt (Vanguard), Prohaska (Vanguard), Gielen (Vox), Swarowsky (Audio Fidelity,Vox) and many others.
 
Last edited:
ken.nelson said:
Really depends alot on the time frame also I believe. Seems like alot from the 60's 70's are much better than the pressing in the 80's on the same labels. MCA has some really good pressing and some not so good. Just starting to look at the differences, engineering, mastering, producing, recording studio's also seem to play a big part. More so than the label I think?
Click to expand...

I agree with the era making a difference. Engineering, recording, and mastering also all play a huge role in the final product, but I also think that some presses were simply of a higher quality. Lower noise floor, fewer clicks and pops for a given 'mint' record, etc. I put these down to the quality of the pressing; it can be dead silent between tracks and still be a lousy band, bad conductor, poorly-mastered, etc. But just speaking of the pressing itself, some houses seemed to do it better - in my opinion. If you're talking end-result, then yes, it all matters.
 
The Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab Masters were nice and thick like a juicy steak.
They were just the way I liked them.
 
Wigwam Jones said:
Following recommendations given me, I have found that EMI Angel, RCA Victor Red Seal, and Columbia Masterworks are nice pressings, generally speaking. A lot of classical there.
Click to expand...

I just picked up a few of these, in mint condition, and I don't think I have heard rhapsody in blue sound like that.
 
glamajamma said:
I just picked up a few of these, in mint condition, and I don't think I have heard rhapsody in blue sound like that.
Click to expand...

Is that good or bad? :D

I'm listening to a lovely Decca right now, Decca DL 4309 Wayne King - Golden Favorites. From 1962. Very clean. It's only when I heard a slight tick just now on side 2 that I realized how clean this album is. Wayne King isn't for everyone, though. I'm enjoying it, though.
 
Wigwam Jones said:
Is that good or bad? :D

I'm listening to a lovely Decca right now, Decca DL 4309 Wayne King - Golden Favorites. From 1962. Very clean. It's only when I heard a slight tick just now on side 2 that I realized how clean this album is. Wayne King isn't for everyone, though. I'm enjoying it, though.
Click to expand...

Very Very good

Oh and also awesome on the London especially London FFRR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom