 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.35.141.110
As vinyl is concerned, this is one of my pet peeves. I'm not sure when this trend began (possibly Classic Records), but IMO this is a case where the vinyl community really had the wool pulled over their eyes. I know all the purported claims of better sound, and after purchasing a veritable truckload of 180 gram vinyl, I truly do not believe the sound is superior. We all have thinner pressings that are wonderful and others that are substandard. The same for the thicker pressings. It's clearly not the weight of the pressing that's important,but rather the mastering and the ability of the pressing plant to produce a flat and centered discs. Of course, pure vinyl helps.
Sadly,I think we're stuck with thicker vinyl and higher prices. On the bright side I have noticed some movement towards lighter pressings, ie. Mobile Fidelity Silver Series and certain ORG discs. These range from 140 - 150 grams and are less expensive. I wish there was a way to convince manufacturers to change their ways, but I'm not holding my breath.
Follow Ups:
In that documentation MoFi talks about the rationale behind the UHQR and the problems they were trying to solve. One of the issues mentioned is the same issue John Ellison mentioned below.
Heavier vinyl has a theoretical advantage in that it can have less issues with vibrational feedback. Of course a turntable is an electro-acoustical playback device and all sorts of issues effect the amount of this issue and whether it exists at all.
This thread, and naysayers, remind me of the inmate with the following quote in their signature...
"The whole problem with the world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
-Bertrand Russell-
The link is below,
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
My whole point with this posting was to counter the claims made by record companies and proponents of thicker vinyl that it improved the sound or enhanced the listening experience. For most of us here, it seems this is not the case.and all the technical data you can produce does not prove your point. Yes, it may dampen the vibration but how many of us will really notice a significant difference in the sound and even if we did, whether it is worth the price.
And despite John Elison's point that I don't understand the purpose of thicker vinyl ( I was aware of the dampening properties), this, by no means, proves that thicker vinyl with it's superior dampening provides a superior listening experience. Perhaps a vacuum hold down would do better in this regard. But how many of us have this option?
For example, I have yet to find 180gm reissue that sounds as good as the non-audiophile mass produced thinner original (and not necessarily the first pressing). Seems like a marketing ploy to charge $30 for the reissue.
If you guys let it out that you've gone and changed your minds and now don't care for 180g, then you're just giving them a reason to go back to thin pressing ... without the commensurate reduction in price no doubt.I kind of like the thicker pressings myself ... just the feel of old world quality I guess. But I don't buy much vinyl either.
Btw my Christmas present Beatles in Mono 180g sure sounds good....
Edits: 02/02/15
o think this apostasy!
I agree. Pure silliness.
Many have found, ironically, the heavy disks are more prone to warping.
This is, indeed, an audiophile myth.
I hate how difficult they are to handle, in addition.
When a record is flat, it makes maximum contact with the platter mat. When this happens, the record is mechanically coupled to the platter and energy in the LP can be dissipated. Warping has been a continual problem with new vinyl. I'd rather have a 120g pressing that lays completely flat than a 200g pressing that only contacts the turntable at 3 or 4 points.
And then, of course, there's all the distortion associated with tracking a warped record.
That is exactly why I bought a turntable with vacuum hold-down. Not only does it eliminate internal vibrations within the vinyl LP by pressing it firmly against a massive platter, but it also flattens most warped records completely. Of course, it won't flatten 180-gram or 200-gram pressings if they are warped. It uses a vacuum of only 3" Hg in order to prevent out-gassing of the vinyl. However, that still results in a pressure of 150-lbs distributed evenly against the vinyl surface, which will flatten most 120-gram LPs completely.
Best regards,
John Elison
I am big fan of vacuum hold down platters. All the turntables I've heard with one also play with less surface noise and tics/pops.
Yeah, mine is pretty darn quiet! ;-)
Cool turntable
How is that Dynavector (XV-1s?) compared to the DL-S1?
I didn't like the XV-1. I prefer my Denon DL-S1. It just sounds better in my system. YMMV
If the LP surface is not flat how do you achieve proper azimuth across the entire playing surface?
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
You can't. The stylus will be canted in some direction much of the time. THD will be all over the place. Basically, a warped copy is a lower fidelity copy.
The vinyl resurgence isn't about fidelity. It's about having a physical artifact and the presses are running night and day. We all know records can be stunning so I hope the situation evolves into something better. Even though I didn't always like the sound of audiophile pressings back in the day, the vinyl was usually immaculately pressed.
Seems to me much design has went into platter materials and mats and much of it has been subjective.There's no reason to conclude everyone or even most would prefer the sound of thicker vinyl. The fact that that one understands the purpose (accepting the explanation from the post below) doesn't mean many or most users are going to benefit from the added cost.
So not all of us were sold a bill of goods - but many of us probably were. If you don't like the sound of thicker vinyl then by all means don't pay extra for it. FWIW IMO the original vinyl pressings usually sound better.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Edits: 01/30/15
But then so is your tag line!
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
The thicker vinyl has some effect. IIRC, there are measurements and charts detailing the type of distortion and the actual measurements in the documentation included with each MoFi UHQR.Believe it or not.
Heavier mass vinyl alone is no ticket to better pressings but if all other things are optimized then heavier pressings should have sonic benefits.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Edits: 01/30/15
MASTERING is what it's all about. Even with CD's. Have you heard of the Loudness Wars? I read the recent Led Zep LP reissues have been done from the original analog masters. If that's the case, it's the exception.
Just had a bit of luck in a local thrift. A.o. Johnny Winter And live. I let it rip on my big rig, and LOUD! A good old record sounds better whith the stereo turned up. Digital: usually it's the other way around.
"The torture never stops"Greetings Freek.
there are the 200 gram pessings...
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure
Edits: 01/29/15
We were sold a bill of goods with the advent of 200g vinyl.
It doesn't seem more resistant to warping in my experience. And when they do warp, the 180g records are harder to flatten.
Some of the best sounding records I've heard are thin, floppy RCA red seals... so I don't think there's any sonic benefit, either.
Perhaps 180g vinyl is just the record industry trying to find a tangible way to justify charging higher prices for "audiophile" records. Personally I would rather manufacturers stick with standard thickness records and shave a little off those seemingly-excessive audiophile prices.
My experience has proved to be the direct opposite of yours! I use one of the proprietary Japanese Disc Flatters (an Axiss model which is a re-badged Orbe)that I bought in 2005. Now this unit is not apparently designed for use with 180 gram discs but nobody told me that when I bought it. From the get go I flattened any 180 gram disc that had even the slightest undulation on this unit. My experience over 10 years with this unit is that 180 gram LPs are by far the easiest LPs to fix! And the flatter does no damage whatsoever to the LP. I don't know what the manufacturer/importer/distributors were talking about when they said that 180 gram discs should not be used on the Axiss/Orbe.
I find Japanese LPs difficult to flatten but they eventually do and some U.S. are hard enough too but they eventually flatten out. Thin LPs are the most difficult in my experience? I don't know how 180 gram LPs fare with such devices as the 'Vinyl Pouch' or the oven method though.
...my experience is based on the "oven method" which works well with most LPs, but I've had three 180g discs that were persistently troublesome. Maybe they just need a bit more heat, I don't know. One of these days I'd like to get a dedicated LP flattener such as yours.
I wish they stuck to one thickness and one cutting angle, with strict QC on that one. I do not give a rat's derriere about the weight
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
The thickness of the vinyl has no impact on recording quality, mastering quality, or even pressing quality. Thicker vinyl is designed only to damp vibrations in the vinyl and reduce their distortion causing effects. Thicker vinyl has no ability whatsoever to improve the quality of the music cut into the groove. It just reduces the level of reflected vibrations back to the stylus and thereby reduces unwanted additional distortion. If you have a turntable with vacuum hold-down, that will do the same thing but even better. A turntable with vacuum hold-down will virtually eliminated distortion from reflected vibrations.
Micro Seiki used to do a demonstration with vacuum hold-down that was extremely impressive. They used a turntable with two tonearms and a test record with a 1000-Hz test tone and an unmodulated groove. One tonearm played the test tone while the other played the unmodulated groove. The speakers were monitoring the tonearm playing the unmodulated groove. They began the demonstration without vacuum hold-down and you could easily hear the 1000-Hz test tone being picked up from vibrations traveling through the vinyl record caused by the cartridge playing the test tone. Then they engaged vacuum hold-down and the speakers went silent. Vacuum hold-down completely eliminated vibrations from entering the stylus tracking the unmodulated groove.
180-gram vinyl is just a method to minimize unwanted vibrations in the vinyl from causing added distortion. Thicker vinyl is always better for vibration damping purposes, but vacuum hold-down is the best solution. On the other hand, neither has any ability to improve the quality of recording or the pressing. If the record sucks to begin with, the record will still suck but with less additional distortion.
Best regards,
John Elison
I always notice that the 180g are a little quieter and usually in my case better than any other copy of the recording that I have. The 180g have not warped for me, so I really like that too.
What a great experiment. It might be worthwhile jury-rigging a cheap used second tonearm on my table and using this method to compare different mats or maybe the benefits of record clamping.
.....so that 20-something hipsters could throw their money away! I've got plenty of records so thin you can bend them nearly in half, and they sound wonderful.
I've also got some thin ones that sound so-so or even bad. The same with 180 or 200 gram. A heavy record does not a good sound make -- there are so many other factors, including vinyl recipe and pressing / plating, etc. Some of the best, quietest, long-lasting vinyl I have are the JVC Mofi stuff from the 80's (that you can see through when held up to a light). I have a UHQR of Dark Side of the Moon, and while it's good, I'm not blown away.
Switching from a acrylic platter to the lead-damped platter on my trusty VPI HW-19 Jr. made more difference than anything. EVERYTHING got quieter when I changed the platter.
...about the "20 something hipsters". Heavy pressings have been around for quite some time while hipsters are a more recent phenomenon. Also, fidelity is not high on the list of priorities for most 20 somethings who spin their wax on beat up Technics or Crosley record players.
For all I know, the rest of your statement is probably correct.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
Which lead damped platter? There were two: the original aluminum with lead, and the later black acrylic with lead. Much later there was the all acrylic clear platter.
"Thicker vinyl has no ability whatsoever to improve the quality of the music cut into the groove. It just reduces the level of reflected vibrations back to the stylus and thereby reduces unwanted additional distortion."
I think I understand your point, but surely the intent of the thicker vinyl and thereby reduced vibration is to enhance the listening experience, to make it more pleasant (which is what I was trying to say). Otherwise, why bother? I just haven't found this to be true in my own experience. True, i haven't run any double blind studies with different vinyl thicknesses, but I truly doubt most of us would be able to tell the difference, or even if we could, whether it really improved the listening experience.
I don't have a vacuum hold-down on my table but I have little confidence that it would make much difference to my ears, anyway. For some, perhaps, it does.
This is the first I've heard of this particular test....
Can you post a Link as it sounds interesting....?
Particularly as most of the people I know with the big SX/RX-5000 and SX/RX-8000 decks prefer the non-vacuum models....?
No link! The test is just as I described it. If you have a turntable with vacuum hold-down and two tonearms, you can conduct the test yourself. It was written up in Audio Magazine many years ago and Micro Seiki used this test to demonstrate the advantages of vacuum hold-down. It is the reason I now own a turntable with a vacuum platter.
Best regards,
John Elison
I couldn't find a Test disc with an unmodulated track....so I used side C of Daniel Lanois Black Dub which has half the side unmodulated.
I played the Copperhead arm on the modulated first track whilst listening to one of the FR66s arms tracking the unmodulated second half of the record.
I listened through my Audeze LC2 headphones powered by the Schiit Lyr head amp so that I could hear even the minutest reflected tones.....
I even left off my normally used centre brass clamp to allow the record the least amount of clamping action....
The result....?
Not a single sound was able to be heard via the cartridge playing the unmodulated track....
I thought the 'legend' of this so-called 'test' sounded 'suss'...as I had never heard of it in 40 years of audio involvement....and surely such a conclusive test would have been used in advertising by all those marketing their turntables with vacuum suction....?
Whilst the 'myth' of this test seems to sound quite plausible.....it's just another example of the often unscientific and bogus propagation of untruths which burden this industry.
> I couldn't find a Test disc with an unmodulated track.
That's no doubt your problem! The test works just fine and vacuum hold-down works, too.
I don't understand this answer, John. He had a disk with a blank groove, a modulated groove and two arms, meeting the terms of the test. It seems that there are other routes to a well damped disk player.I would suppose that a peripheral weight, center weight and acrylic platter would work as well as a SOTA vacuum, though I really don't know. I only have one arm.
Edits: 01/31/15
No...I think it's your problem.
Not only have YOU not performed this test.....you can point to no scientifically validated description of this test.
Stating that the test 'works' over and over may give you some comfort......
Truth appears to hold little value in your cosy universe....?
Most purists love noise, all kinds of noises, it makes them feel good.
(sez so right on the stickers!) with the intention of offering less distortion to some of the crap they offer?
It really ISN'T the extra 25 -30% more they charge for the additional 30 -50 grams of vinyl they pour into the mix?
Hmmmmmmm...
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
I have been avoiding Scorpio pressings going on a decade now.
180 gram means squat. Some of the nicest pressings I have are Philips from days of yore and they are thin, flat and as perfect as a lump of PVC can be pressed.
The Blue Note Scorpios are about ten bucks each.
I don't think I've ever paid more than about $18 for anything pressed by the Scorp.
___
The little old ladies wait in wild anticipation for the meetings of the Double-A-C-ASSN...
Have you ever say compared single sided classical EMI releases that they gave to reviewers as opposed to the commercial two sided commercial release? I think you would change you tune.
Myles B. Astor
My "tune" is that heavier, thicker vinyl provides greater damping for vibrations introduced into the vinyl by a stylus tracking the groove. How would comparing a single sided classical EMI release with the two sided commercial release change my tune? Did I misrepresent the physics of vibration damping?
John C. Elison
Because John, vibrations are only one aspect of the issue. Side one does affect the other during the pressing process. With the EMI, you have the same weight LP, just double vs. single sided. If it were simply weight, then there would be no difference but clearly there is. Classic Records also pressed a few LPs that allowed people to do the same experiment.
Myles B. Astor
Hi Myles,
I think you are raising a different issue than the original poster introduced. You are suggesting that printing grooves on only one side of an LP sounds better than when both sides are printed. Unfortunately, your test is not necessarily valid unless you know that the same stamper was used for both pressings and that each pressing was accomplished in succession.
It's a well established fact that the more pressings a stamper produces, the worse they sound. The first pressing from a stamper will sound noticeably better than the 200th pressing. For your test to be valid, the same stamper would have to be used for both pressings with the double sided LP made first and before any more records are stamped the next pressing should be the single sided LP. Then, if the single sided pressing sounds noticeably better you might have a valid argument.
Unfortunately, this is not the issue put forth by the original poster and it is not the issue that I was addressing. In my opinion, the purpose of heavier weight vinyl is for vibration damping only.
Best regards,
John Elison
You mean the physics of mole hills as mountains, right?
"Did I misrepresent the physics of vibration damping?"
I don't know but you did confuse objective performance with value. As in if someones understands they would naturally of course think thick vinyl is worth the money. Hog wash.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
In fact, as I point out above, Mobile Fidelity pointed out the very same effects that John mentioned in his original post in this thread.
MoFi wanted to push the limits of LP pressings and that meant getting rid of two issues. The same reflected energy that John points out via high mass pressings plus the lack of a flat playback surface.
No record label can make sure that all turntables have vacuum hold down so a higher mass pressing is a viable approach.
Years later Classic Records resurrected the flat profile 200gm pressing that all but mimics the UHQR in their 200gm SVP pressings which had a tough time QC wise. The QC issue can be traced back to RTI directly.
Reportedly the pressing cycle time at JVC Japan for the MoFi UHQR was 2 minutes. That's not a figure that begins to support mass production and the shorter pressing cycle times at RTI helped to point out why a longer pressing time at 200gm is a better thing.
Quality Record Pressings has seemed to find a way to shorten the long pressing cycle time by adding sensors and monitoring the temperature of the pressing in the press. I don't have many of theor heavy weight pressing but the ones that I have are very good.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
We sure were! To add ,why do most of the new records come with two disks when only one is needed? It seems like BS to me.
This hasn't been my experience. In fact, I have some new single LPs I wish were doubles. The typical album back in the '70s and '80s was around 38-45 minutes. When you try to cut a 50 minute+ rock album on a single LP, the sound quality suffers. Unfortunately, spreading it across 4 sides results in a lot of record flipping.
I have many new double albums with 3 to 4 cuts on each side. Almost half the LP is blank. That means I have to get my lazy ass up to flip the record. Seems like overkill to me. Give me a single LP anytime!
I never really had any concerns about the weight issue having any better sound. From what I understand the more responsible sellers made some effort to let people know that it wasn't improved sound quality but greater resistance to warping that was behind the push for heavier pressings.
I could be wrong on this. Truth be told, I tend to glaze over such advertising stuff so if there was a lot of hyperbole about heavier records sounding better it may well have simply gone unnoticed by me. Things like that tend to go in one eye and out the other.
Maybe someone was trying to sell us a bill of goods like the debacle with CD's. All I know is that I have had great luck in buying new records that as flat as a preacher man's best jokes.
Originally, thicker records were supposed to have better internal damping properties. The same thing can be achieved with good platter mat contact. As far as warps go, it seems like modern heavy pressings often come pre-warped.
My floppy David Bowie dynaflex records sound fantastic. I can hear all those audiophile adjectives I read about which I'm supposed to achieve with my over hyped record playing machine.
It is nice to find a nice old jazz or classical record that is pressed "the way it used to be" on heavy wax. I try to avoid reissues of anything, unless a particular album has become unobtanium.
I just tore open the seal of a 75 Oscar Peterson/Jon Faddis on Pablo which is on something between a wet noodle dynaflex and a nice 50's Verve classic. Great deal for $8 bucks!
their right mind would buy a 120 gm re-issue for $30+. I think they also knew the mindset and proclivities of their audience and, you know, they were probably spot on!
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
