 
|
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 |
98.19.157.182
In Reply to: RE: No, you weren't! You just don't understand the purpose for 180-gram vinyl... posted by Myles B. Astor on January 29, 2015 at 20:25:18
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
Follow Ups:
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
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 ]