 
|
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 |
Are the Classic 45 RPM reissues significantly superior to the 33 RPMs in terms of sound quality? I would like to hear from those who have compared the two, and if possible the specific recordings? Do the 45s sound quality justify the additional work of more frequent record changes?
Follow Ups:
I've been buying these sets (jazz only) since just about day one--the first one I bought was "Sonny Stitt Blows the Blues" and I just picked up the Ben Webster/Sweets Edison set a couple of weeks ago. I happen to work about 2 blocks from Classic Records here in Hollywood and they call me when something new is released.These are really amazingly good records for the most part (I too don't like the Sketches of Spain set nearly as well as the earlier reissue or the original)--and I don't mind changing the record every few minutes. I tend to get into 45 rpm listening sessions and spend 3 or 4 hours at a time with these sets and it's a real gas.
My favorites are "Blues in Orbit," "Songs for Disingue Lovers," "Blues A Plenty," "Side by SIde," and "Sonny Stitt Blows the Blues."
but have limited myself to jazz, cuz I really don't want to have classical pieces chopped in the middle of movements. I also passed up a Sonny Rollins set for the same reason.My other gripe is they seem to spread things over four or more discs, when fewer would do -- e.g. Billie Holiday Songs for Distingue Lovers covers two sides fairly fully. Sketches of Spain is spread over four discs, with very little on each disc. I feel a bit ripped off.
That said, some of them have been spectacular, especially for imaging and mid range timbre -- Ellington's Blues in Orbit is superb, as is Johnny Hodges Blues a Plenty. I also like Distingue Lovers and Hodges/Ellington Side by Side. Sketches of Spain was a disappointment -- didn't seem to add much to the garden variety 33 I have owned for years. In fact, I seem to like it less -- seems lean somehow.
I don't mind getting up every 12 minutes or so -- listening to these things is an event -- I am not doing anything other than listening anyway. Some sides are too short, even for me.
So, I'll probably by a few more, as a treat, if I am confident I'll like the music.
the one thing that bugs the crap out of me is in the 45 Classic "Also Sprach Zarathustra" where they fade out the music mid movement and finish the side. Then the next side backs up a little and fades back in. Very annoying. I don't listen to that much as a result. Otherwise the sound of 45's is better than 33 1/3 and I like a few of the 12" 45's with one song per side records, with the appropriate lowered price for having less music on it. Satchmo playing King Oliver comes to mind where the 45 really excels over the 33 1/3 to me, but just two songs from the LP.Kurt
The Classic Records 45 versions are not worth the money and do not compare to their 33 1/3 pressings. The faster a record revolves, the more the higher frequencies suffer and so does tracking. Read the discoveries of Stan Ricker and the reasons for his development of half-speed mastering.I own both versions of S&G's "Bridge Over Troubled Water" and the 45 is a mess. It sounds like they fiddled with the higher frequencies to compensate for information loss. The 33 1/3 isn't too much of a revelation compared the Columbia first pressing.
I also think it is ridiculous to have to switch sides every ten minutes or so. It ain't worth it!!
John
I think you are confusing two different concepts. The objective with half speed mastering is to prevent overloading the cutter's amplifiers. That has nothing to do with high speed playback. Playback at higher speed affords greater dynamics and bass extension, if not reduced play times. There is less limiting found in well done 45s in my experience.rw
All other things being equal, 45s are unambiguously easier to track and enable the stylus/cart to reproduce a recording's high frequencies with much greater fidelity than an equivalent 33-rpm version,particularly on the inner grooves.Notice I said "all other things being equal." If Classic for whatever reason did not master the 45 version of a particular record in the same way that they mastered the 33, then some people may like it while others won't.
Please detail just what Stan Ricker said about the "inferiority" of 45s..??? I am interested to know what quote(s) you're talking about here.
Mike
I'm sorry I don't have the documentation in front of me but I will be happy to look for it at home. Another sugestions is to e-mail Stan Ricker or do a search with Yahoo about him or half-speed mastering. It is simple physics why 45 rpm pressings are not as good as 33 1/3. The slower the playback, the more acurately a stylus can read the info in the grooves, which are more evenly spread out. The faster you go, more distortion, especially in the higher frequencies, also more mis-tracking. I think Classic Records is marketing snake-oil and a lot of people are gulping it down. Have you ever compared the two speeds playback quality with a scope? Just look and then listen again. Marketing is a powerful tool.
John Donan
No need for me to email; I've spoken to Stan a number of times in the past re: half-speed mastering, playback speeds, groove modulations, etc., and he has never indicated anything like what you're talking about.**It is simple physics why 45 rpm pressings are not as good as 33 1/3. The slower the playback, the more acurately a stylus can read the info in the grooves, which are more evenly spread out. The faster you go, more distortion, especially in the higher frequencies, also more mis-tracking.**
Quite the contrary--it is simple physics why 45 rpm pressings allow a stylus to read the groove BETTER, since the modulations are spread over a longer distance. (With a 33rpm disc, modulations are more tightly packed, so that particularly with the inner grooves, very high frequencies cannot even be resolved by most stylus/carts, resulting in significant distortion.) Downsides are slightly higher surface noise and less playing time per side.
then 78s must be easier still. Let us return now to those days of
yesteryear, when we all had 78s and were jumping up every 3 minutes
to change the record! Just because we are audiophools doesnt mean
we need to sit around for an hour or so at a time listening to
inferior sound from digital discs! NO!!! Not when we could have
the vastly superior sound of 78rpm records (if only we could convince
Classic Records (and maybe a few other companies too) to reissue
Kind of Blue and other audiophool warhorses in this format), AND,
as an extra added bonus, we'd get lots of exercise too!!! Why, no
sooner do we bgt our buttcheeks properly planted in the chair then we are up again changing the record! I'm looking forward to this! I
never thought that love of music could make me skinny again!Mike
The optimal max playing time for a 33 side is about 18 minutes (depending on material), about 14 minutes for a 45 side.....maybe 8 or 9 minutes for a 78??????
Of course, as someone else inferred, many of Classic's 45 sets have even less music than that on some of their sides. ( I have a Bartok 45 set from Classic, of which one side is maybe 5 minutes long..?)
Yes that would get your keester up to the TT to change sides quite often.... heheh
The writer of course means this remark sarcastically, but it does illustrate the hubris that affects so many audiophiles: He has never listened to what he so blithely discusses!Original 78s (*not* dubs) properly played on a wide-range, high-end reproducer are something to behold. You have no idea, until you hear them that way.
As for 45s, not only is the speed higher, but there is less playing time and the grooves tend to stretch less to the center. Also, frequently, they are pressed only on one side. All these factors contribute to sound.
clark
78s are definitely a royal pain to play. But.... the most real sound , the most amazing connection with the performer and the music I ever had while listening to a recording, was a 78 on a wind up Victrola (thanks Clark!). And I have many of the Classic 33s and some 45s. And a couple of great turntables fronting an amazing stereo.Wouldn't that be funny though... what do you think the first Classic Records 78 reissue would be?
Steve Tag
c
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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
