Beware 'Audiophile' Vinyl

I agree to some extent John. If I had the space in my flat I'd much rather spend the cost of say 10 "audiophile" new albums on a decent record cleaner and spruce up my originals!

My best-sounding LP (J.N. knows which one!) is a cheapo thin one.

I know we've all believed heavyweight vinyl somehow equates to quality of sound but I can't say I've ever been aware of this.

Has anyone done a proper A-B comparison, using the same mastered copy?

I assume that new vinyl releases generally use the latest remastered (i.e. inferior sounding on good kit) versions, unless otherwise stated - as in 'From the original master tape'.

Another example of recording quality going backwards. My recent visitor brought over several 1960s original LPs, and they sounded absolutely superb.

John.

Possibly slightly off-topic, but ...

About 20 years ago I decided that my copy of "Bridge Over Troubled Water" was getting rather tired. It dates from my much younger days, and had seen many plays on my old steam-age record player (autochange etc), and had suffered at the hands of partygoers (or should that be "Partycomers"?) with fingerprints etc, and had even been washed by yours truly using washing up liquid and tap water to rinse! Needless to say, crackles/pops were very obvious.

So, I went out and bought a new vinyl copy - much thinner etc etc. The new LP copy rapidly found its way to the charity shop, as it was audibly very inferior to my original, very battered, copy. Since then I have avoided the temptation to buy new copies of my old LPs.

The new copy was kept for a little while as I used it to demonstrate CD/LP differences (I'd bought a CD copy too) This was one of the few occasions when I actually thought the CD preferable to my new LP pressing. There was no mention of digital remastering on the LP sleeve, although I suppose that might have been one possible cause of my opinions.

It still is a hit and miss affair new vinyl or vinyl in general.

Certainly buying "audiophile' copies is no guarantee of a perfect record.

Buying new from a reputable dealer/shop/site does at least allow for a replacement/refund.

I've like many have bought better copies of records at 10 for £1, 50p or even a £1 each, where £5-10 records from S/H shops have been less than good. Auction sites are hit and miss too.

Greetings Howard,

I look forward to our imminent meeting. No details. We don't want any gatecrashers at the prestigious gathering!

John.

What no gate crashers,

Not even from Lowestoft

David

quote:

Originally posted by munch:
One of my best sounding albums i have bought over the last few years is a very very thin original vinyl pressing.
Baby by Yello.

That's the very one I refer to in my post above Stu! Bought it when it first came out & IMO the best bit of vinyl I've ever heard.

IMO it's not a matter of "Original Master Recording", "Remastered", or anything.

Like many people here, I've been buying music for more than 30 years. To be honest, it's always been Hit & Miss, with regular cuts as with so-called "audiophile".

30 years ago, some recordings were great, some were crap. The good ones I keep listening to, and they still work their magic.

Same with CD's afterwards BTW.

The problem is, no matter what the label and sticker say, you only find out when you listen to them... and it means you have to buy them first more often than not.

Claude