Modern heavy-weight vinyl. Why?

There are two issues here you are correct heavyweight vinyl is used as a sales gimmick now and has no real benefit except that it is possibly more hard wearing but putting a single LP on to two sides can be beneficial to SQ I believe although no doubt someone will disagree. As I understand it less compression of grooves is better this is especially true if the LP has been cut at 45rpm but of course there are exceptions some of the 33rpm Music Matters Blue Note reissues apparently sound better than their equivalent double 45rpm issues.

I have four copies of Kind of Blue one from the late 60's and three modern reissues and the best to my ears by far is the MOFI 45rpm double LP also I have a double 45rpm version of Londom Grammar's first LP which again apparently sounds better than the 33rpm version.

I think the ‘best’ albums are 3 LPs version - good for one’s health too - all that exercise - up and down, up and down, up and down.... 

True Bob, bass response is better delineated in a wider groove with thicker walls, but computerized technology has existed since the 1970s to compensate for that factor on-the-fly during the mastering process; wider grooves are cut during bass-heavy passages. As for 45-rmp, one benefit is reduction in pitch variation. Of course the downside of that is less time captured on the pressing. There again, we get back to a single LP being pressed on two discs.

As for harder wearing, I've never read that the vinyl base material used in modern heavy-weights is different from standard weight pressings at a given plant. MOFI, when pressed in Japan, used virgin, circa 100-120-g vinyl that was exceptionally hard-wearing and quiet. With their US acquisition (2001), MOFI jumped on the 180-g bandwagon and I have no idea what their current source of vinyl base material is or how well it wears, except to say recent MOFI LPs are not transparent when held up to a bright light.

I'd heard that you guys were into vinyl purely because of the cost and the inconvenience .. sounds to me like the companies are pandering to you. 

One problem that is not overcome, AIUI, is that the linear speed varies depending upon the position of the stylus across the record's width, which means that the frequency response varies (in terms of highest frequencies).  This on top of the need to change the signal during recording, then changing it again on replay (RIAA).  I remember many LPs where the sound from one part of the groove could be heard on adjacent parts of the groove (if a loud part sat physically next to a quiet part - Pink Floyd for instance).  ISTR that some (earlier) orchestral pieces were recorded running from the centre outwards so that the (later) more bass part of the music was nearer the outer edge.  There seem to be so many technical problems with using a spiral groove on a plastic that I'm constantly amazed that it is still used, and has so many passionate adherents.  

one OR TWO  treats is worth it at 45rpm   pete Gabriel  SO   j warnes  Famous blue raincoat    any of lyn Stanley.   alittle expensive  too

John Willmott posted:

I'd heard that you guys were into vinyl purely because of the cost and the inconvenience .. sounds to me like the companies are pandering to you. 

Hi John,   ⇑

Hope your NS summer was nice. I owe you a pm.

Can't argue with the inconvenience factor. As for the cost, I can really do without that as well. Much prefer to dig the used bins for the original pressings. Occasionally some new music grabs my interest and it seems more often than not it's a single album split onto two fat LPs. I guess maybe the new modern vinyl buyers don't know any different.

Beachcomber posted:

ISTR that some (earlier) orchestral pieces were recorded running from the centre outwards so that the (later) more bass part of the music was nearer the outer edge.  There seem to be so many technical problems with using a spiral groove on a plastic that I'm constantly amazed that it is still used, and has so many passionate adherents.  

I suppose the bass is so heavily compressed on modern music that the grooves need to be exceptionally wide/deep to keep the stylus from jumping the walls.

joerand posted:

MOFI, when pressed in Japan, used virgin, circa 100-120-g vinyl that was exceptionally hard-wearing and quiet. With their US acquisition (2001), MOFI jumped on the 180-g bandwagon and I have no idea what their current source of vinyl base material is or how well it wears, except to say recent MOFI LPs are not transparent when held up to a bright light.

By George you're right! I just had to check my MFSLs...

I recently bought the new MOFI of Richard Thompson's "Rumor and Sigh", on 2x33rpm discs. Sounds great, very quiet. But J.N. & Nick From Suffolk did a comparison with the original pressing and, guess what, there's no significant difference - bass maybe a bit heavier on the MOFI. Best sounding slab of vinyl I own is Yello's "Baby", on a single disc and so thin you can practically blow through it.

I have a bunch of Credence Clearwater Revival LPs. Many are original pressings on the blue Fantasy label and have very good sonics, though the vinyl itself tends to be noisy. The best sounding of these is so thin that if held by the edges between the palms and shaken up and down it will make rippling noises. I doubt it weighs more than 80 g.

Brings up the question of mastering. Back in vinyl's heyday LPs were mass-produced by the millions using cheap, thin vinyl, often recycled. There were plenty of young vinyl mastering engineers at the time. Masters of mastering; guys like Robert Ludwig, Wally Traugott, George Marino, Doug Sax and others. Artists at their craft that produced excellent sounding LP despite the crappy vinyl supply.

Most of these guys are retired or dead. I wonder how the craft of mastering vinyl survived the age of CDs. Todays vinyl mastering involves more computer technology and cookbookery. Maybe more directed by reading output on a computer screen than by ear with an intrinsic feel for the gear involved.

Then again, maybe just the nuance of analog tape that worked so well with vinyl in the all-analog age.

No good technical reason. They are more difficult to press well. Perhaps just to differentiate from other pressings?

I have no idea why unless it’s all marketing. It feels more substantial but better sq? I doubt it. I think there is general agreement that original records on release tend to sound the best. That is certainly my experience. Played RLJ Flying Cowboys just now. Silent grooves and lovely dynamic music. 120g I guess and bought in the year of release...

Stu