Anyone else put off by 45 rpm LPs?

I don't own any. I've heard a few. I'd rather have a good, clean, well pressed 33⅓ rpm LP all on one disc. If a disc is warped or a tiny bit off center, 45 speed makes it trickier to track or avoid wow.

Opinions?

 

I have some of the 45 rpm jazz lps that came out recently. They were praised on this forum and sound great to me. My only negative view is the frequency of flipping the sides and I'm not used to paying $50 a title.

 

All the 45 RPM LPs I own sound fantastic, never had any problems with them. The new Dylan MFSL albums are stellar as the Fleetwood Mac albums. No complaints from me.

 

I had one and it sounded great but for me the difference is not worth getting up and swapping sides every six seconds or however short the side is.

 

I guess getting up and down is a pain and I admit to there being times when I don't put an album on due to it being 45 rpm that I might have otherwise for that specific reason, but the ones I have sound fantastic so I just save them for a day I am feeling more energetic. So no they don't aggravate me and I am happy to have them.

 

That XTC "Skylarking" 45RPM is a real treat! As are the Elvis Costello MFSL's.

 

I like both the aspects of 33rpm and 45.

The Dylan's, as mentioned above, sound great. Plus you can fit almost 4 songs per side. Not bad.
The 45rpm jazz reissues coming out lately are superb, and are the best sounding records I have. I don't like spending $50, though, so I am selective on what I buy.

Now... for 33rpm... here's all I know: Music Matters switched to 33rpm (for $35 each) and I have purchased every release.
I wouldn't have done that for the 45's!

 

I don't like.

 

The only thing that bothers me is the price.

 

I'm sure they sound great, but not SO much better than a well-mastered 33 1/3 pressing that it's worth the significant cost or annoyance of flipping sides every 10 minutes. I only have two, that I got dirt cheap mostly for completists sake: REM's Accelerate and Oasis' Dig Out Your Soul, and I think I've played each one once...both would've fit nicely on single LP's, and I have no idea why they're configured this way.

I've always said if I could afford the kind of gear necessary for me to really notice the improvement, I'd also be able to afford a personal record-flipper.

 

I love each and every one I have, and getting up and down is good for my fat ass.

 

i stayed away for a year or two....but bought my first one this year...dylans blonde on blonde....i thought it was great. then i bough in utero and when i compared it to my ORG i started to see the differences between 45rpm and 33....i love 45lps now...im starting to build a collection. theres a bigger sense of realism on these records that i dont get from 33s

 

I think the only one I have is Queens of the Stone Age's ...Like Clockwork. The frequency of the side flips isn't nearly as annoying as the 3X10" Era Vulgaris set. On that one, you literally have to flip every two songs.

Edit: Oh wait, I do have the In Utero 45 RPM set, and it sounds pretty great.

 

If they played at 33 rpm instead if 45 the wider grooves would make the fidelity even better and they could master them much louder with no loss of quality. It's smoke and mirrors.

 

45 for sound quality, 33 for convenience (though they can also have great sound quality). Still, a well mastered and pressed 45 will sonically outdo a well mastered and pressed 33. At least to my my ears.

 

Yeah like a dollar per rpm

 

Love 45RPM for Jazz and Rock. Not a fan for Classical as the side breaks within movements is one of the main reasons I went from LP to CD many moons ago. I understand the pain with constant flipping, I tend to spin 45RPM's when I am in critical listening rather than background music mode.

 

I'm with this , Price & flipping all the time , Loving the new music matters 33rpm's sound great & only 2 sides & good price

 

Not really.

 

No.

 

I've got 12" singles that play on 45 and 33. The wider groove 33 ones always sound better, have a deeper bass and are louder. And I'm talking about the same songs. The US 33 of I Can't Stand the Rain by Eruption, for example, murders the UK/Aussie 45 pressing. If they had a slower speed and wider grooves the SQ would be better every time

 

You cite two different masterings, from different countries. Maybe that is the reason for different quality?
45rpm can have wider grooves, AND move faster. How could a slower rpm sound better, all things equal?

 

If the optimum playing time on a LP (for stereo separation, bass and volume) is 17 and a half minutes a 12" 45 would be about 12 minutes. If any of these recent 45 rpm albums run any longer you can't call it an audiophile release.

 

Not put off by them, as long as they sound good.

 

My problem, like others, is laziness. Otherwise, they are pressed for a reason--superior sound.