What's the difference between 150gram, 180gram & 200gram vinyl?

Nothing in terms of sound

 

I like the feel of 180 or 200 gram vinyl, just like a Sherman tank. You handle a 140 gram LP and it feels like a noodle, almost like you could twist it into a pretzel.

 

30g, 20g, and 50g. So all told,.. that comes to 100g.

 

At the very least, I think it has value in terms of presentation. Maybe that's the case with gold cds too.

Maybe durability plays into it too. The old "I wore out my copy of..." With thinker vinyl, maybe it will take a lot longer to wear.

 

You cannot easily draw conclusions about the sonic difference between vinyl weights unless you hear the same cut on each format. This was only possible in my experience with Classic Records. I can only comment on the 180 v 200 SVP. In this case the 200 I have found superior if by a fairly small margin. However this difference may be down to the flat profile and Quiex formula not used on earlier 180g pressings. However there are so many other factors involved that it is difficult to form conclusions.

As far as VTA is concerned, for most without particularly fussy cartridges setting for an average 140-150 g Lp should be fine. The difference in thickness either way is pretty small and even smaller adjustment when translate back to the arm pivot. Also records of nominally the same weight aren't of uniform thickness between titles. Take into account warps dishes etc and VTA difference is of little significance if you set for an average thickness or for 180g which constitutes the majority of new pressings.

All I can say I have heard good sounding vinyl from old thicker 120-130g pressings as well as anything new from 140g up. The poorest sounding vinyl is often thin 80s pressings which may be sub 100g. Even then there are some great sounding thin pressings were the mastering and cutting were done to a high standard. Thick vinyl of course doesn't mean good sound if it is just a marketing tool for poorly mastered/cut/pressed titles. It does feel nicer to handle and give more of a feel of quality.

 

Weight itself is not the be-all and end-all of a quality pressing. However I will agree that lighter discs are more prone to warping.

In my opinion (and I served my time in Q/C in two UK pressing plants) 140 - 145 is heavy enough! A good pressing comes from good metalwork (mother & stampers), good vinyl (note: I did not say virgin just good!!) and a good pressing cycle.

The heavyweight pressings may (generally) be flatter, but are prone to moulding defects such as non-fill and porosity.

 

I must admit I think these really heavy weights are a nice gimmick but I don't see it as a real factor in the sound. I have plenty of 70s vinyl that sounds incredible and is normal weight. 140-150 feels nicer and solid but above that I don't see the point. Japanese vinyl was always pretty thin but the pressings are high quality.

 

Bring back Dynaflex. !

 

How much does that stuff weigh ? I have some and they are floppy.
How much does VTA come into play ? I have know Idea how to adjust VTA at all.

 

I dont know but my Lou Reed and Bowie Dynaflxes sound really great.

 

Mine to, I always wondered if they would sound better if I could change the VTA. Big difference between them and a 180.

 

Slightly off topic: what's the difference between 12" vinyl and 10" vinyl?

 

200 - 150 = 50
200 - 180 = 20
180 - 150 = 30

 

10"s trash your stylus if you miss the run-in.

 

You can use the thin ones as a protection to watch an eclipse of the sun - if there is any. No joke - I did it years ago when we had one and the protective glasses were sold out...

 

At one time (probably in the 50s & 60s) 10" moulds were made, but in the 70s & 80s we used to get 12" moulds reprofiled. So in effect we were pressing a 12" disc and trimming a lot off the edge!

 

That would be a 1" radius.

 

I think it's a gimmick. I have records from the late 60's/early 70's and those discs are heavy. I put one on the kitchen scale the other day and it came in at 185g. Then there's the ultra-thin RCA Dynaflex that also sound great.

 

More bulk to counter the weight of the tonearm on the edge of the disc, a counter to vibrations transferred from the grooves.
Could be a very diminishing return going from 150g to 180g or more.

 

I think that the weight of the vinyl does not have much to do with quality. I sliced a 150 gram vinyl record in half and measured the grove depth against the record thickness. The actual record thickness was way way more than 100 times greater than the deepest grove depth so grove depth has very little to do with record structure. It’s true that the 150 gram records are very floppy and can warp easier. But quality sound has to do with vinyl purity, cutter quality and cutter operator skill. Newer stamping equipment probably uses the least amount of vinyl necessary anyway. Better quality vinyl can mean lighter records and lower shipping costs. I also think that a shorter playing time can also allow the engineer to set more space between groves and thus can cut a stronger signal and slightly deeper groves and bigger wiggles.



In the early days some record cutting engineers were highly respected for their abilities to set cutter spacing and depth but today all that is done by computer control and produce consistently excellent results so the record engineer plays no roll anymore.



Since the vinyl of today is of superior quality the high-end wiggles can be much more subtle which makes the records bright and airy but it can introduce little pops that are the result of small dust particles introduced sometime during manufacturing or playing. So you get the good with the bad.