Do RCA Classical Red Seal LP's Have Anything Over the SACD's?

I am considering getting rid of my large collection of Red Seal "Shaded Dog" (could never figure out what "shaded" meant) LP's now that I've completed my collection of RCA "Living 3 Channel" SACD's. To me, the SACD's have a better stereo image (especially the 3 channel ones), a more life-like soundstage, and better definition of instruments than the LP's. They're also a heckuva lot quieter and some of them (especially the Reiner Dvorak New World) are mastered a whole lot better (that particular title was a true "dog" in the Red Seal LP catalog).

The big greatness about the Living Stereo LP's that I always loved was the three-dimensional stereo image which rivalled the sound of a live symphonic concert hall. At this point in my life, I sure can't hear any advantage to the LP's, but then again, I'm in my mid-50's.

I know that Mr. Hoffman has expressed his appreciation for the SACD's. I was wondering from the "audiophiles" in this group and the Living Stereo LP aficianados here whether there's anything better about the LP's (other than the artwork) over the SACD's.

Thanks for any opinions that you might offer....

 

Shaded means a brown colored shade behind the dog as figured on both record labels. If there is no shade then it is called "white dog" or without any dog "no dog". Shaded ones are the earliest and most sought after pressings. First of all there are only 54 sacds, meaning a very small portion of the legendary Rca Living Stereo catalogue. You cannot sell all of your collection just to keep 54 sacds. Unless you are talking only for these 54 titles. If on top your LPs are in M- condition with right pressings and stamps, then it cannot be advised to sell them for the sake of the sacds. The quality of such LPS will not ever by met by any medium and remastering whatsoever. I like also my sacds but the LPs IMO are unsurpassable.

 

It really depends on your playback gear. I really like the SACD series, really fine mastering in that series. And some turntables seem to be better at playing old records than others. My Strathclyde/SME III 'table really lets you hear every click and pop. The PE 2038, not so much. Not all "Living Stereo" titles made it to CD. And on my playback gear, not as seriously "Audiophile" as some, the SACDs sometimes sound less "alive" than their correspondent LPs. There's no hard and fast rules here. Note that "Shaded Dog" is in reference to the design of the label on the LP.

Shaded Dog:



White Dog. Ron Pendorf of "Recollections" Records called them "dead dogs." Dynagroove is not your friend:



Later, "Dynaflex" pressings, generally much worse:



If you've got a true high-end LP spinner, there's a chance good LP pressings will beat the SACDs, My shaded dog Mono copy of Heifetz playing the Sibelius Violin Concerto is more alive sounding on LP than SACD over my system. But your milage may vary.

If you need to dump them, let me know.

 

Sorry about the size discrepancy, but, if you notice, in the smaller label, Nipper is surrounded by a maroon shading. The larger is not shaded. The early Living Stereos are considered to have superior sound to the later "white dog" pressings. Do a search here.

I'm not a big classical collector, but I am a big vinyl collector. That said, it's difficult to find Living Stereo pressings that aren't noisy, due to age and wear. Plus the lower noise floor on classical releases and, for me, the greater distraction surface noise causes in a classical piece, makes me tend to prefer the digital format. If I had actual M- copies, I might feel differently.

 

Seems to me you answered your own question. If *you* prefer the SACDs and find no redeeming qualities in the LPs then sell the LPs.

 

It's odd that while discussion of most other records has moved on to deadwax info, with RCA Living Stereo, we seem to be still stuck at the disc-label level of discussion. Are there examples of white dogs or red seals using the same stampers are shaded dogs? If so, then as long as pressing quality was the same, these later editions would seem to be a bargain, no?

 

Yes, the LP's do offer things the SACD's don't, like surface noise, ticks and pops.

In all honesty, I haven't made any direct comparisions, the the 176k extractions from the SACD's sound very good here, all things considered. I hear a bit of congestion during the extremely loud portions of some of the recordings, but for the most part I think they're outstanding. The vinyl may indeed sound better in some cases, but throw in the convenience factor and it's a clear win for the SACD's as far as I'm concerned. Having the whole set available at the push of a button from my music server is just amazing.

 

Sorry that I don't scry the deadwax, some seers at this forum are more obsessed/focused than others. Note that some of the early Plum-Label Victrolas used the same stampers, though I recall the bulk of them having slightly noisier surfaces than the originals. Truth to tell, there are other record labels that produced LPs with less surface noise.

 

Some labelography can be found here: http://www.ronpenndorf.com/labelography4.html

 

Ron Pendorf. Figures. He had THE stash of Shaded Dogs, over in the industrial district of West Berkeley.

 

Yes there are. And there are examples of later stampers being better. The real info still is in the deadwax not the labels.

 

So are there any guidelines for deadwax info out there?

 

Oh, wait a second--I see that there is some deadwax info in the link that RiRilll posted. Thanks!

 

well, if you want to muddy the waters even further you can't ignore the various offerings from Classics and Chesky which run the gamut of not so good to state of the art. And with the Classics they did different versions of many of the same titles with very different results.

and of course there is never going to be a consensus on which versions are best. Choose your favorite flavor and know that you have to do this title by title, stamper by stamper.

 

Mr. Hoffman et al,

First of all, thanks for explaining the "Shaded Dog" thing. All of the RCA's in my collection are "Shaded" and I don't believe that I've ever run across a "non-Shaded White Dog".

I am speaking only of getting rid of LP's that were issued on SACD. I have an complete set of the Living Stereo classical LP's (that were acquired via my late uncle's membership in the RCA Record Club in the 50's and 60's and are all in mint condition due to my uncle buying them only for "status" and myself never playing them on anything but a Linn with a Shure V15 IIIG) and am not considering getting rid of anything that hasn't been issued on SACD. I am just on a "throw-out" binge trying to neaten up my collection. I have not ever reviewed with the "stamper" information. I will have to listen again to see if I still have the "ears" for appreciating the pleasing colorations that were inherent on the LP format.

I assume Mr. Hoffman that the "neat out-of-phase top end" is NOT present on the 2 and 3 track masters that the LP's and SACD's were mastered from, but is rather an anomaly of the equipment used to cut the early pressings of the LP's. Is the "neat out-of-phase top end" an advantage when trying to create the acoustic of the early-1960's Orchestra Hall in my living room? I'm not convinced since the SACDs' stereo image and concert-hall "presence" is much more accurate than the corresponding LP's (I've had a Chicago Symphony season subscription for the last 35 years so I am quite familiar with concert hall acoustical properties. I also played tuba in Chicago's Civic Orchestra which performed regularly at Orchestra Hall).

With the information that you've given me (especially Mr. Hoffman's analysis of why Living Stereo LP's were so aurally pleasing), I'll listen to some of the LP's and SACD's over the next week or so to see if there's anything to recommend to the LP's over the SACD's. As I said in the original post, my Christmas break listening marathon revealed the superiority of the SACD's over the corresponding LP's, but I'll listen again.

Another thought:
Perhaps the "RCA Record Club" versions of these LP's were inferior to the retail pressings and that's the cause of my preference for the SACD's?

 

Dude!!!!! don't sell!!!! That is such a rare collection. You DONT break that up!!!

 

+10000000000!

Could we see photos of such a collection, please!

 

Another useful link: http://www.shadeddog.com/

 

In my experience the SACDs sound better than my Red Seals but Shaded Dogs are another story.