GZ Vinyl "Quality Control" (or lack of) see pics!!

Now that's authentic!

 

Seems appropriate in the case of an Amy Winehouse record.

 

I wish more albums were pressed with 20 seconds (or more) of silence in the beginning. It seems that's where damage happens the most on LP's. I have a bunch of old albums that sound like crap in the beginning (pops, ticks, crackle) and then clear right up after a minute or so.

 

I bought Marianne Faithful's Broken English, numbered record store day, blue vinyl.
It was perfect. I was amazed to see GZVINYL in the dead wax. They must have been paid to get that one right, as it was a record store day release? I was previously convinced that GZ were incapable of making a decent product. I now see that this isn't true. I am happy to report that this is a very well done record.

That said, the bad ones from GZ go far beyond damage that could be caused by paper sleeves, card sleeves, even a sandpaper sleeve. The bad ones don't just look ugly, they play ugly too. Excuses about GZ not being paid enough, or most people not really caring about vinyl quality miss the point. When they are bad, GZ records aren't just ugly, or indifferent, or a bit poor. They are utterly and totally terrible.

 

Third shift at the plant, I guarantee. That's who's at fault. Buncha lushes, home wreckers and lunatics.

Seriously, that's some utter bulls*** - getting brand new albums in that sort of condition. Looks like some bean counters are running the place, doing what they do best - walking over dollars to save dimes.

 

Looks like that pressing plant recycles vinyl. That may explain why some LPs are decent and some not.

Please read this:

http://mashable.com/2014/08/22/gz-media-vinyl-records/#:eyJzIjoidCIsImkiOiJfYnpuNHl0ZDB3dWJ1b3J4biJ9

and you'll find that:

 

It would certainly explain why my black vinyl GZs tend to sound noisier than the coloured ones.

 

Yesterday I bought the brandnew remaster vinyl of "Adore" by The Smashing Pumpkins, a record I've been looking forward to for months. When I opened it at home I found all four sides had stains, blemishes, fingerprints, scratches. When I looked at the deadwax there it was: "GZ Vinyl".

I didn't even listen to it because shelling out 30 Euro for a new album and finding something that looks used inside is SO not acceptable. The guy in the store couldn't believe his eyes when I returned it and he saw what it looked like. I don't know why record companies continue to use GZ, especially since they are apparently immune to learning from their mistakes and continue to release faulty looking products.

Anyway: I took "Rubber Soul" in mono as a replacement and found a pristine looking piece of vinyl inside. Thank God some people still know how to deliver a quality product!

 

Sad to read all this. I still generally find gz less terrible than United, but that isn't saying a lot. That said, they pressed the last PJ Harvey album, and my copy of that is pretty good.

 

The most guilty party in this is the label. When one receives finished products from ANY manufacturer, it is good business practice to check out samples taken out of the inventory randomly.

I personally check everything like a hawk. Result: zero defect in my pressings

 

I think it is pretty unrealistic to reject a vinyl with surface patination without listening. This could be through lack of dehorning and maybe out of GZ control. Anyway I never expect GZ vinyl to look perfect though mostly it does. I have US pressings that look as bad a you describe. Not on ideal situation and I have the benefit of owning an RCM for removing any gunk.

Even by Optimal standards they appear to have upped the QC (at a price) on the Beatles monos. However I still received a Pepper with audible marks. I repeat GZ may not be Pallas or Optimal (who both still get it wrong frequently) but they generally put out pressings of acceptable quality. I have had a run of faulty pressings of late and they are mostly from plants that continually get praise here not GZ.

 

Excuse me?! Why would I keep something that looks used? Fascinating how certain people round here continually defend GZ even though they deliver products that are not acceptable. If these blemishes were out of GZ's hands: Why do I only ever find them on their records? Must be my luck then...

 

I bought the INXS box set of their 10 studio albums.

Pressed at gz digital.

One would think that putting one lp of each would be quite easy. Not so for gz digital. They managed to put 2 copies of Full Moon Dirty Hearts and zero copies of X. I also know of another person who had the exact same issue. WTF

Pressings were adequate after running through my US RCM. I replaced Elegantly Wasted as that was noisy when I received my replacement box set.

Gz certainly can do good pressings, as the Stones, Who and Dire Straits box sets are apparently very good. However I have reservations on their longevity as they use a_softer vinyl formulation than standard.

However normal pressings seem to be patchy at best.

Given the choice, I would choose any pressing plant in Europe before gz.

 

GZ didnt press The Beatles mono vinyl, they only assembled the box contents (or manufactured the book/box only, dont remember exactly).

 

In practice I doubt the softer vinyl formula if correct will make much difference given modern pick ups and low tracking force. I do remember one poster here found GZ pressings could not be repaired without damage in a Furutech vinyl flattener. I'm not saying they are perfect but I have not had a higher fault tatio from GZ than anywhere else including the 'premium' pressing plants. The later do use a better sounding vinyl formula especially Quality Records,Pallas and Optimal.

 

Who said they did?

 

I don't think anyone suggested this. I said Optimal pressed them at a higher standard than is usual for them.

 

I have an Orb industries vinyl flattener. It works perfectly on all pressings except POS gz digital - turns them to pizza like. I send gz pressings back and flatten all other pressings.

I would anticipate the long term effects of the softer/cheaper vinyl formulation will be more groove noise than normal records. That cannot be good and should not be allowed commercially.

 

Latest addition to my collection, Robyn Hitchcock's The Man Upstairs (before cleaning):

Flawless. My incredible good luck with records pressed at GZ continues uninterrupted.

 

Shiny! No issues with various GZ's I have, I think with all lp's then and now, there will never be a zero defect rate

 

Record Technology Inc., Camarillo, California, U.S.A. otherwise RTI.

 

This happened to me with the Bob Dylan monos (they tried to fob me off with two Another Side Of and no Freewheelin' - not bloody likely!), so RTI can screw that up as well...

 

The reply received from the Record company regarding "horns" is correct. Horns are thrown up by the cutting stylus during mastering.

In the UK most major plants would reduce/remove the horns by polishing the mother. This would often enrage producers, artists, and mastering engineers because the top end could be literally be polished away!

Keeping the cutting stylus temperature to an optimum (having regard for the make and character of the lacquer) reduces horn. Excessive horns often result from too high temperature whilst cutting.

Poly lined inner sleeves reduce the scuffing that happens on discs with excessive horns.

Provided regrind vinyl is from good scrap discs or "flash" trimmed from the edge of pressings, there is no reason why a good pressing can't be manufactured. Don't forget a large proportion of pressing faults are caused by errors in the pressing cycle.

 

Hi,
I asked several times to send me matrix numbers of records having problems in flatteners. Nobody did it. You can do it by private posts here.

However, we had no direct complaint for such strange "pizza like effect" from any of our customers. There were several posts on several forums regarding this issue, including your posts here, but maybe it is only you having this problem and the other people are citing you? I really don't know. There were also no complains from any manufacturer of record flatteners. We press maybe 20 % of total world vinyl production so it is quite strange that the manufacturers haven't tested their flatteners with even one GZ record since start of their business.
How can a plant without proper feedback from its customers improve their processes? At least matrix numbers and approx. time of purchase... Thanks.

 

I did send you matrix numbers some time ago from two U2 LPs ('Joshua Tree' Anniversary 2LP and 'Achtung Baby') that I bought in Germany, must be 2007 or 2008 can't remember now to be honest but the date would coincide with the release of 'The Joshua Tree' Anniversary release). You said that neither one of these records based on the matrix numbers I provided was pressed at GZ. There is/was no www.gzvinyl.com on the deadwax either. I know exactly what Shane ors. Turntable means when he talks about the 'pizza like effect'.

Strangely, I could never find out who in Europe manufactured 'The Joshua Tree' Anniversary vinyl and believe me I tried!

I have not tried to flatten any GZ LPs because I avoid purchasing them. My last one was Sandy Denny's 'Sandy' LP in 2013 which had pressing defects on each of the two copies I tried, not warped though. Other than those 2 U2 LPs, I have flattened over 1,000 Vinyl LPs since 2005 with no problems of any kind whatsoever. This is not to say however that the problem does not exist with GZ pressings.