Led Zeppelin II "RL" in the house!

• Wow, you should go buy some lottery tickets too. Congrats on the RL scores!

 

They're out there. But half the battle is finding one that isn't trashed. Nice find.....Again!

 

This one is G+ at best. It's certainly no gem, but a player on secondary system for sure. I paid $5 for it, so not that big of a deal.

 

The cover and inner sleeve are VG+, these first Zep records saw a lot of play I'm sure.

 

It is a very early press though:

"1. On BOTH sides the relevant matrix info is: ST-A-691671 - 1A (or on Side Two ST-A-691671 - 1A) with a SKINNY "RL" etched next to a very SMALL "ss" (for Sterling Sound)."

Except mine has both sides with "RL SS" but the matrix numbers are both ST-A691671-BO

Does anyone have info on this version?

I'll give it a listen tomorrow...

 

I have both the Classic Records reissue and a couple RL's. The RL is the preferred version in my house...

 

Me too - but one can certainly rock the house with either pressing.

 

No way is it as powerful as the RL! It has no bass impact like the RL and too much treble added. It may sound clearer and cleaner but it ain't an RL. Most on here find the Classic II to be the worst of the Led Zep Classic Records.

 

I picked up my second RL recently for 15 bucks and in really nice shape but it turned out to be LH on side 2.
My question is where do these one sided RL's fall in the time line of being pressed ?
Mine has a first state covers with no gold award sticker provided the cover wasn't swapped.
Side 2 is not as loud as vibrant as side one but still sounds good when turned up.

 

from this thread (you have a later pressing):

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...es-for-your-rl-copy-of-led-zeppelin-ii.84938/

US: The original pressing, as it is understood by the general public, has the cat. no. of SD 8236, as most people here already know. Also, as most people here already know, the earliest runs of this original pressing was cut by Robert Ludwig, as indicated by his initials "RL" etched on the dead wax (the runoff groove, after the music is over and before the label starts) of Side One, and sometimes BOTH Side One AND Side Two. For the US pressings, I basically have seen four large groups of versions. For variations of these four versions based on where they were pressed, I think MikeH's listing of the different pressing plants and their "codes" (as indicated at the bottom of the label with initials of the plant finishing up the ST-A-691671-__ or ST-!-691672-__) posted on another thread is very helpful (MikeH, would you please copy and paste that listing on this thread for others' benefit and convenience?). The four GENERALLY different versions that I have seen are:

1. On BOTH sides the relevant matrix info is: ST-A-691671 - 1A (or on Side Two ST-A-691671 - 1A) with a SKINNY "RL" etched next to a very SMALL "ss" (for Sterling Sound). On my favorite copy of this record, the ST-A-691671- or ...72- number at the bottom of the label ends with CTH, indicating that my copy was pressed at Columbia. Please note that the ST-A-691671 - 1A on the dead wax is crunched together without unnecessary spaces in between. On these, the dead wax on Side Two is slightly narrower than that on Side One, BUT is NOT as narrow as the other version described below.

2. On Side One the relevant matrix info is identical to the one described immediately above, but on Side Two, it is: ST-A-691672 - D (or some other letter but NOT 1A). That matrix info, again, is crunched together without unnecessary spaces in between. On these, the SKINNY "RL" plus a small "ss" appear on Side One but on Side Two a larger "SS" appears next to "LH", indicating that Side Two was not mastered by Robert Ludwig. On these, the dead wax on Side Two is similar to the version that I described immediately above. From this info, I concluded that this is a later run than the one immediately above. Side Two does not sound as magical as the one immediately above, but still sounds markedly better than the non-RL versions (except that I have not heard the "GP" version).

3. On both sides of the record, the following appears: ST- A - 691671 - A (or on Side Two ST- A - 691672 - A). This thread will not let me put in extra spaces between numbers and letters but on these, there are empty spaces between ST- and A, between A - and 691671 (or ...72) and between that number and - A, suggesting that it contemplated other numbers or letters to be filled in later (perhaps to indicate the different stampers, etc.) On Side One, there is a NON-skinny "RL" (similar to those which are on later RL records) and NO "SS". On Side Two, there is a SKINNY "RL" next to a very small "ss". Now, there may be other version of this which may have a SKINNY "RL" plus a small "ss" on BOTH sides, but I cannot confirm this, as I no longer have three other copies of RL Led Zep II. On these, Side Two has a very, very narrow dead wax area, even narrower than the two versions described above. This is what people here call the "narrow Side Two" version but I would like to call it the "narrower Side Two" version. My reason for this is the next version described below. WITHOUT confirmation that there is a double-sided SKINNY "RL" with a very small "ss" of this version, I am of the belief that this version is the SECOND run of this LP, right after the version described in Paragraph 1 above.

4. On Side One, the relevant matrix info is identical to the version described immediately above, with the NON-skinny "RL" and NO "SS". On Side Two, there is no mastering credit and the matrix info is: ST-A-691672-M (or some other letter). The dead wax area on Side Two is LARGE (or "wide"), larger or wider than each of the songs on Side Two. I am of the opinion that this RL-on-one-side-only is the LAST of the RL runs, as Side Two was not even cut at Sterling Sound.

All US RL pressings that I have seen do NOT have the "Gold Record Award" marking on the cover and they came in the typical late 60's Atlantic paper inner sleeves with pictures of other Atlantic releases.

Also, there may yet be at least another version of the US RL pressings with the matrix info: ST-A-691672 (without anything more). As I have parted with some of my RL pressings PRIOR to comparing all the different matrix info, I cannot personally confirm this, or what kind of "RL" or "SS" is etched on the dead wax.

 

Could be better, But I use headphones for my listening and the Classic sounds better. Home set up could be different, but I'm judging by my set up.
The Classic hits just as hard and is much cleaner sounding in (Headphones), where the RL is darker and muddy sounding. Don't get me wrong it RAWKS but using (Headphones) you can really tell the difference.

 

Wasn't it said that Classic Records did not have access to the master tape for II? If you look at the amount of free dead wax on the Classic Records II it is enormous. The RL sounds a lot more dynamic and transparent (key is finding a copy that isn't trashed), which uses up much more groove space on the record. The RL sounds better on my HD800 headphones and speakers. I know when my friend wants to show off the dynamics of his horns it's not the CR he reaches for...

 

I first listened to the "RL" album at age 14, in October of 1969, on a Garrard Turntable, with a pair of Koss Headphones, and a Realistic Receiver.

It blew me away. I never had heard a Hard Rock album before that time.

That RL album was my introduction to Blues-Based Hard Rock.

It was so "live" you didn't know what to do with "Moby Dick".

The garrard turntable and stylus handled the RL album wonderfully.

I was hooked from that night on . . .

 

The MFSL will smoke the Classic no question

 

Maybe you've got a well played RL. It may look ok, but, in my experience in buying vinyl, it's sometimes hard to gauge how much a record has been played. That being said, I get what you're saying about the "cleaner" sound with the Classic. Quiet pressing. But the RL being darker and muddy sounding implies you've got a previously very well enjoyed lp.

 

I just scored an absolutely trashed double RL at the Brooklyn Flea record fair for $4. Hopefully, a good washing will render it listenable...

 

You can try wood gluing it. That's the most effective way to clean vinyl.

 

I own a RL Zep II and the Classic Records 200g release and I think it's like comparing apples to oranges. One is not better than the other one just different.

 

Wood glue works great but for new vinyl or used vinyl in good condition I'll stick with my Okki Nokki RCM.

 

Okay..............could you describe the difference in how they sound? Apples and oranges look and taste different ( they even sound different -- when you bite into them).

 

Hard to put into words. To me the RL is like Zep II on steroids or hooked up to a high voltage wire. The Classic Records has a different feel to it. Dynamic but smooth. As I said it's hard for me to describe in words.

 

RL #3 for me! This is the same pressing as in my original post. Presswell with "RL" side one, and skinny "RL" and "SS" side two. This one is in good condition, it plays fine, a little noisy, grooves are nice, a very hot pressing. Found in Virgina Beach, VA

 

I already have a really nice copy but I found one locally last week. Some obvious surface marks, but it still holds the thunder really well. Only problem, there's a minuscule warp on the outer edge, so the first minute of each side skips.

If anybody is interested in it, I can let it go cheap.

 

Hmmm, so does that mean RL > MFSL > Classic?