Major Labels Are Working on a New Vinyl Records Specification

This is it. "Oh, we have this new great vinyl spec, now go out and buy all of our old titles that you already have because these records with the new spec are so much better."

 

This also looks like sound degradation.

 

Precisely this. It would be utterly bad having to sacrifice sound quality just to play on bottom-of-the-barrel players. Look what happened to the first Led Zeppelin LP that was cut by Robert Ludwig and having it to recut it as Atlantic founder's brother's daughter RL copy was constantly skipping on her portable player.

 

I think you’re all worrying about nothing. This is probably just setting quality standards for plastics used, maybe health and safety standards, maybe acceptable noise levels. Maybe they’re requiring a SPARS-type disclosure of the sources used! All good things. But it’s not going to be anything drastic.

 

Yes, before anything else, maybe they could get pressing plants to produce records that aren't off center, massively edge warped and filled with pops and ticks. I'm pretty sure those quality standards were in place in 1978.

 

Hmmm... Perhaps this means the return of the flexi disc?

 

For me, the ultimate upgrade in vinyl would be something akin to cleanroom manufacturing, and some adherence to greater tolerances and/or inspection criteria using available technologies.

Whatever about the provenance of this mastering or that, too many times I've bought BRAND NEW vinyl to play on my not inexpensive rig only to find it's defective in some way or other due to poor QC. Unacceptable, and should ultimately be a rare occurrence.

 

We already have a government agency for that.

No chance of this happening.

This would take an act of Congress and even then we would be getting a pack of lies.

 

The music industry loves DIGITAL, it's a cheap way to get it product to the consumer, very low labor cost. So no real surprises regrading the press release. Best Buys comments are coming from a business on it's last legs!

 

Right. Why worry about an industry group that treats its customers as adversaries. I'm sure they have no intention of squeezing the last chit out of the vinyl goose.

I'll wait and see however given their track record am quite apprehensive about what they are planning.

 

They'll probably say, we will no long use blah-blah-blah chemical in the manufacture of records and new LPs will start breaking like Shellac 78s.

 

DMM cutting solved this back in the '80s.

 

Tell that to Classic Records and Audio Fidelity.

 

Actually, Best Buy came back.

 

It’s more like why worry about an industry group that has no real power over the industry anymore.

 

Gulp...



-Bill

 

I don't think a higher specification is needed. What is needed is better quality control. Absent that a higher specification is pointless.

 

If enforced, that would hurt the bottom feeder plants such as United. I don’t see how it could ever happen.

 

Since nearly all new vinyl is digitally sourced, I could really care less. I don't buy it unless I know it's not digital, only exception being the best mastering/resolution available exclusively on vinyl for an item I REALLY want.

Why put up with the hassle of vinyl for the same digital file delivered more efficiently via other media?

 

I think a problem with doing CLV is that it would greatly complicate turntables and would also complicate the production of records. Although it might be possible to do CLV via mechanical means, it would probably greatly increase the cost of manufacturing turntables. since it would require some kind of system to accurately adjust the turntable's rotational speed.

Previously mentioned was the laserdisc (LD). One of the features of LD was a CLV playback mode which doubled the playback time for the disc (60 minutes per side) with the trade off of no freeze frame and no visible fast forward/reverse (it would provide jump frames on the way to the destination). While checking Wikipedia about LDs, I discovered that they introduced a third mode called CAA (essentially a stairstep version of CLV) to deal with a problem with CLV discs getting the correct playback speed since it is constantly being adjusted as the disc plays. With CAA, it reduces the speed in steady discrete steps as the disc plays.

One of the advantages of constant angular velocity (CAV) is that it is mechanically simple and can be done without the need for fancy computer controls. All you have to do is make sure the turntable turns at the correct speed. One of the reasons for the speeds of 33 1/3, 45, and 78 RPM is that they are factors of 3600 RPM, the speed of an electric motor running at 60hz which can provide the speed regulation, and thus all you have to do is reduce the speed via gearing as follows:

• 3,600 / 46 = 78 (roughly, the speed was more of a suggestion when records were played via mechanical power [at first turning a crank by hand, and then a windup spring system] until the introduction of electric motors)
  
• 3,600 / 80 = 45
  
• 3,600 / 108 = 33 1/3

As far as improving vinyl, I'd make the following suggestions (although it is likely that some are already part of the standard):

• A cleanliness standard for preparing vinyl records so that a brand-new record is clean when you receive it.
• A move away from 33 1/3 RPM to 45RPM. The faster speed would allow better sound quality without the need to introduce changes into the format and to the existing turntables. Some 0f the YouTube videos I've seen have said that playback at 45RPM provides stunning sound quality. Considering how much people are willing to spend for LPs, it is possible that they might be willing to spend a bit more for better sound quality, much like some digital music buyer are willing to spend more for hi-res downloads over lossy/Red Book.

The one negative of digital for the Music Industry was the end of the re-buy cycle which was a steady source of income. With analog records and tapes, they would eventually wear out over time which would result in the customer buying the same album again...and sometime again. I did that myself with a number of LPs, but when I purchased them on CD that was it. I haven't had to re-buy any album once I had it on CD.

I remember reading that one of the reasons that Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon stayed on the charts for more than 14 years is due to people continually replacing their worn out copies. It was soon after the introduction of the CD that the album fell off of the Billboard Album Chart.

 

The only issue I have with the 2nd part is really....so what! I don't think recording studios, engineers, cutting/mastering/mixing engineers take into consideration the perceived quality of playback gear that records will be played on. Those folks still want to do as good a job as possible with the recording, regardless of final media or how it is played back. I don't think discussions like...."since nobody is going to play this record on a VPI Avenger with a Lyra Etna, we should create a krappy master and not worry about scratches and such from the pressing plant......"
Most cars sold I assume are KIA, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai......That does not mean that Pirelli should stop making $500 tires for Ferrari's or BMW.

 

For the different mastering

 

To piggy back on this: There are mastering techniques that work for digital that don't work for vinyl and vice versa. One of the reasons that early CDs got a bad reputation is that in some cases they just took the LP master and put it on CD without remastering it. Each format needs it own mastering due to the differences between the formats.

 

If it IS different/better/worthwhile. SAME digital file - give me the best resolution available, digitally.

 

I think this says it all... "it’s questionable whether there’s a problem that requires fixing."