Opinions on 45 vs 33 rpm versions

Some of the audiophile pressings have been released as 45 rpm versions. What are your thoughts? In the limited ones that I have, I think that 33 rpm versions are good enough. IMO, there are other things that seem to influence the quality more than the speed. I don't like having to flip the record or change it after 1 - 3 songs and I would prefer not having to change the belt setting on my player (I know some have a simple button).

Anyway, what do you like. Is 45 worth the "effort"? Or 33 good enough?

 

Like my underwear, Depends.

All things being equal, mastering, pressing quality, etc. , I would go 45 rpm.

 

Agree. I did an A/B recently of some 45 singles and their album counterparts. I used some old Motown, a new soul release (Magnolia cover by Lee Fields) and lastly a Sword track (think 70s Black Sabbath).

To me, the 45s were a little more up front, sounded a little bit more round. It reminded me of a midrange bump. I preferred the 45s by a bit. Not a huge difference though.

Also, I just love 7" records.

 

if theres two vesions a 45 and a 33...odds are the 45 will sound better.

depends if you want to flip the record over 3 times..or just once.
for some albums i dont mind for others i do.

 

see also:

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/anyone-else-put-off-by-45-rpm-lps.350640/

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/are-45-rpm-lps-worth-the-inconvenience.325792/

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/do-recordings-sound-better-at-45-rpm.329373/

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/45-rpm-hype-is-real.308985/

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-new-45-rpm-craze-does-it-work.316479/

 

A qoute from our host from another thread..

"Haven't read this thread but I personally prefer the 33 1/3 RPM speed myself. A more natural sound. Both are good with the faster speed making it possible to boost the overall volume up a few db (which helps to keep the noise floor down...)"

 

Also...

Why 45 rpm? by Kevin Gray, AcousTech Mastering

After 60 years the good ol’ analog LP is still one of the highest resolution sources of music distribution available. It has a solid, palpable, satisfying sound that no digital format has yet equaled, let alone surpassed. The most unfortunate thing about the LP is that it was really starting to flourish back in the mid 80s, just as the record companies tried to kill it.

Advances in cutterheads (the device that etches the groove in the master lacquer disk) and cutting electronics reached a pinnacle in the early 80s. Digital computers arrived on the scene in their best role: Out of the audio chain, but doing machine-control to adjust the groove spacing on the record for maximum playing time and recorded volume. 180 gram virgin vinyl pressings were the next development, and last but not least, around the late 70s, 45 rpm 12” LPs started to appear.

Why 45, you ask? Because it sounds better! In record mastering, the higher the recorded level and frequency, the greater the groove curvature. Curvature isn’t usually a problem, per se, on the outside of a 12” 33 1/3 record, but as the groove moves toward the center, its relative speed slows down and curvature increases. Yes, it is still turning at 33 1/3 revolutions per minute, but consider: one revolution takes 1.8 seconds. That 1.8 seconds at a 12” diameter is covering a lot more territory than at the minimum 4.75” diameter. The result is actually a loss in high frequencies, and increase in distortion as the groove moves to the center. The problems start when the curvature of the groove equals or exceeds the diameter of the playback stylus. What can be done about it? Many things have been tried, but there is no “magic bullet”. Keep the recorded volume to a reasonable level (read: On scale on the meters) is the first thing. Play the record back with an elliptical or line-contact stylus that has a smaller tip radius. And, if possible, make the record short enough to keep the music away from the very end of the disk. This isn’t always possible, of course.

BUT, if we spin the disk at 45rpm we now have a 35% increase in groove velocity at any point on the disk. This is a huge advantage! Yes, the groove still slows down as it moves inward, but the effects are greatly reduced. The only problem is that the amount of recorded time is now also reduced by 35%. What do you do about that? (Hint: split up the LP into 4 sides on 2 records.) Now you’re cookin’ doc! Yep, twice the mastering cost, plating cost, pressing cost, label and jacket costs. It’s enough to make the bean-counters break down and cry. But the sound! Oooooh, yeah! This isn’t sales hype, it’s physics. Listen for yourself. You tell me if it’s worth it. A lot of music lovers think so…and they are right!

 

Me, I enjoy both formats. But if I could get better sound on something the size of a dime that held all my albums Id toss em all.

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of the 45 rpm. Don't like flipping the discs every two songs. Ruins the continuity for me. If I have the option of 33 or 45, I choose the 33. If the only option is 45, I buy something else.

 

I love 45rpm, but I'm very selective with the titles I buy. Rickie Lee Jones' debut album is one of my fave records, so when MFSL brought out the 45rpm box I didn't hesitate. Cat Stevens' TFTT is another fave, a have an original Canadian, a German Pink Island and I bought the AP 33rpm. When Chad then introduced a 45rpm version, but jacked the price to $60USD ($80.48 CDN) I said...NO.

 

Point of clarification.......when I say I prefer 45rpm I am referring to the newer reissue 12" 45rpm LP's and not the old 7" format. I can't think of one instance where I prefer the 12" 33.3rpm over the 12" 45rpm.

 

I don't mind 45 rpm, but no increase in sound quality will make it worth while when a classical album has to have its movements split up.

 

I'd much rather a 33 1/3 option.. however, the Dylan Blonde on Blonde box set made me understand why people love it. Would still take that in a 33 1/3 version though.

 

I did spring for the AP 45 rpm Tea For The Tillerman but I only had the German Pink Island pressing. Like Johnny Vinyl I'm selective. I bought the Stevie Ray Vaughan set in 33 1/3, partly for price but also because I don't like the break up in continuity.

Bottom line for me, if both are available and the 33 1/3 has good reports I'll go with that one. I'm looking to get Muddy Waters Folk Singer and I'm glad the single LP 33 1/3 is out and not $50 like the double 45.

 

Because of SQ? I think the newer 7" 45s sound great ... I do understand some of the older ones were pressed w inferior materials.

 

It seems that I failed to clarify in my clarification. You could be right and I don't doubt what you say at all, because the truth is that I haven't purchased a 7" record in close to 50 years.

 

Your underwear is mastered as well as pressed....? I am astonished. I hope no one gooses with the lower end.

 

I think, generally, the difference in sound is minimal enough to split opinions in and of itself. I was just curious what you thought.

I have some 45s from the 60s that sound terrible, others sound good. But by and large the newer 45s are nice. Sometimes I think they get better quality control than current 12" although I'm not sure why that would be the case.

 

How can 33 1/3 have a more natural sound?

 

I hate 45s if it's not for singles. It's a drag to switch side so often. Those records ends up not being played much.
Also, hate every new record that's longer then what fits on one vinyl. No album should be longer than 45-55 min. Make it a double if you need more. I don't buy those record anymore either.
I didn't spend much time with Dylan's together through life cause it's on three ****ing sides, but only 45 min long. Had I known that then I wouldn't have spend money on. What gives? Sound quality? Many classic records from the 60s are 40+ minutes and they sound great

 

I don't know. But if I'm going to challenge someone on that thought I don't think it's going to be Steve Hoffman.

 

45 rpm.

If you have the same song on both formats, try a listening test. IMO, there is more space between instruments & singer, there is a better sense of the room ( if recorded live) & piano is noticeably richer. After a few demonstrations, you may notice that 33 1/3 has a sound. 45rpm is more transparent.

 

Good question.

 

Eh, I dont think Steve minds inquiries. No one is saying he is in error or challenging his statement.

 

Interesting to see the results, we are currently evenly split. Normally, I like everything that sounds better, but I guess I already don't like flipping 33 records and 45's make it even worst. Kinda of a separate topic that I was considering posting are those albums that are longer than one record (33) and they have to put them on 2 records. So to spread them out, it is usually evenly spread out over four sides and you see a whole unused section. I know the outer part of the record sounds better, but I don't think it is enough of a difference. I think I would prefer that they would just put all the songs on three sides and leave the last one blank.