The true weight of audiophile LPs. What's the deal?

I have reservations that advertised grams being off would make any difference to me if the record sounded good. That said, I wonder how tough it would be to design new pressing equipment that would yield better consistency and quality? How old is the most recent pressing equipment being used? Being off by a significant number of grams makes me wonder about overall consistency and QC more than anything else.

 

With the right "semantics" people will maybe also argue that virtually every copy of a copy is also 'From the Original Master Tapes' and if you hear no difference what is the problem ....

 

If a record is described as being 180gram and from The original Master Tape this should be substantialy accurate. If not so the product is being misdescribed and I would have thought, a matter contravening trading standards legislation, certainly in USA and EU.

The thickness of vinyl is not related to cost. I expect the quality and complexity of album artwork affects production costs rather more than that bit of extra vinyl to make it thicker. They charge extra for 'heavy vinyl' because consumers appear willing to pay more and it is good business for the record companies.

 

Exactly.

 

Advertising something that is 144 grams as a 180 grams LP is misleading. Of course it's the sound of the LP that matters, but if you're not giving your customers a 180 grams LP don't pretend to do so.

 

Well, in the case of Classic LPs marketed at two price points with different weights, the extra money is going towards heavier paper stock and poly-lined sleeves, both of which I would expect increase the production cost more than an extra 50g of PVC.

Also, in my experience with Classic, the 200g pressings have had less visual defects/warps than the 150g of the same album, though YMMV and that's a can of worms I hesitate to open.

Yes, changes in thickness affect VTA/rake angle but you have to have a considerably resolving system to tell the difference (something I do not have). Michael Fremer is a proponent of heavier vinyl having a sonic difference but he has much better trained ears than I and a much more expensive rig. On the other hand, he also advises setting VTA for the average thickness of your collection and be done with it. All personal preference, I know.

Bottom line is that sonically, having a lower than expected weight record seems detrimental only if you have a system beyond a certain level of resolution or are more picky than I about VTA settings.

Take the recent Neil Young reissues. The heavier weight releases are pressed at Pallas, which I understand has become one of the premier plants in terms of overall pressing quality (haven't yet sampled their output), while the 150g are pressed elsewhere. Packaging for the heavy weight versions is also of higher quality, as I have read. Your money isn't just going toward the extra mass of PVC.

Regardless, the market seems to have shown that people are willing to pay more for heavier weight pressings, so it seems smart business to offer such in audiophile releases, which is probably why you rarely see audiophile pressings offered in regular wieght editions without a heavier weight also offered. What I would be interested to see is if the profit margin for the heavier weight is greater than regular weight or if they are just trying to cover a greater portion of the market.

 

I would add that possibly the main difference is the super vinyl profile non groove guard pressings that only Classic do. I have established from experience that SVP 200grms sound that bit better than their old 180grm discs providing pressing quality is up to the mark.

 

You cut your Quarter Pounder?!?

 

Both the heavy weight and regular weight pressings of the new Neil Young reissues were pressed at Pallas. I think some people may still doubt this, but this is what we've been told.

 

Roger that. I had read otherwise. Can't remember where, of course

 

True, that is an added feature with the heavier weight. I'm not sure how using less PVC than designed impacts the flatter profile, though. I would imagine that there's some threshold of mass where above which there's enough back pressure maintain a flat profile during pressing, and below which you simply dont' have enough material to fill the mold completely. What that magic amount is, though I have no idea. Would be interesting to get details.

As far as better sonics with the SVP, I have no experience as I don't own 180g and 200g pressings of the same title.

Regardless, there's much more that goes into the price increase than simply more PVC, so using weight as an important yardstick for QC seems to me to lose sight of more important factors.

 

My MoFi UHRQ of 1812 Overture weighs in at 217 grams. There are some heavy sonics on the disc

 

My humble apologies. Yes, the Costello LP is from AcousTech. I was away at a New Years Day dinner when I posted RTI. Didn't have my vinyl collection in front of me.

And the underweight Neil Young LP (125 vs 140) was pressed at Pallas in Germany.

 

Hey Eddie.

I went to the local record shop yesterday and told them I have a supposed 180g Rhino Costello LP that weighs 144 grams. They aske me if the LP is noisy, warped, defective. I said no.

The store just shrugged their shoulders and said it's not their issue. "Call Rhino".

I wasn't surprised by their comment. It's typical passing the buck kind of stuff.

 

Seeing how the record store doesn't press the LPs, what did you expect them to do?

 

Maybe they can add produce scales to record stores -- you could put your records on the scale and then they charge you by the gram.

 

Brilliant!

Why didn't I think of that?

 

AcousTec is a mastering facility were Kevin Gray operates not a pressing plant.

 

Amoeba would take it back if you pressed hard enough and had a friendly buyer. That's why I buy all new LP's there. Took back a Sabbath 2009 EU reissue last week, pressed at GZVinyl and looking like a truck ran over it. No questions, guy didn't even bat an eye. Full refund. I think they would take back a malnourished 'heavyweight' LP, too, if a case was made. Of course, I know 99% of merchants operate on far different terms with their distributors, and won't take back records with no tracking or surface issues. This something to take up with the label. But this whole thread is more about hearing how different parties respond, at least to me. If Chris didn't do that, this would be just another defeatist hem & haw which is not interesting at all. When you hear back from Rhino, Chris, give us another update.

 

Believe me, if I lived in the U.S. and near an Amboeba location, I'd probably shop there.

I may try and give Rhino a call next week. Not sure if their 800 numbers work in Canada, outside of their ordering phone number.

 

And the underweight continues...

I purchased the new 200 gram King Crimson - In The Court Of The Crimson yesterday for $40. Canadian. I believe the U.S. retail price is $29.99.

Soon as I took the LP out of the jacket, I thought it felt a bit light. Put it on the dry scale, and it's only 190 grams.

 

I have a better idea! Let us cut their weight to a consistent 125-140 grams. Automatic presses are geared for this weight. Their heating/cooling cycles are also ideal here. Use a little bit better quality control and cut a little bit off the price and we have good, quieter flatter records which work. I'd take a little bit thinner, flatter, and quieter surfaces in exchange any day. And most turntables with difficult to impossible to adjust VTA can get better results playing them back.

 

But, there was the MFSL classical LP that someone posted on here that weighs 217 grams.

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=5070041&postcount=112

 

I thought the extra weight was where they put the extra sound quality?!