vinyl... 120, 180 and 200 gram ?

[laurenc319]

hi,

Just getting back into vinyl and ... is there a real difference between these types of LPs ? There is a big difference in price and I was wondering if it's worth it.

Thanks,

Larry

[Travis In Austin]

The short answer is: It depends. JB's answer will be, CD's come in just one weight and you wouldn't need to worry about it if you had stuck with digital.

I have original vinyl I prefer to any of the 180 or 200 gm pressings. I also have modern pressings in 180 or 200 that I feel blow away the original. The best way to find out is to try and find a few to compare. Or, before you sink money into something, ask on here about a particular lp you are interested here. You will usually find that someone has every version of the lp you are interested in and can give you their take on the differences.

Sometimes it is just a basic cost issue. The new 200 gm version might be 30 or $40, but the original is in the 100's. Makes it a simple choice unless you just have money to burn.

My 2 cents.

Travis

[maxg]

There are other weights too - inbetween these - but generally I would not choose a record on the basis of the weight of the vinyl.

You actually ask a rather good question. I have a fairly extensive collection of vinyl with, probably all the weights there are - and some even lower. I have records that are almost floppy - on the thinnest possible vinyl and records that appear to be in excess of 200 grams.

At the risk of arming the digital community with anti-vinyl ammunition lets look at what can be wrong with a record:

Scratches.

Noise (Hiss, pops, clicks etc.)

Off-centred hole.

Warping.

Poor quality of recording.

If I then compare, say, a 120 gram record with a 200 gram record (the 2 extremes from you list):

Scratches - I have not noticed much of a difference. In fact with the fad for Pure virgin vinyl (in the heavier weights) I think the resultant record may actually be softer and more prone to surface damage than a normal record.

Noise - never noticed a difference - I have records with zero noise on all types and records with a hailstorm in the background. Generally I tend to find this varies more with manufacturer than anything else. For some reason old philips records made in Holland have the lowest noise levels of all, whilst the later Deutche Grammafon records are the noisiest.

Off-centred hole. For me this is the bane of the audiophile record. I never had an off-centred Philips whilst half of my audiophile records are off-centre to one degree or another. I think this relates to the equipment used and the volumes produced. The smaller, audiophile record labels simply dont have the kit to make accurate imprinting on the record surface.

Warping. 2 sides to this coin too. Thicker records are less prone to warping but those almost floppy records I mentioned are immune from it. The weight of the vinyl alone is sufficent to keep them flat on the TT.

Poor quality of recording. Here the higher weight records generally do have the advantage - although that does not always mean you prefer the results. There is more work put into the sound coming from the vinyl, but the result can be rather "over-engineered" sonically. It is not at all uncommon to find an original record that sounds better on your system than a much more expensive audiophile, 200 gram, pure virgin vinyl, first pressing re-issue.

So what does all this mean?

For me it means choose the music - and always try out the record you are buying prior to purchase unless it is still sealed. I tend to avoid sealed records whenever possible simply because it is difficult to return them and imposible to test them. I have had some shockingly bad sealed records in my time - that sounded like they had played 1000 times before I got them - just poor manufacturing, exposure to heat or being stored badly.

[jacksonbart]

The short answer is: It depends. JB's answer will be, CD's come in just one weight and you wouldn't need to worry about it if you had stuck with digital.

Sometimes CDs vary in thickness, never weighed them but sure its not intentional. There are gold ones that preach better sound, but I think when they do sound better it because they spent more time with the mix then it has anything to do with the darn thing being gold. Always wondered why they sold LPs in different wieghts, yet I have only seen it in the higher end reissue catalogs (which also have CDs, which was the medium I was shopping for), so figured it was another way to extract more $ from those with the vinyl appreciation, borders on a fetish for some around here. Good question.

[Allan Songer]

200 grams? Have you ever weighed an orignal deep-groove flat-edge Lexington Avenue Blue Note 12"? They weigh in at over 220 grams!!! When they went to the round-edge they dropped to about 190-200 grams. When they went away from the deep-groove they dropped to about 160 grams. When Liberty started pressing them they dropped to about 140 grams and then in the early 70's when UA started pressing them they dropped to 120 grams.

I'm not sure the acutal weight and thickness of an LP has all that much bearing on how it will sound. Older (pre-1970's), original, thicker pressings DO sound better almost all of the time, but I don't think it's because they weigh more--they're just of much higher quality.

I think the current 200-gram fetish that companies like Classic Records have been fostering among audiophiles is,for the most part marketing.

[Gilbert]

Thank you Max, seems like a logical approach and you have obviously study the matter. I too agree that this is a very good question, and one that I had been thinking about whilst searching for new vinyl.....as I too I'm just getting back into it.

Just need to order my SPU now. Thanks again, now I'll sit back and wait for some of the other vinyl guru's to chime in.

Excellent question IMHO.

[garymd]

I agree with what everyone has said so far. Some of the best recordings I've heard have been on 120-160 gram LPs. One benefit of lighter records is that you can flatten them with a clamp very easily if they're warped. It's a little more difficult with heavier pressings. I have seen plenty of warped 200 gram LPs too but can't recall ever seeing a warped original Blue Note unless its been abused in some way. They just don't seem to ever have that problem. The Classic 200 gram reissues are quite often warped (straight out of the package) but I can almost always flatten them with my Basis clamp. Almost always...........

The older Blue Notes that Allan is referring to are mostly deep groove records. I don't know this for a fact but it would make sense in this case that the record would need to be thicker????

Most MFSL half-speed records are just average 160ish gram LPs although many are 200 gram limited issues. I can't tell any difference in sound quality between the two.

[JBryan]

I think that there are certainly more important variables to a good-sounding record but all things equal, thicker vinyl should be more stable, better damped and it lessens the occurrance of cross talk and chatter (if I got the terms right). Thicker records were a necessity back when record production and needles were not as refined. Within a few plays, the stylus would begin scraping awat at the grooves and the friction alone could do serious damage. Most record companies made thicker records as a way of prolonging the albums' lifespan as much as for the fidelity.

Though the need for thicker vinyl has been negated for the most part, there are still the inherent benefits such as damping and a quieter background. These are constrained by the recording and manufacturing process as others have mentioned - still, there is always a market for "the ultimate anything", even if its only perception.

How do you think the diamond industry or Bose built their markets...? Just my take on this, Bryan

[laurenc319]

Hi folks,

Thanks for the replies. I was listening to an old LP I have the Yale Quartet playing the late quartets of Beethovan. The set was issued on Vanguard Cardinal series in the 70s and are ultra thin flexiable disks and they sound fine. I jsut wondered if there was something I was missing.

Larry

[Timmikid]

"The older Blue Notes that Allan is referring to are mostly deep groove records. I don't know this for a fact but it would make sense in this case that the record would need to be thicker????"

I thought with Deep Groove records, the deep groove refers to the run-out groove being deep only?

[Allan Songer]

"Deep Groove" refers to an indentatiion in the label area:

Every Blue Note record up through 4058 has "deep grooves" if it is an original pressing. It has nothing to do with the depth of the grooves where the MUSIC lies!

This is a non deep groove Blue Note:

[Gilbert]

I see said the blind man!,, Thanks Allan, very informative.

[garymd]

Even still, I thought it might have something to do with the thickness of the LP. I guess not.

[Allan Songer]

Even still, I thought it might have something to do with the thickness of the LP. I guess not.

It does! Deep-groove pressings are all thick and heavy--- 180-220 grams!! And I do think they sound better than later pressings most of the time.

[jazman]

Allan,

Deep groove or not, this is a seminal Blue Note LP by Jackie Mc, and one of my favorites of all time.

Klipsch out.

[Allan Songer]

You got THAT right!

Jackie and Grachan Moncur had something goin' on! This and Evolution (released under Moncur's name) are two of my all-time favorites!