LPs one more time

[whatever55]

I have another question / observation ....

To anyone that has bought new LPs... Audiophile stuff 180g 200g...

I was told visual defects, scuff marks, white bars, light and dark color and some pops and clicks are to be expected ....

Is this what youy are finding.
When I pay $20 + for an LP I expect it to be perfect.... at least until I play it.

Any thoughts ???

[Mallette]

Horse hockey. Even in the days of buying them at a department store that was unacceptable. If it don't look right it probably will not sound right. During the days of recycling old records I got to opening them at the checkout stand to check for defects. Found plenty and exchanged immediately. At todays prices for new LP releases I'd never leave the store without checking the disk or even playing it after paying if possible.

Dave

[fenderbender]

Some of the bigger "audiophile " online stores are very very stand up....they want your repeat business....Elusive disk, Acoustic Sound and Music matters, to name a few will replace any defective disk's no questions asked.....

They know at starting price of $25 up to $150 or some of there rare releases, buyers want perfection......I received a Bill Even Trio "Waltz For Debbie" that the label was off center and it was replaced with out asking for the original back.

I have been collecting the Blue note 45 and Fantasy 45 reissues and every single one has been 100% perfect....not to mention that sonically the originals I have, can't hold a candle......

[JJkizak]

I don't know of any stores that let you open the package first before purchasing. I imagine you would have to go through about 50 records to get one without some kind of defect. As I recall about 75% of the records I purchased had some kind of defect, warped, hole off center, hole on center but groves off center, pops, crackles, noisy, low bass levels, reduced highs, distortion in high velocity areas, hole not big enough, label off center, improper gapping between songs, terrible transient response when compared to the same album released on CD, and excessive very low frequency flutter.

JJK

[Mallette]

I don't know of any stores that let you open the package first before purchasing. I imagine you would have to go through about 50 records to get one without some kind of defect. As I recall about 75% of the records I purchased had some kind of defect, warped, hole off center, hole on center but groves off center, pops, crackles, noisy, low bass levels, reduced highs, distortion in high velocity areas, hole not big enough, label off center, improper gapping between songs, terrible transient response when compared to the same album released on CD, and excessive very low frequency flutter.

JJK

As I mentioned in my post, they can't stop you from opening them at the checkout stand...and you should.

Dave

[tigerwoodKhorns]

"warped, hole off center, hole on center but groves off center, pops, crackles, noisy, low bass levels, reduced highs, distortion in high velocity areas, hole not big enough, label off center, improper gapping between songs, terrible transient response when compared to the same album released on CD, and excessive very low frequency flutter"

Sign me up!!

[garymd]

VERY rarely. If there are any imperfections, new LPs are shipped immediately. For the kind of money we are paying these days, customer service is quite good.

[Don Richard]

As I recall about 75% of the records I purchased had some kind of defect, warped, hole off center, hole on center but groves off center, pops, crackles, noisy, low bass levels, reduced highs, distortion in high velocity areas, hole not big enough, label off center, improper gapping between songs, terrible transient response when compared to the same album released on CD, and excessive very low frequency flutter.

JJK

And the ones that appear perfect have:

70 dB (at best) dynamic range.

Heavy compression to reduce groove excursion so that 20+ minutes per side may be realized.

Gain riding on the bass frequencies, for same reason as above.

Improper RIAA EQ curves on various records ( European discs, different brands, poor engineering)

Phase shifts from above equalization.

Phase shifts and resonances from cartridge.

Rumble, curable with a filter that creates more phase shift.

High levels of distortion, especially IM.

Difference in sound between outside and inside grooves.

Microphonics.

Limited lifespan before audible degradation, due to simply playing disc.

The PITA factor from having to flip sides and go through the cleaning ritual.

Despite these problems records can provide a satisfactory listening experience when properly played and cared for if one is willing to ignore the problems. However, the ability to disassociate oneself from the large number of problems that this medium has does not mean it is a superior medium. One doesn't have to have perfect reproduction to enjoy the music.

[Don Richard]

Yes, "on paper" LPs are worse than CDs in just about anyway you can measure. If only we listened on paper too.

All of the problems I listed are audibly annoying, to varying extents.

[jacksonbart]

Yes, "on paper" LPs are worse than CDs in just about anyway you can measure. If only we listened on paper too.

All of the problems I listed are audibly annoying, to varying extents.

Yes, of course. But then you have to compare that to all the audibly annoying aspects of CDs, right?

Well the annoying aspects of CDs are related to the recording not the medium.

[Don Richard]

Well, that's just what you think. It isn't the mainstream view of most engineers who have been in the business for many years, I can tell you that. Why do you suppose so much effort went into new digital formats?

The formats that are used now exist because of the need to lower the noise floor because noise adds up when multiple tracks are mixed down (more bits). Sample rate was increased to move the anti-aliasing filter cutoff to a higher frequency so that ringing and phasing issues would be moved further away from the audible passband, again because multiple sources are mixed into stereo and these artifacts would add up.

A recent test reported in Mix proved that 97% of the engineers tested could not hear any difference between 96/24 and Redbook. None of the general public who were tested could.

http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/

[Mallette]

Crikey, gentlemen, that is pure BS, and while this strikes me as a case of pure baiting I am taking it...

>A recent test reported in Mix proved that 97% of the engineers tested could not hear any difference between 96/24 and Redbook. None of the general public who were tested could.

What a suprise! See my comments on engineers below. As to the general public, I rather doubt they could tell a pipe organ mp3 from a harmonica behing the curtain. Further, they could care less.

As to the rest of DR's comments:

100db dynamic range is achieved with a 1.2 setting on a DBX while at the same time eliminating surface noise on most quality LP's.

Rumble? I haven't heard TT rumble on anything I've own since my last rim drive Garrard about 1976.

The rest of it is either rare or I am just too deaf to have any idea what you are talking about.

I dare say I've spent more time actively experimenting with digital (a format I waited on for 30 years and love dearly) than either of you. I have found plenty of ways for digital to go wrong, terribly wrong, worse than tick and pops wrong. So have the commerical houses. I would say that 90% of the 2500 records (including 78's) I have are technically very good to excellent, as I have disposed of those that were not over the years. I would say that only about 10% of the CD's I own meet the same standard.

Again NOT BECAUSE ANALOG IS REMOTELY SUPERIOR IN ANY WAY...but because it seems real engineering is in very short supply these days. My supply of quality digital is now increasing because I am limiting myself to only the reliable suppliers. Most of it still sounds like Diet Music.

Dave

[Don Richard]

What's the importance of the "general public" here? No offense intended, but the general public isn't interested in any of these questions aside from what is cheap, what is small and what can they make some noise at the party with. Again, no offense, but the hobby isn't aimed at the general public is it?

The "general public" I referred to were audiophiles and students in a well known recording school. The audiophile group actually did as well (??) as the experienced engineer group. While it is true that the mixing and mastering engineers work at the behest of the producer and must satisfy him, it doesn't mean they don't recognize good sound. It is their job to listen to a project and make it sound like the producer wants it to sound. The importance of the study was not to evaluate mixdown or mastering skills, but to see if anyone could hear any difference when a redbook A/D/A was inserted into an analog playback loop. Very few could.

[kaiser SET say]

We hear in analog therefore I prefer analog playback. Digital is great for portable, mobile or background (PC) music but it is absolutely lifeless compared to my analog rig in my main system and my digital rig is a EAD CDT-1000 transport with DSP7000 series III HDCD DAC (not a slouch by any means) but my MMF 2.2 with Tracker cartridge literally blows the EAD's out of the water[] For me digital has no ambience therefore it does not sound like music to me but luckily no one has my ears nor do they need to agree

Nice SR-71 Don[ap]

[Don Richard]

100db dynamic range is achieved with a 1.2 setting on a DBX while at the same time eliminating surface noise on most quality LP's.

Wow! Are you suggesting that records are capable of that? Since the mics, mixers, and tape machines used in the vinyl era weren't capable of more than 70dB to begin with, even if the record could do 100dB it wouldn't matter due to the noise generated in the upstream equipment. Even DBX encoded records were limited to 90dB, IIRC.

Rumble? I haven't heard TT rumble on anything I've own since my last rim drive Garrard about 1976.

Rumble is infrasonic, therefore inaudible. What it does is steal amplifier headroom.

The best thing about vinyl is the many good performances, often by deceased artists. The vinyl, in many cases, is superior to even the original master tapes due to tape degradation. Those degraded tapes can be restored to some extent, but with audible consequences. CDs made from such restored tapes will never sound as good as a vinyl pressing made when those tapes were fresh.

For recordings made after studios stopped using acetate backed tape things are a bit (no pun intended) different. A well done remastered CD will simply blow away a vinyl pressing. Every time.

[Mallette]

>Wow! Are you suggesting that records are capable of that?

Try reading the post. No. But a good audiophile ear with 30 years experience can set a DBX post processor to within insignificant error of the original dynamic range. I've been doing it since 1976 and do not even give it any thought. The process is inaudible to me, except to reach accuracy in the playback. DBX encoded records were a set 2:1 compression like DBX tape. Same principal, except pre processing. Frankly I do not know of any recordings digital or analog with a 90 DB range of recorded sound. The rest is just a buffer, IMHO.

However, DBX Companders are POST. So if you have 70 to start getting a 100 is not a real problem...unless the original PERFORMANCE did not have that much range. Then it will not sound quite right. Not a problem if you have good ears.

>Rumble is infrasonic, therefore inaudible. What it does is steal amplifier headroom.

Obviously not a problem. It's inaudible, so I don't hear it, and I am not missing any amp headroom to my knowledge or ears.

I am about to dive out of this. Other than irritating people, I really cannot comprehend any reason to dis a hundred years of fine art and engineering or those who like it. If you want a diet of post-1982 music only or stuff reprocessed to digital death, enjoy. But for cryin out loud leave those of us who treasure the thought we might have the only remaining copy of that Bix Biederbecke record and go into musical ecstasy at hearing it better than he ever did alone.

Dave

[Mallette]

One more thing...

I've mentioned the 1924 recording of "Rhapsody in Blue" with Paul Whiteman's band and Gershwin at the piano before. It is not in good shape but it plays. It is one of my most treasured pieces and the noise melts away when I listen to it. I am in Carnegie Hall. The baritone sax is particularly transparent for some reason and I can see and hear straight through to 1924.

Go right ahead and be a format cultist. Some of us want it ALL. No format is worth a poop without a great performance of marvelous music well engineered. If those standards are met it is sad indeed to hear someone complain about the media it came on.

-30-

[Don Richard]

I've no doubt about the results. This sort of "no difference" test has proven over and over again that a $100 SS receiver is "not any different" than higher end SS or tube amps, proven that a $39 CDP is "no different" than a high end unit, and so on over and over. There is an entire industry of cranks who perform these tests replete with million dollar "rewards" and so on. Been going on for the 40 years I've been in the business. It's kind of the Consumer Reports, or Julian Hirsh version of audio. Any decent amp, with any decent CDP, and any decent speaker totalling about $300 is "all anyone needs" to enjoy maximum fidelity. Yup. And it's true - - for almost all people that works fine.

You keep mentioning dollars and cents. The guys that ran that test weren't selling anything.

Millions of people buy their equipment based on this sort of "testing." It sounds convincing, sounds scientific, sounds concrete....they must be right. I'd never, ever recommend LPs to these spec-buying people. They're happy as clams with their big loud noise makers. That IS who the CD was designed for anyway - mass market. CD at the time represented a big COST breakthrough in mass distribution of music. That's the part non-industry people never understand - - it was designed to eliminate the higher costing LP and Tape distribution mechanisms. And, it worked perfectly! So, to be clear, I think almost everyone would be wasting their time and money getting into LPs. It's far too expensive (and painstaking) to justify for just making some Boom Boom with speakers.

Such testing doesn't just sound scientific, it is scientifically sound, the state of the art in scientific research techniques. It eliminates the effects of bias and prejudice on the results. Predictably, when the results do not agree with a person's biases and prejudices, that person blasts the results.

Pressing vinyl records is about the cheapest, low-tech way to mass-market music. CDs were invented to "have perfect music forever". Relative to vinyl, they succeeded.

It's funny how antique car buffs don't go around saying their Model T's are superior to a new Ford, or antique computer buffs aren't saying that their TRS-80s are superior to Dual Core Processor machines. They don't even say that the antiques they own are equivalent to modern equipment. F-16 pilots don't wish they were in a P-47 Thunderbolt when they are sent on a mission. But, in home audio.....

[oldenough]

Mallette said; " Go right ahead and be a format cultist. Some of us want it ALL. No format is worth a poop without a great performance of marvelous music well engineered. If those standards are met it is sad indeed to hear someone complain about the media it came on".

Very well said Sir.[Y]

[Don Richard]

Go right ahead and be a format cultist. Some of us want it ALL. No format is worth a poop without a great performance of marvelous music well engineered. If those standards are met it is sad indeed to hear someone complain about the media it came on.

I'm agreeing with you on the subject of great performances. After all, E. Power Biggs quit recording 10 or so years before digital. My objection to vinyl is when the limitations of that medium interferes with my enjoyment of a great performance. As far as being a format cultist, I have much more vinyl than CDs, about 1100 LPs, several dozen 45s, about 150 78s (technically not vinyl). But CDs have spoiled me with their lack of noise and their greater convience.