Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center
  • 0

The Vinyl Renaissance


JohnnyB

Question

Posted

2045880943_65294f9469.jpg

It never happened before. Wax cylinders never made a comeback. Neither did 78s, 8-tracks, or cassettes, or Beta or VHS. And yet today, twenty-five years after the introduction of the CD, and in the middle of a precipitous drop in CD sales, vinyl records are selling at their highest level in 12 years. In 2006 new LP sales hit their highest figure in ten years, and then nearly doubled the next year. New turntables, cartridges, and phono preamps are being introduced all the time. New turntable companies, brands, and models have emerged in the last dozen years. Some audio icons are offering turntables for the very first time: McIntosh introduced its first-ever turntable in its 60-year existence. Digital pioneer Ayre (they designed one of the very first DVD digital converters) just came out with a turntable. Either of them will set you back about $10,000. Count on another $2-5K for a cartridge and similarly priced phono stage to do either of them justice.

mcintosh-mt10.jpgayre_tt.jpg

Are they nuts?

But wait! In the early '90s, Grado Labs, holder of around 40 patents in phono cartridge design, was down to two full time employees as demand for their traditional product dwindled to near zero. A switch in product emphasis to headphones kept them alive. Now they offer 19 cartridge models in three quality lines, Prestige, Reference, and Statement, ranging from $60 to $3000. Business is good great!

Of course, LPs will never overtake CDs or downloads, but the vinyl record business has gone mainstream again. For a long time, vinyl aficionados had to make do with used records and the few remasters offered by boutique specialty operations. Today, Sony, Universal, and EMI, which account for around 70% of the record labels out there, offer Legacy, Back in Black, and Capitol Vaults reissues of once hard to find, high quality, affordable new pressings of classics by Miles Davis, The Who, Cat Stevens, Steve Miller, Metallica, The Police, and many, many others. Many artists are releasing their new recordings on vinyl. I picked up the latest from James Taylor, Paul McCartney, Norah Jones, Buddy Guy, Diana Krall, and Charlie Haden on vinyl. I've seen new pressings by the Silversun Pickups, Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, Christina Aguilera, and many more, especially leading edge and emerging artists. Fred Meyer grocery/department store and electronics giant Best Buy both carry a limited selection of new vinyl.

Currently there are over 250,000 LPs for sale on eBay. High end music vendor Acoustic Sounds has made its mark by offering the most high resolution CDs, HDCDs, XRCDs, SACDs, and DVD-As anywhere. Currently they carry 2,959 SACDs sampled at 2.7 MHz (64 times the CD sampling rate) and 380 DVD-As (24-bit recordings sampled at 88.2 to 176.4 Khz). But they also offer 5,988 new LPs, plus another 4,423 NOS and 9,250 used LPs. that's a total of 19,661 LPs, nearly six times as many LPs as high res digital discs from a vendor that specializes in high quality audio media of all types. With the option of high resolution digital, audiophiles have unequivocally chosen LPs as the high resolution music medium of choice, voting with their wallets.

OK. I get it. Vinyl's back. So what?

Does this remind you of anything else? Like, oh I dunno, TUBES? By the late '70s the tube was all but dead. Solid state electronics had almost completely taken over home audio and dominated instrument amplifiers as well. American tube-makers shut down. Like record-lovers a few years ago, tube aficionados were viewed as stubborn, slightly eccentric Luddites. But companies like Mesa/Boogie stuck to their guns, er, tubes through the dark years. Soon companies built on solid state amplification (e.g., Crate, Pignose) began offering tube amps. After the fall of the Iron Curtain, tubes from Sovtek and Tesla (later JJ) became available and plentiful as well as the ones from China.

In some cases, people were drawn to tubes (or records) because they became retro-cool curiosities. But for most enthusiasts, the old technology offers something its replacement didn't, and a significant minority of customers are willing to put up with the extra expense and higher maintenance of the older technologies to get their more musically expressive, organic-feeling sound, whether it comes from glass or vinyl.

So don't be too baffled by the comeback of the LP. If you play a tube amp, on some level you already understand. Still...

Is LP playback for you?

It's definitely an individual matter.

Do You Hear What I Hear?

People hear differently and they listen differently. People get their enjoyment out of music in different ways. Some listen for the melody, perhaps for vocal phrasing. Others for the beat and slam of the rhythm that propels it. Others listen for harmonies or for the overall sense of ensemble.

Some people will immediately prefer an LP over a CD, even on a $2 garage sale turntable as I did. If you're one of those, you will only make yourself happier if you go analog. Others could hear an LP on a $2000 turntable and wonder what the big deal is. Still others will have that impression at first and then gradually notice the musical treasures offered up by a record player that you just won't get from a CD or mp3.

But one thing I remember from the old days when LPs were the music medium: records made us feel good. It didn't have to be state of the art. Every party back then had a stack of records going, and some people listened, some danced, some talked, but there was an awareness and involvement with the music. Even when it was being played on a cheap-ass record changer.

If you get more thrill out of dynamic slam to the exclusion of expressiveness and inner detail, you'll probably prefer digital. CDs are recorded with a 16-bit word length. While this enables a dynamic range of around 100 dB, the dynamic gradations in between aren't particularly subtle. 16 bits limits amplitude changes to 65,536 (64K) finite increments. By contrast LPs have dynamic shadings at the molecular level. If dynamic nuance helps you connect with the music, you'll probably like LPs. If surface noise or the occasional tick or pop drives you up a wall, stick to digital. For me, I can put up with the occasional shuffle or cough at a concert for the live experience, and I'm more than willing to listen through a little noise from time to time for the analog listening experience.

I've got a pile of old records and nothin' to play 'em on. What do I do?

That depends on what you want to do. There are a lot of ways to enjoy LPs:

  • You can just enjoy what you have hanging around the house, or what you can pick up at the thrift stores for fun. After all, you can get whole albums for the price of a single song download.
  • You can seek out special masterings and pressings that reveal recordings as you've never heard before.
  • You can toss those records on a garage sale turntable just to have some way to play them.
  • You can seek out the best turntable and cartridge you can afford and set it up meticulously to--on one hand--enjoy the relaxed, organic presentation and--on the other hand--explore the nuances and details of how the music was made.

In other words it's up to you.

For me, this second time around (I'd gone 20 years listening to digital only), I started with a $2 garage sale turntable and a few LPs I still had, and was shocked at how easily I connected to the music. Within the week I bought an $80 cartridge, and within another couple of weeks I spend $500 on a new turntable (down from $700) and $100 on another cartridge. I've since upgraded some things on the turntable and upgraded the cartridge, turntable mat, and phono stage so I have about $1K in it altogether. For me the expense has been well worth it because i get a connection to the music I hadn't felt in years. I thought I was just getting old, but it turned out that I'd grown accustomed to a level of artist-listener connection that comes easily to analog LP that my digital library and playback systems could not deliver.

Well, originally I was going to expound on what makes analog appealing to some and not to others, and perhaps give a run down of some record players at different budgets, but at this point I'd rather you ask the questions than me just guess at what you're interested in.

avid-acutus-web.jpgmarantz_tt-15-7.jpgamicgyrosea.jpgasumrm10.jpgawbfullcircle.jpgssm_ref.jpgcontinuum.jpg

25 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

Posted

Quick question JB. How does the new stuff sound on LP? Most, if not all, of that stuff is done in the digital world before it is pressed to vinyl. Does the stuff originally done on tape sound better than the new stuff done on a hard drive? Just curious...

BTW...Keep this coming, I enjoy reading it. THANKS!!!

Posted

My kids call them "the BIG CDs" :blink:

I never got around to buying all the stuff I have in my very limited collection of vinyl on CD, but would love to hear the stuff again. My turntable is in the attic as the new "entertainment center" furniture made no provision for a turntable. I have been eyeing those USB turntables to move all of the vinyl to iTunes, but so far it doesn't seem feasible. I have been trying to generate some interest in getting a group of friends to go in with me on the purchase, getting everyone's vinyl converted over, then eBaying the thing, but haven't been successful in selling that vision - of course conversion wouldn't maintain that wonderful warm analogue tone that the 'big CDs' provide, well, except for all those DDA records from the late eighties...

Very interesting thread other than my rambling thoughts. Thanks.

Posted

back?

they never went away for me

Well, they went away for me, and for most people of our generation. In my case, I lost about 95% of my record collection to a flood in my basement apartment--ruined Don Ellis collection, original pressing of Sgt. Peppers, Creedence Clearwater, Modern Jazz Quartet, Quincy Jones, Count Basie, Gary Burton, etc. etc. Four years later my turntable broke and the CD had just been invented, so I decided to wait until i could afford a new player and rebuild my collection. I bought my first player in 1987, the first year where CD sales revenue surpassed LP revenue. Many of our generation were duped by the "Perfect Sound Forever" slogan and sold off or dumped their LP collections and rebuilt their libraries with CDs. I remember how excited I was when I got my new 2nd generation $300 player, took it home with four new CDs, and started playing them. WTF? Where'd the soundstage go? I was accustomed to a big, lush, airy, harmonically rich presentation from my now defunct turntable with top line (at the time) Grado cartridge. In its place, I heard threadbare music emanating from two speakers--no soundstage or imaging to speak of.

If I had it to do over again, I should have returned that CD player for a refund, bought another turntable and nice cartridge, and collected all the used records from the first wave of digital converts dumping their record collections for pennies on the dollar.

But I didn't. I ended up going exclusively digital for exactly 20 years. Buying my new turntable was a revelation. I have accumulated at least 800 LPs in the two years since, including replacements for almost every favorite treasure of the old collection, plus many many more. I can count on two hands the CDs I've played in the 2-1/2 years since I got my new record player. I spun records all day yesterday as I was writing the start of this thread.

How does the new stuff sound on LP? Most, if not all, of that stuff is done in the digital world before it is pressed to vinyl. Does the stuff originally done on tape sound better than the new stuff done on a hard drive?

It varies, but in general I prefer the LPs over the CDs, even from digital recordings. Here's why: Most quality digital recordings are made at 24 bits and a sampling rate that ranges from 88.2 to 192 Khz. Some recordings are made as pulse-width modulated (PWM) bitstreams running at 2.7 or 5.6 MHz. When the CD is mastered from this recording, the digital recording is dithered down to 16 bits and 44.1 Khz, throwing away a lot of harmonic richness and wrecking the phase relationships in the treble (where so much of the ambience and soundstage information resides). When you play this CD at home, you are then playing it through a consumer CD player with a $20 D/A converter chip.

When the LP is mastered, the high resolution digital original (or high-res master mixdown, still at 24/96 or whatever) is run through a professional studio quality D/A converter (costing maybe $20,000 or more) to create the analog signal run out to the record cutter. The LP has treble information out to 40 Khz, and has at least a 24-bit amplitude resolution rather than the CD's 16-bit. Furthermore, I've found the modern LPs sourced from digital recordings to be extraordinarily quiet.

As with anything, quality varies. My Charlie Haden, Brian Wilson, Norah Jones, and James Taylor albums sound great--very quiet and dynamic, and reasonably harmonically rich. The McCartney album (Memory Almost Full) is a little richer than the CD, but not as lush as the Jones, Haden and Taylor LPs, especially the Norah Jones. The Diana Krall LPs are a real treasure. She still records in analog, so imagine 21st century microphones, electronics, and recording know-how with a 100+dB analog s/n ratio, pressed on 180 or 200g virgin vinyl.

Then there are albums that artists make at home with ProTools or whatever. If they have the longer word length they'll sound OK, but if they record at 16/44.1 or 16/48, and then perform the d/a conversion through a $300 sound card, the LP can sound threadbare and chalky, just like over-compressed digital.

I never got around to buying all the stuff I have in my very limited collection of vinyl on CD, but would love to hear the stuff again. My turntable is in the attic as the new "entertainment center" furniture made no provision for a turntable. I have been eyeing those USB turntables to move all of the vinyl to iTunes, but so far it doesn't seem feasible. I have been trying to generate some interest in getting a group of friends to go in with me on the purchase, getting everyone's vinyl converted over, then eBaying the thing, but haven't been successful in selling that vision - of course conversion wouldn't maintain that wonderful warm analogue tone that the 'big CDs' provide, well, except for all those DDA records from the late eighties...

Two things:

1) Vinyl records are a treasure, and in spite of the reissues, most are irreplaceable. The groove, with its modulations, humps, valleys, and squiggles, is a physical model of everything that went on in that room when the recording was made. When the performance is digitaized at 16/44.1 (CD standard), you chop the infinitely resolving nuances of the dynamic range into 64k finite steps and throw a stone ceiling at about 21 Khz, which adversely affects the phase relationships of the top octave or two, which wrecks much of the ambience that makes the recording sound musical, harmonically rich, and places it in a specific acoustic space. I can understand digitizing LPs so the music can be shared or put on an iPod or server, but I don't understand digitizing it, thinking you have the original recording in its entirety, and ditching the vinyl and the turntable. You don't have the original recording; you have a skeletal facsimile of it, and much of what you lose is the part that makes it musically involving and pleasurable.

2) USB turntables are largely a racket. If you already have a turntable, you don't need one. You may need an outboard phono preamp, and perhaps a USB analog/digital converter, but you don't need another turntable. In many cases, the computer can accept the phono stage's analog output and convert it with its own soundcard. There are a couple of decent USB turntables, but the best known ones from ION are crap. You can't get a good transfer from a shitty plastic turntable with a junk arm and a dump truck for a cartridge. Garbage in, garbage out.

For example, if you have a phono preamp, you can use this device for $29.99 to connect the analog output to the digital USB input on your computer.

Behringer_UCA202_md.jpg

NOTE: You can't get good sound by plugging the turntable directly into this unit unless your turntable has a built-in phono RIAA equalizer and preamp stage.

Posted

I usually only buy vinyl ... on ebay. its a PITA but I feel like I'm actually buying something important, stable, beautiful, magnificent etc etc ... CD's and MP3's are the fast food of music.

Get a hold of a great LP and its a Thanksgiving dinner. Recently scored some Robin Trower and Stones on mint vinyl ... The Trower was CHEAP!

I feel full ...

Guest pirateflynn
Posted

Thanks for the article, JB.

I don't get listener's fatigue like I would with CDs; LPs are more pleasing to my ear. Admittedly, I rarely listen to music that originated in the digital world. The whole experience works for me. I like looking for THAT album, checking out the cover, placing the disc on the turntable, etc. Getting my hands on it. I'm more involved in the action rather than it just playing in the background.

Posted

Hmm, I still have have all my lp's (300 or so) and I'm in the process of getting that 1960 H.H. Scott tube amp refreshed, I have a Technics tt that will do for now, may upgrade in the future.

Posted

Hmm, I still have have all my lp's (300 or so) and I'm in the process of getting that 1960 H.H. Scott tube amp refreshed, I have a Technics tt that will do for now, may upgrade in the future.

Which Technics TT do you have? If it's a direct drive model, re-lubricate the spindle/motor bearing and you may be surprised how well it runs. You can get the Technics oil from KABUSA.com for $4.95. There are also all kinds of inexpensive aftermarket tweaks you can do to pull a higher performance level out of the direct drive Technics, especially the SL1200/1210 models.

The three pictures left to right illustrate: 1) Tonearm damping fluid trough and arm wrap to control resonances; 2) Closeup of aftermarket foot and vibration reducing platform; 3) Overall picture also showing aftermarket Sorbothane mat and record damper/grip.

CIMG0827.jpgCIMG0823.jpgCIMG0824.jpg

Posted

Listen to this man, he's a wizard when it comes to these stereophile techy thingies. I have this tt with these upgrades 'cept for the wrap and it kicks butt. Get a tt and ask Johnny to hook you up.

Hey JEB, I just pre-ordered this from Music Direct.

Click for Larger Image

FRANK SINATRA - LIVE IN PARIS (NUMBERED LIMITED EDITION 180g 2LP)

Mfr/Label: MOBILE FIDELITY

Sku: LMF312

Category: 180g Vinyl

Release Date: TBD*

$39.99

FRANK SINATRA - LIVE IN PARIS (NUMBERED LIMITED EDITION 180g 2LP)

Frank Sinatra Live In Paris on Numbered Limited-Edition 180-gram 2-LP Set from Mobile Fidelity

Jaw-Dropping Sound: Sinatra's Best Live Album Remastered for the First Time - Never Before on Vinyl!

Staggering 1962 Set Presents Ol' Blue Eyes at His Peak

Live In Paris is Frank Sinatra’s definitive concert album. Yes, there are many good ones—Sinatra at the Sands is also among the finest—but none better captures the essence of the singer’s voice, showmanship, and command than this 1962 session, which remained unreleased until 1994. Backed only by a sextet, the main focus here is on Sinatra’s peerless singing, phrasing, and style. Needless to say, the iconic crooner doesn’t disappoint.

It’s impossible to overstate the magnificence of the interpretations on this set. Looking for the ultimate renditions of “My Funny Valentine,” “In the Still of the Night,” “One for My Baby,” “Night and Day,” and “Ol’ Man River”? Search no more. Sinatra’s readings of these classics exceed his superb studio versions, as well as those that appear on other live albums. And consider the setlist: “The Lady is a Tramp,” “Come Fly With Me,” “Chicago,” “I Could Have Danced All Night.” Superb. And Sinatra is simply “on,” bringing a combination of swinging enthusiasm, reverent charm, and dignified emotion to standards. He triumphs with a powerful voice yet affected by the ravages of time and cigarettes.

Fans of Sinatra at the Sands should take note. Sinatra in Paris is much more intimate, with the scaled-down arrangements and small band allowing songs to bask in the glory of Ol’ Blue Eyes’ voice. Yes, Sinatra’s period onstage comments can seem crude. But they take nothing away from the sheer superiority of this recording.

Ever since its release, the lone drawback to Sinatra in Paris has been that of the inferior sound quality. Lament the shortcoming no more. Half-speed mastered from the original tapes and pressed onto two slabs of quiet 180-gram vinyl, Mobile Fidelity’s numbered limited-edition 2-LP set lifts the veil on the music and allows it to soar with a richness, texture, openness, and presence that have until now gone missing. You will swoon over the improvements.

But act now. These will not last! Get your low-numbered edition by calling Music Direct today! And fill out your Sinatra collection with Mobile Fidelity’s 180-gram LPs of the singer’s Nice ‘N’ Easy, Frank Sinatra Sings for Only the Lonely, and Sinatra & Strings. They sound amazing!

Frank Sinatra Live In Paris Track Listing:

1. Introduction - Charles Aznavour

2. Goody Goody

3. Imagination

4. At Long Last Love

5. Moonlight in Vermont

6. Without a Song

7. Day In - Day Out

8. I've Got You Under My Skin

9. I Get a Kick Out of You

10. Second Time Around

11. Too Marvelous for Words

12. My Funny Valentine

13. In the Still of the Night

14. April in Paris

15. You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Loves You

16. They Can't Take That Away from Me

17. Chicago

18. Night and Day

19. I Could Have Danced All Night

20. One for My Baby

21. Foggy Day

22. Ol' Man River

23. Lady Is a Tramp

24. I Love Paris

25. Nancy (With the Laughing Face)

26. Come Fly With Me

Posted

Johnny, on the Technics, what did you wrap the tonearm with? My 1200 has a sorbothane mat and Audioquest sorbothane sub-feet, but I never thought about the wrapped tonearm/fluid trough thing.

Posted

Johnny, on the Technics, what did you wrap the tonearm with? My 1200 has a sorbothane mat and Audioquest sorbothane sub-feet, but I never thought about the wrapped tonearm/fluid trough thing.

You can buy a tonearm wrap from Music Direct for $19.99, or for some Teflon pipe thread tape for $0.59 per 43-ft. roll.

6880850.jpg

I used the pipe thread tape. it's so light it barely alters the tonearm's effective mass, and it noticeably tamed a persistent midrange glare that had persisted through all my previous tweaks.

Be careful as you wrap so as not to place undue stress on the bearings, but wrap it fairly tightly to dampen any arm wand ring. I even wrapped some around the knurled ring that secures the headshell to the tonearm. I found that that little piece rings like a bell, and the Teflon tape is so cheap I can always re-wrap that part when I remove the headshell.

Speaking of headshells, I swear by this one. It has better wiring, is way more rigid and inert, and raises the overall tonearm mass by about 5g, which optimizes it for many of the quality medium compliance cartridges available today. I use an Audio Technica At150MLX with this and it's an ideal match.

Z_Headshell.gif

The fluid damper can be found here, within http://www.kabusa.com.

td1200a.jpg

It lowers the amplitude of the arm cartridge resonant peak, and in doing so, enables the tonearm to track very warped records and increases the range of cartridges that work well with the tonearm.

Posted

Thanks for the article, JB.

I don't get listener's fatigue like I would with CDs; LPs are more pleasing to my ear. Admittedly, I rarely listen to music that originated in the digital world. The whole experience works for me. I like looking for THAT album, checking out the cover, placing the disc on the turntable, etc. Getting my hands on it. I'm more involved in the action rather than it just playing in the background.

That's a huge difference I find with vinyl vs. cd's. I can listen to vinyl all day and my ears feel fine. After listening to cds for 2 or so hours, I have to turn it off.

I also find the drums usually sound much better on vinyl.

Posted

I was actually thinking of plugging in my old tape deck as well. Cassettes are cool:

cassette-tape-2.jpg

Posted

If I had to rank my favorite medium in order it would be:

1. SACD/DVD-A

2. CD

3. Uncompressed digital (e.g. Apple Lossless)

4. Reel-to-reel

5. Phonograph

6. mp3

7. Cassette tape

8. 8-track tape

That's not to say that I don't prefer some records to the CD release of the same, but that's usually because of the mastering job done on the CD was lousy (endemic in the first decade or so of CDs). But far more often, I prefer the sound of a CD.

-Jonathan

Posted

How can you identify when a record was manufactured, which pressing it was etc?

ArnieZ

That information is what is scratched or stamped onto the master at the time of its cutting. It shows up in the wide space of the lead-out groove spiral near the center of the record.

medium.jpg

All code numbers and letters mean something, but I can't tell you what it is. It's not like the Hamer serial numbering system where you know the year and which guitar in sequence it is. Each company, label, and even the individual guys who cut the masters have their own systems of identifying an individual stamper. To my knowledge, there aren't initials to identify who mastered it (such as Hoffman or Grey) or necessarily the date it was made. Furthermore, even if you identify a particularly good master, the records pressed from it won't necessarily all sound good. There may be variations of the qualities of the mothers and stampers made from it, and there will definitely be differences in whether it's an early, middle-age, or last of the pressings made from a stamper before it wore out.

This page helps explain the difficulty, and also why no one is going to divulge this information even if they knew. If a collector created a database of stamper IDs that helped guide him to the most collectible records, would there be any reason in the world to share that information? It would guarantee that the supply of well-mastered collectible records would dry up overnight. I encourage you to surf through his site a bit to get a sense of the complexity of this issue. He's been doing it for 30 years, and it's come down to playing the record to see how it sounds, and then grading and pricing it accordingly. He may be right, but I'm simply not going to pay $500 for a "hot stamper." Still, it's very informative.

That's why I gravitate toward the used LPs that are stamped "Not for sale. For promotional or broadcast use only." They're usually just right in there with the other used records. In general, these records were usually the earliest off a given stamper, sent out to DJs and record reviewers to initiate interest in the record. Therefore, the stamper is fresh and the records tend to be quieter and more dynamic. I have many that I've picked up for $1-3, and nearly all sound better than average.

Posted

If you grew up with the sound of LP's and are used to managing the various maintenance, cleaning, and general upkeep issues, then it's something that you are already accustomed to. There's also some nostalgia in there as well. Go with what you like best.

But I will always maintain my opinion that LP's like tube amps do not sound good because they are more accurate. They sound good because they massage the tone in a way that is pleasing to our ears, and they handle distorted peaks much better than digital recordings and solid state amps.

I had some records as a kid, but they were a pain to deal with on the crappy players my parents had, so I started building my music collection with Cassettes in the 80's. I switched over to CD's a few years later and never looked back. I still have some old cassettes in the closet that I never got on CD, but I don't have a home tape deck anymore so I don't listen to them. Just can't throw them away yet.

But now, I have to say that multichannel SACD's and DVD-A's over HDMI to an AVR with good DA converters and Audyssey MultEQ XT room correction is a big step forward. I have never heard anything as good at less than high-end prices. Of course, this setup wasn't cheap either.

And the next step is BD-Audio at 24 bit/192 KHz. Even Neil Young is on board with this, and he hates digital...

Johnny - you need to get an Oppo BDP-83 Universal Blu-ray player. At $499 it's an absolute steal. It's worth it at twice the price, or more. Lexicon is going to re-badge an OEM version it and sell it for $3K plus!

Posted

Just to clarify about mastering markings....

On the huge majority of commercial LP's you find out there, the marking will reference the company's catalog number for the LP or single. It may not be the same as what's on the spine of the jacket (or wherever the particular company put it), but it's a reference back to it in one internal company fashion or another. If it's a re-master or some sort of variant on the original release, there may be some extra letters or digits thrown in, but there's no set pattern or official order for this. The reason for this is that one mother or stamper looks just like the next one, and without that record company ID, you'd be getting Guy Lombardo in your Jan and Dean jacket. Or worse. The number may be handwritten or stamped, just depending.

Some smaller label or specialty product stuff may have inscriptions that reference the studio's job number or even just the artist followed by and A or B to denote which side of the elpee it is.

At one time, it was not unusual to see little squiggles or small letters way down at the edge of the label, or even underneath it. That was the mastering engineer signing his work. Usually it's undecipherable and even if you could, it'd be nearly impossible to actually find out who it was.

If you can find a copy of "An Hour With The Ramsey Lewis Trio" and it's an original pressing run and you feel like wrecking it, peel back the label on the B side and you'll find the initials "DJB". That's Douglas J. Brand, the first guy to put an hour of full-fidelity audio on a popular music record album. He's the guy that taught me. If you find the right press run of Johnny Horton's " Battle of New Orleans" 45, it might have a TMA in the runoff area of the "A" side. That's me. They made me stop it after a couple of remasters, though.

Posted

How can you identify when a record was manufactured, which preesing it was etc?

ArnieZ

There is another aspect of record production that's not as specific, but it can definitely help narrow down which production run a record is from: the label design, the brand name, and (possibly) the weight of the record (not that I'm going to start sorting out my 180g pressings from the 150g ones).

Record companies change labels through the years, and this makes it relatively easy to sort out an original pressing from a re-issue. If you know enough about it, you can also sort out a US pressing from Canadian, Japanese, etc. That doesn't necessarily say which is better.

I don't know enough of the details to spell them all out, and it would take a book, but for example, the original Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" album had what's called a "six-eye" label:

collabel2500.jpg

They used this label on their pop & jazz from the late '50s to the early '60s. Kind of Blue is from 1959, and Brubeck's "Time Out" and "Time Further Out" are also 6-eye Columbias.

But I have pressings of Kind of Blue and Time Further Out with labels more like this:

Dylan_Columbia_Label2.jpg

This was Columbia's label design for pop, jazz, and rock in the mid-'70s. Since Kind of Blue was recorded in 1959 and Time Further Out in 1961, I know that mine are reissues, which is why I got the Miles Davis for $8 instead of $350. In spite of all the collector hoopla, my reissue sounds totally satisfying. With many of these iconic records, you can buy purist reissues for about $35 from specialty companies such as Classic Records, Speakers Corner, and Cisco that are often remastered and cut on vintage restored all-tube equipment.

Furthermore, there have been various mergers and buyouts through the years, and labels can change names. For example, I have an LP of "Muddy Waters Folk Singer" on Chess/MCA. That makes it a reissue, as the first pressings would have been simply "Chess Records," before MCA bought them.

Posted

How can you identify when a record was manufactured, which preesing it was etc?

ArnieZ

There is another aspect of record production that's not as specific, but it can definitely help narrow down which production run a record is from: the label design, the brand name, and (possibly) the weight of the record (not that I'm going to start sorting out my 180g pressings from the 150g ones).

Record companies change labels through the years, and this makes it relatively easy to sort out an original pressing from a re-issue. If you know enough about it, you can also sort out a US pressing from Canadian, Japanese, etc. That doesn't necessarily say which is better.

I don't know enough of the details to spell them all out, and it would take a book, but for example, the original Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" album had what's called a "six-eye" label:

collabel2500.jpg

They used this label on their pop & jazz from the late '50s to the early '60s. Kind of Blue is from 1959, and Brubeck's "Time Out" and "Time Further Out" are also 6-eye Columbias.

But I have pressings of Kind of Blue and Time Further Out with labels more like this:

Dylan_Columbia_Label2.jpg

This was Columbia's label design for pop, jazz, and rock in the mid-'70s. Since Kind of Blue was recorded in 1959 and Time Further Out in 1961, I know that mine are reissues, which is why I got the Miles Davis for $8 instead of $350. In spite of all the collector hoopla, my reissue sounds totally satisfying. With many of these iconic records, you can buy purist reissues for about $35 from specialty companies such as Classic Records, Speakers Corner, and Cisco that are often remastered and cut on vintage restored all-tube equipment.

Furthermore, there have been various mergers and buyouts through the years, and labels can change names. For example, I have an LP of "Muddy Waters Folk Singer" on Chess/MCA. That makes it a reissue, as the first pressings would have been simply "Chess Records," before MCA bought them.

Kind of Blue must have some kind of record for most re-issues ever. I love that record, just cherish it. If you only own one jazz record, that would be the one to get.

:lol:

Posted

How can you identify when a record was manufactured, which preesing it was etc?

ArnieZ

There is another aspect of record production that's not as specific, but it can definitely help narrow down which production run a record is from: the label design, the brand name, and (possibly) the weight of the record (not that I'm going to start sorting out my 180g pressings from the 150g ones).

Record companies change labels through the years, and this makes it relatively easy to sort out an original pressing from a re-issue. If you know enough about it, you can also sort out a US pressing from Canadian, Japanese, etc. That doesn't necessarily say which is better.

I don't know enough of the details to spell them all out, and it would take a book, but for example, the original Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" album had what's called a "six-eye" label:

collabel2500.jpg

They used this label on their pop & jazz from the late '50s to the early '60s. Kind of Blue is from 1959, and Brubeck's "Time Out" and "Time Further Out" are also 6-eye Columbias.

But I have pressings of Kind of Blue and Time Further Out with labels more like this:

Dylan_Columbia_Label2.jpg

This was Columbia's label design for pop, jazz, and rock in the mid-'70s. Since Kind of Blue was recorded in 1959 and Time Further Out in 1961, I know that mine are reissues, which is why I got the Miles Davis for $8 instead of $350. In spite of all the collector hoopla, my reissue sounds totally satisfying. With many of these iconic records, you can buy purist reissues for about $35 from specialty companies such as Classic Records, Speakers Corner, and Cisco that are often remastered and cut on vintage restored all-tube equipment.

Furthermore, there have been various mergers and buyouts through the years, and labels can change names. For example, I have an LP of "Muddy Waters Folk Singer" on Chess/MCA. That makes it a reissue, as the first pressings would have been simply "Chess Records," before MCA bought them.

Kind of Blue must have some kind of record for most re-issues ever. I love that record, just cherish it. If you only own one jazz record, that would be the one to get.

:lol:

Amen, and amen.

Posted

This thread reminded me of an audiophile store I used to go to in high school, when I was lusting over all this high end audio equipment that I couldn't afford. They had a record cleaning system called, I think, Monks. You brought in your LPs and they put them on the Monks cleaner, which looked like a turntable with tonearm. But the tonearm was actually a dual function cleaner - it squirted out a cleaning solution, then vacuumed it up. It was expensive to have them cleaned in this way but it really sucked up all the dust and lint and whatnot, made your records sound new.

Posted

This thread reminded me of an audiophile store I used to go to in high school, when I was lusting over all this high end audio equipment that I couldn't afford. They had a record cleaning system called, I think, Monks. You brought in your LPs and they put them on the Monks cleaner, which looked like a turntable with tonearm. But the tonearm was actually a dual function cleaner - it squirted out a cleaning solution, then vacuumed it up. It was expensive to have them cleaned in this way but it really sucked up all the dust and lint and whatnot, made your records sound new.

Yep, Keith Monks, and still in business.

Keith-Monks.gif

Generally considered the best, and most expensive. There are also many good record cleaning machines for the home that cost less. I wish my local store had a Monks where I could get a few of mine cleaned. Conrad (Belgian) has a very nice Clearaudio record cleaning machine in his video shop.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...