____twoism

Then why press on 180g? I thought it did affect the sound quality, I thought that was often cited as 'audiophile' 180g

I think 180gr LPs are steadier, and sound therefore better.

ArbitersGround wrote:>Music forum. One guy on here who has some type of connection (that nobody really knows about or talks about) with the band of said forum.
>Claims band plans to release an album next year.
>Album comes out many years later.
>People state "See I bet you feel silly, those who doubted him."
>Dude sends the guy a message asking about vinyl represses.
>He replies "I dunno lol it could happen."
>Dude comes back saying "Holy fuck, he just confirmed without any shadow of a doubt that there WILL BE VINYL REPRESSES. We are as sure as the earth revolves around the sun."

Seriously, I'm not saying there won't be vinyl represses. But you guys don't understand the meaning of the word "confirmation."

Yeah... because I totally said "Holy fuck, he just confirmed without any shadow of a doubt that there WILL BE VINYL REPRESSES. We are as sure as the earth revolves around the sun."...

No, I just posted the exact conversation we had and said it sounded like good news.

It is an absolute fact that mdg is a representative for the band. How people can still doubt this is beyond me.

I have added a question mark to the thread title, for you whiners.

There is no steadiness improvement past 130g, if you want steadier vinyl stick to 120g and above and use a better needle/table.

180g is made for either DJ'n as it's sturdier and feels better and lasts longer and to make people like you (and me) feel cool when holding it.


Heavy is good, heavy is reliable, if it does not work you can always hit him with it.

to add:

180g vinyl is considerably more expensive to cut, and because of this there may be some occasional times that it is better cared for durung the cutting and making process.. and thus "MAY" sound a little better, have a less crackles or hiss.... This is definitely not assumed and or expected when cutting 180g vinyl.

The only thing that will make it sound better is if the mastering is improved.. That is all, apart from defects from cheap recycled vinyl being used, which is very rarely the case.

Noob question here...can somebody tell me why it is better to listen on vinyl as apposed to a 320kbps mps or flac. Is it really that much better or is it a collector thing? If it is better it would be something I would be interested in. What would be a good vinyl player and would I need a preamp?

Anon1339 wrote:Noob question here...can somebody tell me why it is better to listen on vinyl as apposed to a 320kbps mps or flac. Is it really that much better or is it a collector thing? If it is better it would be something I would be interested in. What would be a good vinyl player and would I need a preamp?

Here is a good explanation:

"If music is originally recorded by analog means, reel-to-reel tapes, that purity is lost along with fidelity ("faithfulness" to the original sound) when converted to digital. To fit the contents of a song, certain pieces are inevitably paired down when compressed and converted into a bluntly compacted MP3 format (or WMA, AAC, etc.). Imagine fitting a closet into a single suitcase: as your wife jumps on the outside of the luggage while you attempt to zip it shut, you are forced to discard a few, seemingly-negligible items. A sock, or few pairs of boxers. Then you get to your destination it find that your trip will be lasting a few days longer than your boxers provide (the slimy discomfort in "doubling up" days to compensate). Each seemingly negligible detail is as drastic, when you hear a funky, bass-heavy album on vinyl, only to find that the bass and any discernible low-end is completely absent or else inorganic when squirted out of some earbuds or make-shift home stereo. Vinyl captures every slight nuance as it has the space to spare by way of a physical imprint. While quantity inarguably comes after quality with vinyl(each side holds only about ten to fifteen minutes of material), the quality is incomparable as each groove contains every intended detail captured holistically, every frequency shift perceived. The closest digital comes is a mere forgery of a masterpiece, a synthetic gloss in lieu of a textured canvas."

Another recent example is the new MBV album. They mixed and mastered the vinyl version in Analog. So you only get that experience via Vinyl. Now, is it THAT noticeable? Some people say yes and some others will say no. It just depends on YOUR ear and how you listen.

I do think it's funny when you see a classic re-release vinyl that says "DIGITALLY REMASTERED". Same goes with that BoC Bootleg, all they did was put MP3's on a vinyl record... Those new Beatles Remasters are horrid.

More here on why vinyl sounds better:
http://www.fasttopten.com/list/top-ten- ... an-digital

Thanks, polar sky! Very nice and simple explanation for choosing vinyl. Do you have any recommendations for equipment? The headphones I currently own are AKG k240 mkii and Beyerdynamic dt770 if that makes any difference.

Anon1339 wrote:Thanks, polar sky! Very nice and simple explanation for choosing vinyl. Do you have any recommendations for equipment? The headphones I currently own are AKG k240 mkii and Beyerdynamic dt770 if that makes any difference.

I use a 1960s Magnavox, restored. Nothing fancy, but sounds fantastic. Bought a diamond tip needle for it cause they last longer. Not sure what brands are the best for turntables. I'm sure some others can chime in, but I would say that Audio Technica and Stanton are good brands. Is Sony still good? Not sure. But you will need a Stereo Receiver with a Phono Pre-Amp, Speakers and of course all the cords and cables to hook everything up. It can get quite expensive. I would go on Craigslist for the receiver and speakers. You can find some good deals on there.

Anon1339 wrote:Noob question here...can somebody tell me why it is better to listen on vinyl as apposed to a 320kbps mps or flac. Is it really that much better or is it a collector thing? If it is better it would be something I would be interested in. What would be a good vinyl player and would I need a preamp?

An awesome book that will help with your question:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Perfecting-Soun ... nd+forever

is TH going to be 180g? it doesnt say anything about it i think.

It will, according to amazon.fr

ok I read the whole explanation above re: Analog vs Digital (confirmed what I thought I knew)

However how are we sure that the final mix is in analog? I mean the brothers usually work with analog all the time, and I expect that TH is no difference, but once it is mastered and all, isn't it done in digital format or is the mastering also done analog?

So are we sure it's AAD (for CD) and AAA for vinyl? because if it's AD and the vinyl, what gives?

Magrathea wrote:ok I read the whole explanation above re: Analog vs Digital (confirmed what I thought I knew)

However how are we sure that the final mix is in analog? I mean the brothers usually work with analog all the time, and I expect that TH is no difference, but once it is mastered and all, isn't it done in digital format or is the mastering also done analog?

So are we sure it's AAD (for CD) and AAA for vinyl? because if it's AD and the vinyl, what gives?

Unfortunately I think most albums these days are mastered digitally and then pressed on vinyl (Not 100% on that). That's why I was surprised when MBV announced their vinyl would be mixed and mastered strictly in analog and then pressed.

Some info on AAA:

http://darkermydudes.blogspot.com/2010/ ... in-uk.html

So I guess if you record, mix and master all of your music on your computer, it makes no sense to press it on vinyl.

jcotteri wrote:

re-phaelam-ed wrote:

mono wrote: People do care about original pressings, or maybe not original but at least old, now that people like 4Men or Rhino are pressing reprints from digital masters. But luckily these old pressings (Wire, New Order, etc.) are usually not too rare or expensive.

a lot of time represses are lower quality. perhaps not on the vinyl side, but generally the packaging.
sucks getting lower grade vinyl too. geo seems like its on 180g vinyl. SOLID...nice. i got in a beautiful, thin shitty vinyl. plays like crap and has a pink chip in it. probably scrap from another press of something that jumped into the pressing. got lucky and found a white label promo copy. 180g...FLAT and awesome sounding.

there CAN be value in a first pressing. dont discount it. but if they repress...dont pass it up. may not happen again.

I think you have no idea what you are talking about, the weight of the vinyl has nothing to do with the quality of the sound or the pressing, the only difference is that it's more likely to be virgin vinyl rather than recycled

In fact you will more than likely find that represses have higher quality sound in general, as they are likely remastered and probably have more cash flow with the time that has elapsed.

actually the weight of the vinyl has a lot to do with the quality. youre looking at a better press. a more stable press. less likely to change shape more receptive to a better groove. the thin shit wears and warps quicker.
the sound quality is based off of the width of the groove. but weight helps sustain that groove. i probably dont know though.

oh ya....and thin vinyl sucks.

polar sky wrote:

Magrathea wrote:ok I read the whole explanation above re: Analog vs Digital (confirmed what I thought I knew)

However how are we sure that the final mix is in analog? I mean the brothers usually work with analog all the time, and I expect that TH is no difference, but once it is mastered and all, isn't it done in digital format or is the mastering also done analog?

So are we sure it's AAD (for CD) and AAA for vinyl? because if it's AD and the vinyl, what gives?

Unfortunately I think most albums these days are mastered digitally and then pressed on vinyl (Not 100% on that). That's why I was surprised when MBV announced their vinyl would be mixed and mastered strictly in analog and then pressed.

Some info on AAA:

http://darkermydudes.blogspot.com/2010/ ... in-uk.html

So I guess if you record, mix and master all of your music on your computer, it makes no sense to press it on vinyl.

It's possible MBV mixed it all down to an lacquer acetate, then recorded it back for the digital master...by doing this, your record will sound identical on CD or vinyl, apparently. Arcade Fire did it on their last record. Makes sense to me?

harpoon dodger wrote:

polar sky wrote:

Magrathea wrote:ok I read the whole explanation above re: Analog vs Digital (confirmed what I thought I knew)

However how are we sure that the final mix is in analog? I mean the brothers usually work with analog all the time, and I expect that TH is no difference, but once it is mastered and all, isn't it done in digital format or is the mastering also done analog?

So are we sure it's AAD (for CD) and AAA for vinyl? because if it's AD and the vinyl, what gives?

Unfortunately I think most albums these days are mastered digitally and then pressed on vinyl (Not 100% on that). That's why I was surprised when MBV announced their vinyl would be mixed and mastered strictly in analog and then pressed.

Some info on AAA:

http://darkermydudes.blogspot.com/2010/ ... in-uk.html

So I guess if you record, mix and master all of your music on your computer, it makes no sense to press it on vinyl.

It's possible MBV mixed it all down to an lacquer acetate, then recorded it back for the digital master...by doing this, your record will sound identical on CD or vinyl, apparently. Arcade Fire did it on their last record. Makes sense to me?

you just use one of these...

then transfer from tape...like they used to

re-phaelam-ed wrote:

harpoon dodger wrote:

polar sky wrote: Unfortunately I think most albums these days are mastered digitally and then pressed on vinyl (Not 100% on that). That's why I was surprised when MBV announced their vinyl would be mixed and mastered strictly in analog and then pressed.

Some info on AAA:

http://darkermydudes.blogspot.com/2010/ ... in-uk.html

So I guess if you record, mix and master all of your music on your computer, it makes no sense to press it on vinyl.

It's possible MBV mixed it all down to an lacquer acetate, then recorded it back for the digital master...by doing this, your record will sound identical on CD or vinyl, apparently. Arcade Fire did it on their last record. Makes sense to me?

you just use one of these...

then transfer from tape...like they used to

Indeed! I'm lucky enough to be going through recording school right now, and we're working off a Sony/MCI JH-24 this semester. Beautiful 2-inch machine..wish I could afford one

kelp wrote:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Perfecting-Soun ... nd+forever

Ha! Was just about to reference that book! An amazing read and one everyone on this forum should seek out