The date when it started is unclear -- the introduction of the 180 gram record. I tend to associate it with Hobson and the Classic Records line of reproductions but it could be earlier. JVC in Japan developed techniques for creating 180 gram and 200 gram LPs that MFSL had on offer..
Some may say thick vinyl records were a reaction to the end of the oil shortage of the 1970s. Some claim thick vinyl records are more durable and less prone to warpage. I think it was JVC who said their 180g and 200g records were flatter. Some claim that a thick record delivers protection from vibration coming through the platter and spindle.
From 140g through 200g, today record productions follow the amalgamation of IEC 98-1987, RIAA and DIN standards which also have standards for deviating from standards. To get into the weeds on record standards go here.
In terms of technical specifications, tecord weight has little to do with the quality of sound and music. Record thickness and weight have no bearing on how the groove is cut or its dimensions. To make a record groove dependent on vinyl thickness would require a whole new set of standards.
One line of thinking suggests the 180g 'audiophile record' is simply a marketing gimmick. It has no inherent goodness versus other record weights and it is not a solution to any significant problem. Audiophiles, especially those who started collecting in this century, are sold the idea that 180g records are higher quality; that they have greater value than lower weight, thinner records. Nonetheless the originals of all those 180g reproductions, the Deccas, Philips, RCAs and Mercury's -- often considered to yield higher quality sound -- were not pressed on 180g vinyl.
Some say that 180g records are a bad thing because they sound bad. The 180g record sounds dead by comparison to thinner records because thicker vinyl is too damped. To compensate, recording engineers boost the top and bottom frequencies. That yields hiss and noise when the top end is boosted which now has to be filtered out which leads to more deadness. In the end you have a lifeless plastic sound or a hi-fi sound. Of course there are always exceptions and some modern LPs sound quite good.
I suspect many will say "it is what it is" and pay no mind to whether the record is 180g. Someone will inevitably say "the quality of the vinyl itself has a greater impact." Perhaps, though there are more virgin vinyl 180g records than thinner virgin vinyl.
What do you think? Do you have a preference?
Some may say thick vinyl records were a reaction to the end of the oil shortage of the 1970s. Some claim thick vinyl records are more durable and less prone to warpage. I think it was JVC who said their 180g and 200g records were flatter. Some claim that a thick record delivers protection from vibration coming through the platter and spindle.
From 140g through 200g, today record productions follow the amalgamation of IEC 98-1987, RIAA and DIN standards which also have standards for deviating from standards. To get into the weeds on record standards go here.
In terms of technical specifications, tecord weight has little to do with the quality of sound and music. Record thickness and weight have no bearing on how the groove is cut or its dimensions. To make a record groove dependent on vinyl thickness would require a whole new set of standards.
One line of thinking suggests the 180g 'audiophile record' is simply a marketing gimmick. It has no inherent goodness versus other record weights and it is not a solution to any significant problem. Audiophiles, especially those who started collecting in this century, are sold the idea that 180g records are higher quality; that they have greater value than lower weight, thinner records. Nonetheless the originals of all those 180g reproductions, the Deccas, Philips, RCAs and Mercury's -- often considered to yield higher quality sound -- were not pressed on 180g vinyl.
Some say that 180g records are a bad thing because they sound bad. The 180g record sounds dead by comparison to thinner records because thicker vinyl is too damped. To compensate, recording engineers boost the top and bottom frequencies. That yields hiss and noise when the top end is boosted which now has to be filtered out which leads to more deadness. In the end you have a lifeless plastic sound or a hi-fi sound. Of course there are always exceptions and some modern LPs sound quite good.
I suspect many will say "it is what it is" and pay no mind to whether the record is 180g. Someone will inevitably say "the quality of the vinyl itself has a greater impact." Perhaps, though there are more virgin vinyl 180g records than thinner virgin vinyl.
What do you think? Do you have a preference?
