Hot Pressings

[garylkoh]

I just bought every single re-issue of Tubular Bells - the 180gm, the 200gm, and the Ultimate Edition. Unfortunately, I don't have a system to play it on everything's dismantled and shipped for CES. We were discussing this on another thread, and I think that it will be extremely interesting. Now, if I can only find my first pressing......

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

I just bought every single re-issue of Tubular Bells - the 180gm, the 200gm, and the Ultimate Edition. Unfortunately, I don't have a system to play it on everything's dismantled and shipped for CES. We were discussing this on another thread, and I think that it will be extremely interesting. Now, if I can only find my first pressing......

Sweet! Just so you know, my 200g Classic Records is sounding much better. I did a quick hand-cleaning (no RCM) and it seemed to have helped.

John

 

[garylkoh]

That's good to hear, John. Let us know your impressions between the 180gm pressing and the 200gm pressing when it comes in.

I learned some time ago from a friend in the industry that chemical is sprayed on the press before the hot vinyl biscuit is pressed so that the LP comes off the press easier. It is important to clean off this chemical BEFORE the first play of the LP. If you don't it grinds the chemical into the LP and it's harder to get off.

I use first use de-ionized water by hand, then then an enzymatic cleaner leave for at least 10 minutes, and de-ionized water again. Use a Nitty Gritty so that you don't put a cleaned side back down on a dirty platter.

 

[DaveyF]

Interesting topic. For many years I have either been amazed at or disappointed in some of the shaded dog and Mercury pressings depending on which stamper they were. For instance, I own a 1s 1s Scheherazade LSC 2446 with Reiner and the Chicago. I also own a 10s 10s copy which almost sounds like a different record The 10s 10s is far more lifelike and with subterranean bass compared to the 1s1s. Now, my 3s3s copy is a little better than my 1s1s copy but still not in the same league as the 10s10s. I also own the 'white Dog' pressing in a 7s5s copy...amazingly that is better than the 3s3s and close to the 10s10s

 

[jadis]

Interesting topic. For many years I have either been amazed at or disappointed in some of the shaded dog and Mercury pressings depending on which stamper they were. For instance, I own a 1s 1s Scheherazade LSC 2446 with Reiner and the Chicago. I also own a 10s 10s copy which almost sounds like a different record The 10s 10s is far more lifelike and with subterranean bass compared to the 1s1s. Now, my 3s3s copy is a little better than my 1s1s copy but still not in the same league as the 10s10s. I also own the 'white Dog' pressing in a 7s5s copy...amazingly that is better than the 3s3s and close to the 10s10s

Interesting, indeed. Thanks for sharing, DaveyF.

 

[jadis]

Talking about RCAs, I recently got hold of yet another Harry Belafonte Live at Carnegie Hall. I stopped counting how many I have had and threw them out because of scruffy/noisy quality. But by far, I have retained a clean 12s copy with a sticker that says 'miracle surface' on the cover. The funny thing is that the label, at the 6 o'clock area, says STEREO instead of LIVING STEREO. I was itching to know if this was a latter or inferior copy, though it was an original. Now, I finally got a clean playing copy, 26s or thereabouts, with the words LIVING STEREO on the 6 o'clock area of the label. I immediately played MATILDA on both copies, and I was shocked that the one with the LIVING STEREO tag, imo, blew away the one with the STEREO label. The sense of air in the hall, and the size of the hall can clearly be felt on this Living Stereo copy. I am quite baffled by my findings, though I'm finally happy to have tracked down a great sounding and clean original copy. Took me years to do this. LOL

 

[MylesBAstor]

That's good to hear, John. Let us know your impressions between the 180gm pressing and the 200gm pressing when it comes in.

I learned some time ago from a friend in the industry that chemical is sprayed on the press before the hot vinyl biscuit is pressed so that the LP comes off the press easier. It is important to clean off this chemical BEFORE the first play of the LP. If you don't it grinds the chemical into the LP and it's harder to get off.

I use first use de-ionized water by hand, then then an enzymatic cleaner leave for at least 10 minutes, and de-ionized water again. Use a Nitty Gritty so that you don't put a cleaned side back down on a dirty platter.

Think originally used a Teflon like substance during the stamping; nowadays however, it's a chemical contained within the vinyl biscuit.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Talking about RCAs, I recently got hold of yet another Harry Belafonte Live at Carnegie Hall. I stopped counting how many I have had and threw them out because of scruffy/noisy quality. But by far, I have retained a clean 12s copy with a sticker that says 'miracle surface' on the cover. The funny thing is that the label, at the 6 o'clock area, says STEREO instead of LIVING STEREO. I was itching to know if this was a latter or inferior copy, though it was an original. Now, I finally got a clean playing copy, 26s or thereabouts, with the words LIVING STEREO on the 6 o'clock area of the label. I immediately played MATILDA on both copies, and I was shocked that the one with the LIVING STEREO tag, imo, blew away the one with the STEREO label. The sense of air in the hall, and the size of the hall can clearly be felt on this Living Stereo copy. I am quite baffled by my findings, though I'm finally happy to have tracked down a great sounding and clean original copy. Took me years to do this. LOL

I think a lot of the sound of a used LP has to do with what the person before you played the LP with I've heard same stampers from an given album, first instance Witches Brew on RCA, sound different; one was dark and the other was open. Clearly the more played album sounded darker.

In general though, the earlier the stamper, the better the sound. That esp seems to go for the Decca classical recordings and many jazz LPs.

 

[jadis]

I think a lot of the sound of a used LP has to do with what the person before you played the LP with I've heard same stampers from an given album, first instance Witches Brew on RCA, sound different; one was dark and the other was open. Clearly the more played album sounded darker.

That's true, Myles. That would explain the premium price being asked for a sealed original copy of those old records.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

I think a lot of the sound of a used LP has to do with what the person before you played the LP with I've heard same stampers from an given album, first instance Witches Brew on RCA, sound different; one was dark and the other was open. Clearly the more played album sounded darker.

In general though, the earlier the stamper, the better the sound. That esp seems to go for the Decca classical recordings and many jazz LPs.

At what point (# of copies) does it start deteriorating? I know there isn't an exact number, but generally speaking.

 

[jadis]

At what point (# of copies) does it start deteriorating? I know there isn't an exact number, but generally speaking.

It's hard to say, but in my experience, I had a brand new Sheffield Lab Growing Up in Hollywood LP that I kept playing and playing to evaluate my new audio gears, and maybe in a span of 4 to 5 years to much playing, I felt the highs were kinda lost in the record, as Myles would say 'sounds darker'; and I verified this by opening a sealed copy of the same album and yes, the highs were more prominent, and everything just sounded clearer. I've read in the early pages of TAS that record reviewers were saying they 'worn out' their copies of Dark Side of the Moon, etc. Hence, I became conscious of the term.

 

[DaveyF]

I think it important to remember that the condition of the stylus is a very important factor as to the
wear on the record. A worn and/or a badly aligned cartridge can damage a record in just one play.
Many of us are probably using a cartridge that might be past its prime...may still sound ok but
is still putting too much wear on the LP
In a prior thread,we talked about the various lifespans to be expected of a cartridge..according to
Music Direct, they seem to believe a cartridge is worn out after just a few years of use.
The other aspect of wear has to do with how much grunge resides in the grooves to start with; if you haven't got the grooves clean, then you will be using the stylus to spread the grunge around the record thereby damaging the groove.

 

[DaveyF]

Jadis, I agree that finding the Harry Belafonte LP in playable condition is not that easy. Probably one of the reasons for this is that they were made in fairly large #'s and I am sure got lots of play time, along with less than sterling handling.
One of my record collector friends once told me that the reason Jazz Lp's and particularly original Blue Notes, are so hard to find and are valuable is due to the fact that when new, most people played them to death on badly set up gear and then failed to treat them correctly; resulting in a destroyed or badly worn copy. Unlike a lot of classical LP's which although made in appx. the same #'s were played far less and treated usually a lot better.

 

[jadis]

Jadis, I agree that finding the Harry Belafonte LP in playable condition is not that easy. Probably one of the reasons for this is that they were made in fairly large #'s and I am sure got lots of play time, along with less than sterling handling.
One of my record collector friends once told me that the reason Jazz Lp's and particularly original Blue Notes, are so hard to find and are valuable is due to the fact that when new, most people played them to death on badly set up gear and then failed to treat them correctly; resulting in a destroyed or badly worn copy. Unlike a lot of classical LP's which although made in appx. the same #'s were played far less and treated usually a lot better.

Agreed, DaveyF. My feelings exactly.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Agreed, DaveyF. My feelings exactly.

+1

 

[MylesBAstor]

I think it important to remember that the condition of the stylus is a very important factor as to the
wear on the record. A worn and/or a badly aligned cartridge can damage a record in just one play.
Many of us are probably using a cartridge that might be past its prime...may still sound ok but
is still putting too much wear on the LP
In a prior thread,we talked about the various lifespans to be expected of a cartridge..according to
Music Direct, they seem to believe a cartridge is worn out after just a few years of use.
The other aspect of wear has to do with how much grunge resides in the grooves to start with; if you haven't got the grooves clean, then you will be using the stylus to spread the grunge around the record thereby damaging the groove.

There are a huge number of factors that come into play regarding an LPs lifetime. Here a few off the top of my head:

1) Type of vinyl used in the pressing of the record eg. recycled, soft, hard, etc. Some LPs made during the oil crisis, etc. with reground vinyl tend to sound horrible and were noisy out of the jacket
2) VTF used (eg 5 gms--or putting a quarter on top of the headshell ) Now lighter might be better as long as it doesn't result in mistracking; that's why I'm somewhat hesitant about using a cartridge that tracks at 2.8 gms or so.
3) Cartridge alignment
4) Cartridge mistracking - combo of alignment, optimal VTF and the record's dynamic range or low bass (this may destroy records the quickest--and some early records were cut so dynamically that the cartridge/arm combos of the day couldn't play them)
5) Number of playings (though this is far from authoritative, I'll look at the center hole to see how worn down it is)
6) Cartridge used (eg played with a mono cartridge or cheap cartridge, etc)
7) Cleanliness
8) Was the LP played on a changer?
9) Type of material platter. I find some of today hard platters eg. metal or plastic, unless kept meticulously clean, will over time, press dirt into the side contacting the platter surface, esp. if use with a LP clamp/weight. This was a problem years ago with the Versa Dynamics table equipped with the vacuum hold down; Bicht had to implement a very thin pad between the LP and the platter surface so as to prevent damage to LP side not being played.

 

[jadis]

With all the possibilities of your favorite record wearing out in time, it's always nice, and wise, to keep a back up copy, whether in NM or sealed conditions. I've been practicing this since the 80s. Myles made a good point in observing the spindle wear condition. I use that to check how used an LP is, and it's not surprising that some record sellers on the net grade the spindle condition as well.

 

[jadis]

The Mysterious World of Bernard Herrmann. Decca Phase Four. I have 2 pressings, one has a Decca logo on the label and catalog number is PFS 4337. Another is a London logo on the label with cat. # of SPC- 21137. I compared the 2, which are actually both pressed in the UK, and found the PFS 4337 far superior in tonal quality than the SPC one. The brass instruments has incredible 'bite' and clarity. And overall, the transparency of the PFS is also more superior. The PFS is a hot pressing. I also have the PFS-Decca Logo of The Fantasy World of Bernard Herrmann. Awesome album.

 

[MylesBAstor]

The Mysterious World of Bernard Herrmann. Decca Phase Four. I have 2 pressings, one has a Decca logo on the label and catalog number is PFS 4337. Another is a London logo on the label with cat. # of SPC- 21137. I compared the 2, which are actually both pressed in the UK, and found the PFS 4337 far superior in tonal quality than the SPC one. The brass instruments has incredible 'bite' and clarity. And overall, the transparency of the PFS is also more superior. The PFS is a hot pressing. I also have the PFS-Decca Logo of The Fantasy World of Bernard Herrmann. Awesome album.

Yep the DPFS are pretty much, all things being equal, the better pressing. The same as the Decca classical. The Londons (Phase 4 and classical) all sound re-eq'd for the US market as were the Angel/EMI pressings. At least the Londons were better than the Angels, that were virtually unlistenable.

 

[garylkoh]

I've found the same.... the Phase Four pressings, even when played back in 2-channel sound far better than the London stereo versions. I would have thought it would have been the opposite since there is additional (?) 4-channel encoding. Anybody still have a Phase Four decoder to check out if these are better than the 4-channel SACDs?

I vaguely remember that I have one decent Angel pressing - will have to hunt through my Class A pile to see which one it is. Will do that when I have some more time.