[rajacat]

Vinyl LP Frenzy Brings Record-Pressing Machines Back to Life
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/15/business/media/a-vinyl-lp-frenzy-brings-record-pressing-machines-back-to-life.html?ribbon-ad-idx=4&src=me&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Most%20Emailed&pgtype=article

[poseidonsvoice]

Yes, thanks for the link. Cool that it is in a mainstream press like NY Times. Read also the recent blurb that Mike Fremer wrote in the latest October 2015 Stereophile regarding naysayers of the vinyl revival, etc...it's an interesting read as well.


Best,
Anand.

[GentleBender]

Very interesting article. I have experience multiple delays waiting for some of my favorite artists to release on vinyl. At least I have Spotify to stream while I wait. If I like the band enough, I will also purchase on CD.

[mgsboedmisodpc2]

I have read that certain chemicals needed within the record making process were no longer being produced by Dow Chemicals and as such new records are inferior today.  Has the chemical makeup of the record changed?

[FullRangeMan]

I have read that certain chemicals needed within the record making process were no longer being produced by Dow Chemicals and as such new records are inferior today.  Has the chemical makeup of the record changed?

In my country at the 1970s the durability of LPs was very low, about 10 auditions and the noises was too high.
Seems today situation are worse.

[Scottdazzle]

I have read that certain chemicals needed within the record making process were no longer being produced by Dow Chemicals and as such new records are inferior today.  Has the chemical makeup of the record changed?

My experience has been completely the opposite. The average quality of the new records I've purchased in the past five years is vastly superior to what it was 30 years ago. Quieter vinyl, flatter, and thicker generally than they used to be.

[SteveFord]

I'm with Scottdazzle as the records I've been buying over the past few years have all been great (aside from one title and it looks like the entire run was screwed up as the replacement copy was the exact same).
It's really great to see vinyl going strong.

[vinyl_guy]

My experience has been completely the opposite. The average quality of the new records I've purchased in the past five years is vastly superior to what it was 30 years ago. Quieter vinyl, flatter, and thicker generally than they used to be.

THIS! I have found the quality to be extremely good and consistent, especially from RTI & QRP. URP in Nashville has not been as consistent.

[charmerci]

Yes, thanks for the link. Cool that it is in a mainstream press like NY Times. Read also the recent blurb that Mike Fremer wrote in the latest October 2015 Stereophile regarding naysayers of the vinyl revival, etc...it's an interesting read as well.


Best,
Anand.

NYT does quite a bit of technology every weekend. I posted an older NYT's article link here on the vinyl revival about 2 or 3 years ago.

[FullRangeMan]

NYT does quite a bit of technology every weekend. I posted an older NYT's article link here on the vinyl revival about 2 or 3 years ago.

Looks pay merchandising to me, someone is paying.

[STEREOmole]

I always find news like this, to be a mixed bag.  Yeah, it's great that vinyl is gaining popularity, but it's bad for independent artists that are looking to get records pressed inexpensively, and in a timely manner.

I just got two EPs pressed about 6 months ago (it was a 6 month wait to complete manufacturing).  Now the pressing plant is refusing business from anyone that hasn't ordered in the past, and the wait times are even longer.

...then there are the big labels jumping on the bandwagon and releasing CDs from the 90's-2000's on vinyl that were pure crap to begin with, along with the latest movie soundtracks.  Does anyone really want to listen to the Twilight soundtrack on LP?  These releases are pushing out the little guys that want to make a short run of vinyl for their new original music.

[neobop]

My experience has been completely the opposite. The average quality of the new records I've purchased in the past five years is vastly superior to what it was 30 years ago. Quieter vinyl, flatter, and thicker generally than they used to be.

I think that's true except reissue SQ is often inferior.  Maybe it's genre specific, but regular Blue Note or OJC reissues generally don't have the SQ of originals. 

I believe DuPont no longer makes a chemical used to stabilize vinyl.  Maybe that's why they're thicker today?
neo

[jsaliga]

I think that's true except reissue SQ is often inferior.  Maybe it's genre specific, but regular Blue Note or OJC reissues generally don't have the SQ of originals. 

I bought scads of Blue Note and OJC reissues on vinyl about 6 or 7 years ago for $10 each from SoundStage Direct.  I certainly wouldn't judge all reissues by these as the quality is very uneven.  I sent a lot of them back because of pressing problems and Seth got to the point where he didn't want to sell me any more.  Which is ok because I didn't want to buy any more of them.

Unfortunately in this economy if you want top shelf quality then you have to be prepared to pay for it.  I have acquired virtually the entire Analogue Productions and Music Matters Blue Note reissue catalog on 45RPM 180g vinyl.  They compare very favorably to the original Blue Note pressings that I happen to own (about 40 of them).  They are not cheap at $50 a pop, but just try find all of those original Blue Notes in minty shape and see what they cost you, assuming you can find a lot of those LPs in any playable shape.  Ditto for Speakers Corner and Original Recordings Group.  These projects get handed off to respected mastering houses and for the most part they have done a respectable job.

--Jerome

[mgsboedmisodpc2]

Below find som quotes from articles about the history of the LP record.
************
This first successful LP record was developed by Columbia Records, under the direction of Dr. Peter Goldmark, a Hungarian-born electrical engineer in his late thirties who had been delegated the task of developing a practical slow-speed microgroove record with a team of co-workers and Bill Bachman, Columbia’s research director.[4] The team’s goal was to find a way to increase the number of grooves per record without injuring the sound quality of the record. Goldmark also spent time improving the duplicating techniques for the new records because he had been appalled by the lack of concern for foreign particles introduced during this process when he had visited the Columbia Record plant. He understood that these new microgroove records could produce recordings that had less background noise if they were created in cleaner recording rooms.[5] On Friday June 21, 1948, Columbia Records held a press conference at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City to unveil their new technology which was a non-breakable, 12-inch, microgroove disc that had a playing time of twenty-three minutes per side.[6]
*********

"The sound quality and durability of vinyl music records is highly dependent on the quality of the vinyl. During the early 1970s, as a cost-cutting move towards use of lightweight, flexible vinyl pressings, much of the industry adopted a technique of reducing the thickness and quality of vinyl used in mass-market manufacturing, marketed by RCA Victor as the "Dynaflex" (125 g/m²) process, considered inferior by most record collectors. Most vinyl records are pressed on recycled vinyl.

New "virgin" or "heavy" (180-220 g/m²) vinyl is commonly used for modern "audiophile" vinyl releases in all genres. Many collectors prefer to have 180 g/m² vinyl albums, and they have been reported to have a better sound than normal vinyl. These albums tend to withstand the deformation caused by normal play better than regular vinyl180 g/m² vinyl is more expensive to produce and requires higher-quality manufacturing processes than regular vinyl.

Since most vinyl records are from recycled plastic, impurities can be accumulated in the record, causing a brand new album to have audio artifacts like clicks and pops. Virgin vinyl means that the album is not from recycled plastic, and will theoretically be devoid of the possible impurities of recycled plastic. In practice, this depends on the manufacturer's quality control."

******************
During the early 1970s, a cost-cutting move towards use of lightweight, flexible vinyl pressings. Marketed by RCA Victor as the Dynaflex process, much of the industry adopted a technique of reducing the thickness and quality of vinyl used in mass-market manufacturing. In many cases, this included using "regrind" vinyl as a means of cutting manufacturing costs.
*************
http://www.vinyl-record.co.uk/Pages/VinylRecordHistory.htm