THE GREAT 33 OR 45 for 12" DEBATE

[disco-disc]

Did we ever get a consensus on the 33 and a 1/3 rd Versus 45 RPM preference ..this WAS a BIG deal BITD (see Billboard) ...the purists wanted 33/1/3 for the easability of 12" record playing, but I am sure I read that 45's were preffered by DJ's for SINGLE use........I think 33 would have been a better playback speed, as it would have more 'room' to sonically reproduce...but I am NOT a sound expert, ...ANY EXPERT VIEWS PLEASE

[QUINNY]

Originally Posted by starsky

Did we ever get a consensus on the 33 and a 1/3 rd Versus 45 RPM preference ..this WAS a BIG deal BITD (see Billboard) ...the purists wanted 33/1/3 for the easability of 12" record playing, but I am sure I read that 45's were preffered by DJ's for SINGLE use........I think 33 would have been a better playback speed, as it would have more 'room' to sonically reproduce...but I am NOT a sound expert, ...ANY EXPERT VIEWS PLEASE

For a record of less than 7 or 8 minutes I personally think that 45 rpm would be better, cos the grooves could still be cut at loud volume and the increased speed would allow for a higher sonic quality (think 71/2 i.p.s. tape versus 15 i.p.s. tape - the stylus is passing the variations in the groove walls and floor at a much higher velocity).

Once you get to 8/9 minutes and above the advantages a 45 has over 331/3 record become less evident due to the grooves being much tighter so that above 10 minutes or so a 331/3 record is better.

Almost invariably, US 12" at the lower speed had a less well defined top end
(maybe down to differing tape playback standards in the US too) and almost always sounded rather muddy compared to the vast majority of UK pressings which could, on the flipside of this particular coin, be accused of sounding rather harsh.

It could be said that UK pressings with their 45 rpm standard were closer to the original sound on tape, than US pressings were. Personally, I generally preferred UK pressings as they sounded more crisp.

[disco-disc]

Q, Thanks for taking the time to reply (BTW..my other posts to/about you are in jest )

I do agree, whilst NOT technically competent on sound (yet), I did think that listening to USA 33 12's ..they did NOT sound as good as 45's on 12.....I hope your reply is scientifically or Anthropologically (?)based, as I would agree with you,.. purely from listening, without understanding the reasons why.
That is why we flocked to disco's,,,,,,,,,,,, THE DJ's did the thinking for us and we just reacted and FEDBACK the j' ne sai que (?) about a record ?


Jeez I wish I was clever !!!!!!!

[QUINNY]

Originally Posted by starsky

Q, Thanks for taking the time to reply (BTW..my other posts to/about you are in jest )

I do agree, whilst NOT technically competent on sound (yet), I did think that listening to USA 33 12's ..they did NOT sound as good as 45's on 12.....I hope your reply is scientifically or Anthropologically (?)based, as I would agree with you,.. purely from listening, without understanding the reasons why.
That is why we flocked to disco's,,,,,,,,,,,, THE DJ's did the thinking for us and we just reacted and FEDBACK the j' ne sai que (?) about a record ?


Jeez I wish I was clever !!!!!!!

Graham Start is the one person here who gets rather technical about such things, but 'tis sure that UK 45 rpm 12"ers actually sounded more like the master tape. THINK ANALOGUE VERSUS DIGITAL the reason people like analogue is due to its limitations (warm sound vs. brittle sound), not down to its superior ability to faithfully reproduce a master tape. Quite frankly, there were so many variables that could affect a pressing's sonic quality, it's a wonder that they were generally consistant, but they were.

[KoolChris]

Originally Posted by QUINNY

Almost invariably, US 12" at the lower speed had a less well defined top end
(maybe down to differing tape playback standards in the US too) and almost always sounded rather muddy compared to the vast majority of UK pressings which could, on the flipside of this particular coin, be accused of sounding rather harsh.

It could be said that UK pressings with their 45 rpm standard were closer to the original sound on tape, than US pressings were. Personally, I generally preferred UK pressings as they sounded more crisp.

Sorry to butt into your series of online dialogs, Starsky & Hu...Quinny, but the above exchange has found me deeply surprised, even shocked!!!!! Can anybody, let alone 2 people, have had good enough experiences with British vinyl, to consider it better than any other country's, and more shocking still, American pressings? Well, I only had access to US pressings at the time the originals were being released, and only started accessing UK-pressed vinyl when I moved to Europe, which meant they were mostly second-hand (but not always); and, in my experience, UK releases have consistentlyy been of incredibly crappy quality, compared to US-made vinyl. I've always found them to be thinner, flimsier, and mostly, of incredibly bad sound quality, even when they looked mint... I now always steer clear from them, because I've grown to know what to expect, after having been burnt quite a few times in my early years of record-collecting.

That's why I'm so surprised to read both of you guys' opinion on the subject. I'll never buy a vinyl from a major's UK subsidiary, because I know in advance the sound'll be crap, and have to end up serving as a giant coaster, a frisbee, or a coke platter. Slip'n'Slide has been good to me though, repeatedly. But that's been the only counterexample. Sorry to insist, but the UK has been the only country to consistently provide me with crap sounding records. Even countries like France, Germany, Brasil (!), and Israel manage to produce decent quality vinyl.

Am I the only one to have been cursed with "the Revenge of the evil crap Brit records"?

[Thereza bizarre]

Probably!.

I gat a lat of great british vinyl and it is as good as american vinyl.
but it is swings and roundabouts, and depends on a lot of things!. where the thing was pressed in the first place how it was pressed and what was the master etc.

i have had crappy american pressings but i am not going to tar the whole show with one limp brush .

[QUINNY]

KoolChris: You surprise me with your comments. We obviously have different ears. In theory, at least, there is NO WAY that a 33 rpm 12" of less than 7 minutes or so can sound as good as a 45 rpm 12"....all other things being equal. Physics dictate so. Time for a long needed syringe!

Thereza Bizarre: I'd always thought my brush to be rather stiff.

[Thereza bizarre]

Quinny minny nine peas in pinny!......

[disco-disc]

Hey KK , the post was a request for info./feelings...NOT TO SLAG OFF USA records.
I have both UK and USA discs and the UK secondhand are usually of poorer quality - because the owners did not look after them, not specifically because of the pressing.
The USA discs are great, but I did find early on that the UK NEW discs sounded fresher to my ears, probably as Q explained...
I was more interested in the differences in the 33 1/3 Vs 45 RPM debate, as this WAS A BIG ISSUE BITD with DJ's in USA, etc...

[ashley_k]

The great 45 rpm 12 inch v. 33 1/3 rpm 12 inch debate:

Well from a technical point of view I would think that a perfectly mastered/pressed 45 rpm 12 inch would have a better sound quality than a perfectly mastered/pressed 33 1/3 rpm 12 inch, but in the real world - if you have a 45 rpm 12 inch that has a fault like hiss, this hiss will be at an higher pitch as it’s being played at a faster speed than it would be on a 33 1/3 12 inch and so more noticeable, if you have another fault like a slight scratch in the record on a 45 rpm 12 inch it’s going to be coming around more often at a faster speed, so in reality you are often better of with a 33 1/3 12 inch.


The not so great UK v. US 12 inches debate:

Quite obviously all US 12 inch pressings have a vastly superior sound quality to them, one only has to listen to a few pressings from the Trax Record label to hear such outstanding examples of good sounding pressings, combined with such amazing quality control that you would be hard pushed to find a UK pressing to match it – but on a more serious note, you can find good and bad pressings from both the US and the UK it depends a lot on the record company’s overall quality control, take for instance US TK Records they did not always manage to have the highest quality control, the records were independently pressed by TK in the US at probably several pressing plant locations, in the UK a lot of the TK 12 inch records were pressed by CBS/Epic in one location which generally had a very high quality control, so the UK 12 inch pressings were usually of a better overall quality than the US TK pressings, when bought new at the time of release.

A perfectly mastered/pressed CBS/Epic record produced between say 1977-1986 in the UK is as good as (and in sum cases better than) the US CBS/Columbia/Epic pressings, unfortunately in the UK the CBS/Epic records were housed in lighter weight packaging that gives the record less long term protection against wear and tear (and they also had no shrink wrapping).

The quality of UK pressing certainly went down hill in the late 80s with the introduction of the CD in the mid 80s, as record companies started to concentrated on CDs rather than vinyl, they also started to out source the production of vinyl to independent pressing plants and also based this out sourcing more on the cost of the pressing, rather than the quality of the pressings.
It should also be noted that a lot of the equipment used in pressing plants now days and over the last 10-15 years is now very old and in some cases worn out, a lot of independent pressing plants bought second hand pressing equipment from the major record label pressing plants as they closed down – it was not a good day for UK vinyl when the CBS/Epic pressing plant closed.
The general quality control of vinyl pressings has definitely gone down over the years in the UK and US, although you can still get quality pressing produced if you try hard enough.

If I’m buying a second hand record I’d probably go for a US 12 inch first mainly because the packaging is sturdier and the records condition is usually better because of this, finding good condition UK 12 inches can be hard sometimes – for a number of reasons such as smaller quantity of records being produced for the UK market, this means that not as many good condition or un-played records are in circulation, also the less good UK packaging will not have protected the records over the years, or for that matter in second hand record shops.

[Ysl]

For me, UK pressing has always been of poor quality, US was (I'm talking about 70's/80's pressing) most of the time of higher quality.

Dutch and German were fine, French were to avoid

One exception is an Alvin Fields 1981 LP on A&M uk pressing wich sound as good as US pressing

And my best sounding LP is T-Connection 1982 "Pure and Natural" US pressing

For the 12", as most of the US were 33 1/3, that's the speed that sounded better for me compared to european 45 rpm

Ysl

[disco-disc]

Ashley, a good argument there, I WOULD LIKE GREG W TO REPLY ON THIS SUBJECT IF HE SEES IT ...

I too know that the packaging of UK stuff is abysmal...the quality of the inner sleves, and especially the outer cover was usually much inferior to USA pressings...however, the vinyl...when presssed on thick vinyl is better I feel...However, most discs in UK were seemingly pressed on flimsy vinyl weight which is reflected by the USA buyers here ??

N.B. There was an oil shortage at the time, which had a BIG impact on the quality of vinyl labels were prepared to buy ???

BTW does anyone have any tape that reairs the WHITE promo covers of USA discs....I would like to trepair my split seams, and if anyone knows of a tape that does this to a similar standard I would be grateful for a supplier..
IT IS ONLY RIGHT THAT THE 'GOLD~DUST' IS MAINTAINED IN THE BEST POSSIBLE CONDITION !!!!

[ashley_k]

I think their are just too many factors to take into account when trying to decide if one pressing is better than another.

Personally I just try and get the best copy of a record US or UK, etc., any pressing that has right mix, the best eq. mastering, cutting, etc., and then its down to the pressing plants quality control, I usually go for a US copy first for the sturdier sleeves, but I’m not really that bothered about the country of origin that much.

Because I really have nothing better to do, I have compared the UK and US pressings of E. W. & F. “Boogie Wonderland” 12 inch and the test results from the laboratory (otherwise know as the kitchen scales) are as follows:

UK 12 inch – E. W. & F. “Boogie Wonderland”
112g – weight of vinyl record
72g – weight of cover and inner sleeve
184g – Total weight of record plus cover and inner sleeve

US 12 inch – E. W. & F. “Boogie Wonderland”
112g – weight of vinyl record
97g – weight of cover and inner sleeve*
209g – Total vinyl weight of record plus cover and inner sleeve*

Summary of test results: In this particular case the vinyl weight of the UK and US pressing are the same, the US pressings cover and inner sleeve are heavier by 25g.

*US test record had no shrink wrapping.