LP's vs. 12" single versions

[Rab]

I am interested to hear other people's perception on the difference between LP's vs. 12" single versions of songs. Of course, we all know that usually, but not always the 12" version is longer, or perhaps not identical to the LP version. We also know that USUALLY....not always the 12" version has a "deeper imprint" resulting in better sound quality. Does anyone find that typically the LP version will sound just as good as the 12" version on even the most high fidelity systems? Is there an advantage for DJ "backqueing" with the 12" single? I have found that sometimes the record label makes the difference. For example, Debbie Jacobs, "Don't You Want My Love" from 1979 has the same version on 12" as the LP, (it's on MCA) I own both the 12" and the LP and both sound very impressive? Of course, one must also include, that the record industry probably makes more money off the 12" singles as well, marketing reasons. I'm curious about what others think....

[markydefad]

Hi Rab,



My first thought is that I really only notice the difference in LP pressings and 12inch versions when I try to mix from one to the other. I almost always have to lower the volume levels on the 12" cause the sound is so much more pronounced and overpowering compared to the previous cut. Mixing from LP to LP or 12" to 12" is usually much less techinically a challenge. Of course, it does vary from label to label.



Also, I've noticed most Imports have a stronger, more vibrant sound quality than domestic pressings--sometimes maybe "too much sound" (probably intended for the Club sound system?). I'm not a pro, but those are just my observations as a living room, tape-making amateur.



_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2002-04-03 14:58 ]</font>

[Bernie]

Putting aside the longer version and remixes,, I prefer the 12" over the LP for sound quality reasons. Since the 12" provides more space for the grooves to breath it will generally have better bass response, better overall dynamics and is easier to cue.



Marky, if mixing between 12"ers and LPs it's best to set your levels for the 12 and then bring up the LP to match.

[The Lord of Flatbush]

On 2002-04-03 15:22, Bernie wrote:

Putting aside the longer version and remixes,, I prefer the 12" over the LP for sound quality reasons. Since the 12" provides more space for the grooves to breath it will generally have better bass response, better overall dynamics and is easier to cue.



Marky, if mixing between 12"ers and LPs it's best to set your levels for the 12 and then bring up the LP to match.

That's what pre-production is all about when it comes to matching levels of volume between 12" Singles and LP cuts.



Most LP's are low in volume compared to 12" Singles. For example, most of the Solar Records (Shalimar, Whispers, Carrie Lucas, Lakeside and Dynasty) 12" Singles were pressed louder than the LP versions.



Most imports from other countries whose LP's and 12" Singles are pressed louder than both LP's and 12" Singles recorded in the United States.

[NickNack]

I really prefer the 12" over the lp, when they're pressed correctly. Otherwise, it's a waste of vinyl. The sound quality, especially 'back in the day', was far superior to the lp. When the industry was cutting these babies at 45rpm you could knock a crowd to their knees with bass response. Plus, the majority of the 12" singles use to contain only one song on either side so they were much easier to work with. IMO, a 12" 'single' with about four remixes on a side is giving me lp quality sound. The grooves are just as tight as the album.

[jim]

I remember when I first heard about the CD,I was telling a friend that there was a new type of disc coming out that would have the fidelity of a 12" with a long playtime and a small disc. (I believe that was 81 or 82)



As for me I have been an ALL CD man for over a decade,and have been getting access to many 12" versions of good songs on CD where they belong

[paul]

Technically speaking, the 12" especially at 45 rpm should be superior in sound quality as compared to lps. Some audiophile recordings are intentionally done at 45 rpm for that reason. So yes I prefer 12" vinyls dynamics and frequency response generally over the lp version.

[BrunoRepublic]

Does anyone find that typically the LP version will sound just as good as the 12" version on even the most high fidelity systems?

Assuming the 12" is cut louder, there will be a better signal-to-noise ratio, but then you run into another problem. As the groove gets closer to the center of the disc, the actual velocity decreases, thus reducing the headroom for higher frequencies. So the mastering engineer has to either lower the treble response from 10kHz up, or you get major groove distortion (especially with a cheaper cartridges/stylus).



If you have both the LP and 12" of "Le Spank"by Le Pamplemousse, you can hear this quite easily. Put on the 12", and play the first few bars. Now move the needle to near the end of the record. Notice how it sounds *much* duller towards the end?

Now try the same thing with the LP. First, you'll notice that it plays back at about half the volume. But it sounds just as bright at the end of the track as it does at the beginning. Granted, it's the first track on the side, but my point remains...



BTW, this is the reason for the phenomenon experienced at a club where almost every new track that the DJ mixes in seems so much brighter than the previous one.

[12incher]

interesting topic: I wonder if this is more relative to the quality or reputation of the label than anything else? I know of heard some off the wall 12 inch singles that haven't been too good. Also, I hear 45rpm has better quality ?

[Forrrce]

interesting topic: I wonder if this is more relative to the quality or reputation of the label than anything else? I know of heard some off the wall 12 inch singles that haven't been too good. Also, I hear 45rpm has better quality ?

The 'perfect' 12" is cut at 45 rpm speed, single-sided and ideally doesn't play too near the label. Audiophile labels have implemented this approach for LPs, on occasion. A good example is Miles Davis's 'Kind Of Blue', which I have as a 4x12" (45) set, by Specialty records.

[BrunoRepublic]

The 'perfect' 12" is cut at 45 rpm speed, single-sided and ideally doesn't play too near the label.

I understand the reasoning behind all that, except for the single-sided part... why would that make a difference? For tapes that's one thing, but vinyl...?

[Forrrce]

The 'perfect' 12" is cut at 45 rpm speed, single-sided and ideally doesn't play too near the label.

I understand the reasoning behind all that, except for the single-sided part... why would that make a difference? For tapes that's one thing, but vinyl...?

This was put forward as a quote, though I've set myself up here. There are supposed to be drawbacks to double-sided vinyl, though we really are getting into the realms of esoterica. If it's really about sonic difference, I don't think it's audible to the human ear.

[Bernie]

The 'perfect' 12" is cut at 45 rpm speed, single-sided and ideally doesn't play too near the label.

Wow, I feel like I'm back in the 70s discussing this. The reason for not pressing on both sides was that the imprint of grooves from one side would "theoretically" distort the grooves/sound on the other.

BTW: I will move this post to the Vinyl category a little later tonight.

[Forrrce]

Wow, I feel like I'm back in the 70s discussing this. The reason for not pressing on both sides was that the imprint of grooves from one side would "theoretically" distort the grooves/sound on the other.

Fantastic, Bernie.
I knew I'd heard of a 'con' but for the life of me, couldn't recall what it was; though any theory was going to sound at least slightly bonkers! :lol:

[MAN]

I noticed another thing, the more songs you got on vinyl side the dull sound you get , and the less songs you got in a side the good sound you get, and that's why mostly all the compilation vinyl in about 10 songs each side sound dull and low volume than the LP's that usually contains 4 or 5 or 6 songs or the 12" or even the 7" , and it seems that the much space between groove gives much better sound than the tight one, is that right, refer to your compilation vinyl collections and tell me if you notice this :o

[K-Bee]

You're absolutely right about this MAN. I remember in the early 90s when CD's started to take over, but the record companies still tried to cram all the tracks into the LP's as well, resulting in LP's with 6-7 songs on each side.
Sadly the sound quality suffered a lot in the process.

[kaliffen]

interesting topic: I wonder if this is more relative to the quality or reputation of the label than anything else? I know of heard some off the wall 12 inch singles that haven't been too good. Also, I hear 45rpm has better quality ?

The 'perfect' 12" is cut at 45 rpm speed, single-sided and ideally doesn't play too near the label. Audiophile labels have implemented this approach for LPs, on occasion. A good example is Miles Davis's 'Kind Of Blue', which I have as a 4x12" (45) set, by Specialty records.

The perfect 12 being a 45 rpm record can only be in theory.
No european (where all 12" were 45 rpm) have the loudness of a Equal US 33 rpm copy. Furthermore the vinyl quality has always been much better on US records.
However there are a few US 45 rpms that comes to mind as good but not amazingly loud and clear.
Yaz(oo) Situation and the Megatone catalogue.

Ill prefer a thick heavy US copy any day at any speed for that matter.
US readers can only be greatfull for not being raised on German ALSDORF pressings with sucky sound and really BAD vinyl quality.

[Sami M]

Yes, the European pressings are worse than the US, I agree. The sound is also brighter and somehow thinner, and the vinyl is very often lighter than US.

I just heard a claim that the fact on which stage the vinyl was pressed affects it's sound quality, that is the last copies sound crab compared to the first ones :o Since it's almost impossible to know the pressing order of the copies, this sounds very dull. Any more info or experience on this? Did they sometimes kept the amounts pressed so low, that this would not occur?

[BrunoRepublic]

I'm surprised to hear anyone putting down German pressings. In my experience, they are among the very finest ever made. I prize my German copies of Brass Construction I, Don Ray's Garden Of Love, and my 12" of the Ritchie Family's Bad Reputation. Perhaps some small German labels were crummy, but all the ones I've heard are fantastic.

German pressings are often sought out by collectors for their superior sonics. In addition to decent mastering, the German labels often took the time to get the right tapes when nobody else could be bothered. For example, only Germany ever put out the true stereo mix of The Beatles' "Magical Mystery Tour" on vinyl, or the uncompressed stereo mix of "Please Please Me". These records go for pretty big bucks now.

I own several Berlin-school electronic LPs, and the vinyl is *vastly* superior to anything we had over here. UK pressings vary, with some labels (like Pye) piling on excessive compression, but others such as EMI, are fantastic. Compare the sonics of any UK PSB 12" with against the North American copies; the UK wins every time. Clearer and cleaner. The vinyl was sometimes thin, but it is much sturdier and less prone to warping. I can't tell you how many domestic records I've bought brand-new that were almost unplayably warped.

The lower velocity of 33 means that the treble must be reduced and/or there will be greater inner-groove distortion. A 45 RPM disc can be cut louder than a 33, simply because you need a faster speed to accommodate louder signals before distortion kicks in. I'd pick 45 RPM over 33 any day.

[Sami M]

I only know what I hear, and decades of comaprison with Germany, British, Holland and US made records suggests that sound is usually more pleasent on the US ones. I know it is kind of odd, becouse the european ones are usually on 45 rpm, which should mean better better sound quality. However, the dynamics and overall sound image usually sound better on the US pressings. It may well be that high tones are better on the german pressings, becouse to my ear they sound kind of thin. On the other hand I have never been keen to hights but bass :)

[efunk_adelic]

I believe in 90% of the cases I like the 12" at 45rpm over the 33 1/3 speed.... the solar 12" singles sound way better than the LP versions... maybe they did this on purpose so that you'd buy both.


my favorite sounding 12" at 45rpm

Hall & Oates - I Can't Go For That (UK)
Voyage - Souvenirs (US)
Foxy - Get Off (US)


there are many many others....

btw... those UK 12" from the early 80's are top shelf! I love the way they are cut... :D

[Forrrce]

my favorite sounding 12" at 45rpm
Hall & Oates - I Can't Go For That (UK)
there are many many others....

btw... those UK 12" from the early 80's are top shelf! I love the way they are cut... :D

Quite surprised you think this sounds good - I don't have this anymore (I have an American one) but I bought it new at the time and thought it sounded truly awful - distorted and lacking in tops.

UK 12"s in those days were miles apart from their US counterparts, in terms of EQing. US 12"s (especially indies) usually had (sometimes much) less top and more mid-to-bottom.

Some titles that always come to mind when I think of the difference, are tracks I bought on UK first, then found the US ones later in second hand shops:

Strikers 'Body Music' (UK Epic)/(Prelude - very dull and flat)
Rod 'Just Keep On Walking'(Creole UK)/(Prelude - quite dull
in comparison)
Digital Underground 'Doowutchyalike' (Euro BCM)/(Tommy Boy - a completely different record; like AM radio in comparison to BCM's 'FM')

[QUINNY]

Just my two cents.
All things being equal, a 45 RPM record will nearly always sound better than a 33, especially on a sensible 6 minutes or less length. 45's will nearly always be slightly quieter because the grooves can't be cut so wide. Both speeds have their limitations and advantages, but I always thought UK pressings sounded sharper than U.S. ones and I reckon much of that was down to the speed.
Subjectively, if you're a bass freak you'll go for U.S. but nobody can deny that objectively UK/European vinyl sounded better overall.

[efunk_adelic]

I'm not sure which single you are talking about Forrrce... I assume the Hall & Oates.... I like the fact that the Bass was overwelmed.... and you could use the equalizer to adjust... I like having that option when playing it thru a mix... I wonder if that makes sense to you??? All I remember was when I first played that in the clubs... the U.S. version didn't get the response that I wanted.... When my 12" UK version came in from mail order, the attitude on the floor changed and I was able to play it over an 8 week period.

[originalbigm]

I've been reading this thread along with other similar threads as to the technical and audio attributes of disco music and all make valid points and arguments.However I tend to think we lose sight of the fact that most of this music was produced for the dancefloor without audiophile consideration.This music was played in different venues from small intimate clubs to large cavernous venues on powerful sound systems with all types of ambient noise to contend with.DJ's had to constantly eq their systems to deal with the issues of not enough hi-end or too much/too little bass.Record companies were more interested in selling the product which had to at best sound reasonable on the majority of home and car systems of the day.The common brands of the day were Pioneer,Marantz,Fischer,Sansui not exactly what I would consider audiophile components.Ceramic(OOOOOH!) cartridges were still very common and belt drive turntables without pitch,anti-skate or tonearm weight adjustments were the norm.Spending $100 bucks for a speaker system was considered splurging.Cerwin Vega was the standard of the day for bottom end.Ho-Hum!
I'd suggest to you that the majority of consumers in the seventies had budget systems that were incapable of highlighting the technical shortcomings of a record and that in a club where songs were being pumped out in excess of a 1000 watts and 110db the only thing that mattered was can I feel the music.I mean after an hour in a club your eardrums were fatigued to the point that you had difficulty
differentiating marginally bad sound from good.DJ's had it worse as their entire night consisted of balancing hearing in one ear of the headphone sound and the other ear listening to the actual system sound and trying to get a proper balance.I recall that when I observed EQ's in different clubs in the early days they all tended to have a common configuration.Boost the bottom end from 100-600hz.Flatten or depress the midrange 1000-6000hz and a gradual increasing of the high end 8000-12000hz.I call it the S curve.
With the advances in sound technology today we have become more aware of sound quality and are certainly more discerning as consumers.
I'm sure that audiophiles back in the day didn't have a whole lot of disco music in their collections to say the least.JMO