180 gram?

Lots of discussion if you do a search. Consensus seems to be that it's highly variable due to differences in QA/QC, provenance of the master, vinyl formula, etc, etc. A member with a lot of knowledge about polymers posted recently that one could even make an argument that the thicker LPs are MORE likely to warp.

Prior we didn't give a fluke about record weight, but lots of good quality pressings especially classical had been on heavy vinyl reaching 200g. What I noticed that noise floor on heavy vinyl is lower which is the crucial factor for classical music. For R&R it's all subjective and more would depend on mastering quality.
For me etched letters RL next to printed STERLING on the dead wax is more preferable than 180g.

Thanks Czarivey,
could you elaborate a little on this "RL" Sterling?

RL stands for Robert Ludwig recording engineer. Sterling denotes where it was pressed and that it is an original pressing.

The original concept for a 180 or 200 gram record was to cut a deeper groove into the vinyl. The result was better dynamics and sonics being reproduced by the stylus/cart. These LPs were marketed as "audiophile" recordings and often did sound superior than the mass-produced vinyl runs.

Today, 180 gram is basically a marketing term for the new generation of vinyl being produced and the new wave of vinyl buyers; "if its thicker and heavier, then it must sound better."

Czarivey makes a good point in that the quality pressings are still dependent on the engineering and the record cutting process. There are still excellent records being released by a few top cutting plants. There are also many 180 LPs being released with defects due to poor quality control and the push to get the product to market.

This is the thread previously mentioned regarding 180g warped records...
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1427751926&openflup&6&4#6

I thought the idea behind thicker pressings was less resonant? It is a shame when you purchase a thicker lp and it comes in warped, which happens a lot. I'll have to say that quite a few of my best sounding lps are the thin sort, some are almost like "dynaflex" thin.

I would not replace an older, good-sounding pressing with a 180-gram pressing just for the weight. The quality of any record depends on many factors and weight is only one. I wouldn't even think about it.

While RL certainly stands for Robert Ludwig,he is not a recording engineer.He is a mastering engineer.Sterling does not press records they are a mastering service.

1->same record
8-> Profit x 8
0-> zero improvement

Lee Hulko is another name to look for in the dead wax. Shown as LH. I find very little correlation between vinyl "weight" and sonics. Some of the CBS stuff from the mid '70s is on flimsy vinyl and sounds great. Ditto some of the UK RCA's from that era. So much depends on the source material, copy used for mastering, the mastering and country to country variations even using the "same" mastering, including pressing plants, it is a small factor. Remember how much difficulty Classic Records had when they went to 200 grams and changed the profile of the record? Lot's of quality problems for a while.

Classic Records 200g reissues are really poor compared to most of originals.