Heavy Vinyl


I did a search and see that this hasn't been discussed in quite a while. Heavy vinyl is touted as being better for sound quality. I wonder about this. For a start, it is more susceptible to warps and particularly those short duration warps that really give the cartridge a hard time. Second, in my own listening across a fairly extensive record collection, I'm not hearing any particular sonic revelations from heavier records. I'm more inclined to believe that the critical factor is the quality of the vinyl  and the stampers used rather than the thickness of it. Other thoughts?

128x128yoyoyaya

other technical issues are involved, for simplicity:

Faster Speeds yield more physical material to record the content.

Tape: 3-3/4; 71/2; 15; 30 ips, each increase in speed yields twice the magnetic material to record the same amount of content, i.e. a violin note.

Tape: 1/4" tape: 4 track is 4 skinny tracks (less magnetic material). 1/4" tape 2 track has tracks twice the width of 4 tracks, thus twice the magnetic material to capture content.

1/2" tape; 1" wide tape, combined with the faster speeds: both factors combine to increase the magnetic material which increases recorded fidelity..

Physical Mechanisms: i.e. Cassettes, 1-7/8 ips (originally for dictation): the mechanism’s precision needs to progressively increase. Cassette speed and tape width stayed the same, it was the mechanism improvements (and cartridge improvements) that yielded acceptable suitability for music, along with improvements in the tapes formulation/material’s ability to more faithfully record and retain the content. Eventually 4 skinny tracks were successfully squished onto the same 1/8" width tape and same playback 1-7/8 IPS record/playback speed. Amazing.

8 track cartridges: take one apart, what a piece of crap. Originally made for commercials, discard when that commercial was kaput.

R2R machines: speeds involved, mechanism for 30 ips is no joke.

Back to 45rpm, likewise: it gives more material via it’s faster speed to capture the same content. Thus less content per lp side.

As for ’wider grooves’, that isn’t involved that I know of, 45rpm goes to the same phono stage/processing, and the same stylus tip is involved

think about RIAA equalization, which is what allows LP (long play). The Bass signal is ’electronically cut’ during recording to reduce the width of the bass grooves (thus more skinny grooves, thus more content per side), and the electronic cut is reversed via RIAA equalization, the bass is electronically boosted (back to it’s original pre-cut signal strength). Highs are electronically boosted, then RIAA electronically cuts the signal back to it’s original pre-boosted signal strength.

Now, bass and highs, properly restored, the signal is LINE LEVEL, (1 volt in the pre-stereo days), the amplifiers ready to receive AT LEAST 1 volt and boost LINE LEVEL signals. Pre-Amp’s Volume Controls allow more or less of the line level signal strength to get to the amp.

Original Ceramic Cartridges signal strength were stronger, and could go into any AUX input. My Vintage McIntosh Preamp has two phono inputs: one Phono Low (current MM cartridge signal strength); the other Phono High, to receive the higher signal a ceramic cartridge produces.

Modern content, like CDs output, i.e. their Line Level can be more, much more than 1 volt.

"Second Winter' was on 2 LP's - one side of one LP was blank."

larsman-

Yeah,  my original post didn't come out as it should have-"not exactly the same but that would be Second Winter." Half the time I'm posting, it's from my phone while standing in an airport line or packed in a shuttle bus.  Proofreading/editing sometimes not done!

I haven't noticed a correlation between a record's thickness and its' sound quality. 

In the early 1980s, Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs released a limited series of 200gm Ultra High Quality Recordings. One of the reported advantages of such heavy vinyl was that this greater mass of vinyl would absorb vibrations generated in the LP by the stylus as it travelled along the groove, decreasing the transmission of such vibrations back into the stylus where they would otherwise degrade the analogue signal.  These pressings, along with MFSL’s standard half-speed releases, utilized JVC’s proprietary vinyl.  Compared to the standard MFSL pressing, the UHQR of The Beatles’ “Sargent Pepper’s” (I’m fortunate to have both) is across-the-board better sounding.  Most notable is a striking increase in soundstage depth, this most appreciated on “Within You and Without You”.

Does such esoterica serve as a reason for current heavy vinyl pressings?  It doesn’t make sense that, in light of the Loudness Wars/overwhelming compression, most labels would consider this to be of importance, much less even be aware of such theories.  Save for the likes of Analogue Productions and such, it’s most certainly a cash grab.