Reprints in vinyl 180 grams and similar.

It was a bit that I wanted to say some things about the subject of this post and, given that the record companies are making me angry, today is the right day. Yesterday I wanted to post my Spirit vinyl - 12 Dreams Of Dr. Sardonicus - (Epic) - 1970 but I gave up because it seems that even the record companies, the more they have money, the more careful are that don't drop a coin in the manhole .. ., since Pink Floyd (band that I love until 1979 but of which I avoid their every thing realized in the last 40 years), they made me take away The Dark Side Of The Moon (what a nuisance my poor vinyl rip can give to millionaires people ...)  and Warner instead, finally, to provide a reprint, banned me - Sailor - Checkpoint - (Epic) - 1977 (only 750 views on the blog ...) and so I don't want any problems with my cloud.
I respect the artists and never post anything just produced, but here we are talking about records released over 40 years ago !!!
Good, indeed bad, and then I pass to the judgment on the products in object, premising that a giant of the music as Greg Lake asserted that the ideal were 140 grams, while Robert Fripp, another giant, reprints the King Crimson to 200 grams.
In my humble opinion the problem is not the weight but the material they use, in fact it is not understandable how vinyls that are even 50 years old played several times and weigh only a few tens of grams, sound better and do not ruin exponentially every time that you listen to it ... as happens with those of this millennium, with a progressive deterioration of the quality of production year after year.
When I rip my old vinyls I have to clean only small imperfections, while the new ones are a disaster with often defects that cannot be repaired without ruining everything or, even, not identifiable in the lineage.
Since I am convinced that the "POWERFUL" are kidding us about everything, I would like that if any of the friends who frequent the blog encountered my same problem, or doesn't find it (lucky him) he would give me his opinion.
You would do me a really welcome thing, even if of contrary opinion, I'm pissed off black ... but I'm not touchy.
Because of the aforementioned problems with the labels, I'm really undecided whether to post again or finish this weekend with Tommyknockers - Caught Dead Inside - 1990.

rawkin 'dog


  1. I am largely in agreement! The King Crimson stuff at 200grams had all kinds of noise on many, but not all copies, as I found when I exchanged some of those titles and got better copies. The Yes 180g reissues from Atlantic, better. I do tend to think that at the point of 120 or 140 grams But my first American pressing

  2. I do tend to think that the most benefit that can be gotten from vinyl weight tops out at 120 or 140grams. But can't make up for poor quality materials or a bad pressing; slapping some music on heavy vinyl is not a guarantee of good sound. My first American pressing of Are You Experienced is cleaner sounding and has more presence than any other record in my collection.

  3. remember Dynaflex from the mid 70ies, these very thin albums? i have a few by Lou Reed, Jefferson Airplane, they (still) sound better than most 4Menwithbeards releases. Really! and 180 gram or 140, it is such a hoax. And yes, vinyl these days is very bad material. Few years ago Blue Note celebrated their 75th birthday with a series of vinyl reissues. You should think that they wanted to give us their best vinyl but no. I bought a few and they had a lot of surface noise and crackles (Cecil Taylor's Unit Structures for one).

    Best wishes from Holland! - and dont believe the hype!

  4. My best wishes to you too Anônimo!


Postar um comentário