# Vinyl question, new qotsa record



## Astroman86 (May 6, 2010)

Hey I guess Im kinda new to collecting records. Been buying them for over a year now, mostly used but some new.
I got the new queens of the stoneage album on vinyl and its a 33. But I have to set my record player's speed to 45 for it to play properly.

So I guess I'm wondering why. Can they cram better sound quality on a record if you have to play it faster? How common is this?

Thanks.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

edit: oops, mis read your question. i've never had to play a record at a different speed than indicated. how do you know it's supposed to be a 33?


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

blam said:


> edit: oops, mis read your question. i've never had to play a record at a different speed than indicated. how do you know it's supposed to be a 33?


It's not. It's just the same size as your usual 33, but they've cut it at 45. It's sold as a 45rpm album.

The reason, Astroman86, is like you thought. More quality. with thicker vinyl, they spaced the album out over 4 sides and cut deeper grooves. Deeper grooves = more info for the needle to pick up. A lot of newer vinyl is coming out as 4 sides on 10" or 12" wax at 150 or 180grams. The 180 gram stuff is the really top-notch quality stuff. Your standard 33 1/3 record from the 70's was 120 or 125 grams (or something like that).


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

It works identically to mag tape: less stuff per unit of space = better sound. Faster speed = less stuff per unit space.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

hollowbody said:


> A lot of newer vinyl is coming out as 4 sides on 10" or 12" wax at 150 or 180grams. The 180 gram stuff is the really top-notch quality stuff. Your standard 33 1/3 record from the 70's was 120 or 125 grams (or something like that).


I've noticed this with lots of the stuff I am buying these days.


----------



## Astroman86 (May 6, 2010)

fast replies. thanks hollowbody.

nice to get educated


----------



## hardasmum (Apr 23, 2008)

hollowbody said:


> blam said:
> 
> 
> > edit: oops, mis read your question. i've never had to play a record at a different speed than indicated. how do you know it's supposed to be a 33?
> ...


That is why so many disco / 80's dance remixes were released on a 12" record to be played at 45rpm. MORE BASS for the dancing!


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

Great album BTW - it's shaping up to be a QOTSA classic. Stands up to many repeated spins quite nicely. Homme has some great tones, great songwriting, arrangements and production on this one.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

hollowbody said:


> It's not. It's just the same size as your usual 33, but they've cut it at 45. It's sold as a 45rpm album.
> 
> The reason, Astroman86, is like you thought. More quality. with thicker vinyl, they spaced the album out over 4 sides and cut deeper grooves. Deeper grooves = more info for the needle to pick up. A lot of newer vinyl is coming out as 4 sides on 10" or 12" wax at 150 or 180grams. The 180 gram stuff is the really top-notch quality stuff. Your standard 33 1/3 record from the 70's was 120 or 125 grams (or something like that).


This isn't really true, which just about everyone at AudioKarma.org would confirm. The thickness (180G) of an LP has no bearing on the quality, etc. A lot of the new release reissues are having quite a bit of quality issues, warps, etc. I have some 60's and 70's pressings on very thin vinyl that are warp free and sound amazing. I do have some newer reissues on 180 gram that sound very good. Neil Yound "Harvest" and "After the Gold Rush to name a couple. Supertramps Crime of the Century which is a Speakers Corners reissue is very good. speakers corners does Analog reissues from original master tapes. The fact that these are 180 gram reissues really has no bearing on sound quality or any other quality nor will they last longer cause they're thicker. About the only real advantage is they seem to feel more substantial in your hands. 180G releases seem to be the current fad.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

guitarman2 said:


> This isn't really true, which just about everyone at AudioKarma.org would confirm. The thickness (180G) of an LP has no bearing on the quality, etc. A lot of the new release reissues are having quite a bit of quality issues, warps, etc. I have some 60's and 70's pressings on very thin vinyl that are warp free and sound amazing. I do have some newer reissues on 180 gram that sound very good. Neil Yound "Harvest" and "After the Gold Rush to name a couple. Supertramps Crime of the Century which is a Speakers Corners reissue is very good. speakers corners does Analog reissues from original master tapes. The fact that these are 180 gram reissues really has no bearing on sound quality or any other quality nor will they last longer cause they're thicker. About the only real advantage is they seem to feel more substantial in your hands. 180G releases seem to be the current fad.


Well, you're right and you're wrong. 180g vinyl alone doesn't mean squat, so yes, just because it's on 180g doesn't necessarily mean it will sound good or better than an original, etc. But, 180g does definitely allow for thicker grooves which means more info. 180g gives you the best "potential" sound. If the mastering or re-mastering isn't great, that's not the vinyl's fault.

Also, issues with warping aren't really sonic issues. A warped record may sound like crap because it's warped, while it may have also sounded great beforehand. That's a QC issue.

In a true apples-to-apples comparison, if you had access to analog masters and pressed the exact same master to a 180g record vs. a 125g record and played it back on the same playback gear, the 180g version will definitely sound better. Original pressing vs. reissue isn't really a fair comparison.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

hollowbody said:


> Well, you're right and you're wrong. 180g vinyl alone doesn't mean squat, so yes, just because it's on 180g doesn't necessarily mean it will sound good or better than an original, etc. But, 180g does definitely allow for thicker grooves which means more info. 180g gives you the best "potential" sound. If the mastering or re-mastering isn't great, that's not the vinyl's fault.
> 
> Also, issues with warping aren't really sonic issues. A warped record may sound like crap because it's warped, while it may have also sounded great beforehand. That's a QC issue.
> 
> In a true apples-to-apples comparison, if you had access to analog masters and pressed the exact same master to a 180g record vs. a 125g record and played it back on the same playback gear, the 180g version will definitely sound better. Original pressing vs. reissue isn't really a fair comparison.


The groove depth is established in mastering - NOT by the thickness of the vinyl.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

guitarman2 said:


> The groove depth is established in mastering - NOT by the thickness of the vinyl.


i realize that, but i wasn't really discussing the different aspects of production. if an album goes into mastering and the engineer KNOWS it's going to be distributed on thicker wax, he or she can master accordingly, but doesn't have that luxury with thin wax. 

also, i never said that ALL 180g records sound amazing, which i think is what you're getting out of my previous post. of course they're not. but a 180g piece of wax has the potential to sound much better than a thinner record.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

hollowbody said:


> i realize that, but i wasn't really discussing the different aspects of production. if an album goes into mastering and the engineer KNOWS it's going to be distributed on thicker wax, he or she can master accordingly, but doesn't have that luxury with thin wax.
> 
> also, i never said that ALL 180g records sound amazing, which i think is what you're getting out of my previous post. of course they're not. but a 180g piece of wax has the potential to sound much better than a thinner record.



There are much more in the technical aspet to do with this but the bottom line is 180G is marketing. No more. If deeper grooves were the answer they wouldn't need to turn single albums in to double albums to increase the SQ. They'd just go thicker for deeper grooves.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

hollowbody said:


> i realize that, but i wasn't really discussing the different aspects of production. if an album goes into mastering and the engineer KNOWS it's going to be distributed on thicker wax, he or she can master accordingly, but doesn't have that luxury with thin wax.
> 
> also, i never said that ALL 180g records sound amazing, which i think is what you're getting out of my previous post. of course they're not. but a 180g piece of wax has the potential to sound much better than a thinner record.



There is much more in the technical aspet to do with this but the bottom line is 180G is marketing. No more. If deeper grooves were the answer they wouldn't need to turn single albums in to double albums to increase the SQ. They'd just go thicker for deeper grooves. Basically 180 or 200G just means more vinyl material in between the grooves.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

If you are new to it...perhaps the speed of the turntable was adjusted to 33 on your 45 setting(?). 

It's a far out possibility but still a possibility.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

My son bought himself the current daft Punk album on vinyl, and has begun to immerse himself into that world. It's funny to watch, actually, because normally I'd be the one sitting helpless while he instructs me about matters digital. Now *he's* the one who has no idea what he's doing or why things work "that" way.

To whit, he asks if he can score a turntable so I dig out one from the basement. He calls me up a few days later indicating embarrassment at not knowing how to make the tone arm go down, and I have to instruct him ("Move the little lever on the side forward, grasshopper, and music will find you."). We realize the stylus on the cartridge is shot to hell and hunt around unsuccessfully for replacements. Finally, I dig through my box of about 10 cartridges (there was a time when buying a new cartridge was cheaper than buying a replacement needle; sorta like the current relationship between toner cartridges and new laser printers these days) and find a cartridge where the stylus is in reasonably decent shape. He mounts it in the tonearm, moves the little level, only to find that - lo and behold - his A/V receiver which he was so supremely confident had _every conceivable type of input _accounted for lacks any sort of RIAA phono preamp input. So, I spent a bg chunk of Father's Day building him a phono preamp. I hope to box it up tonight and deliver tomorrow.

In _theory_, vinyl weight/mass/thickness can make a difference, insomuch as greater mass means less susceptibility to rumble. And infrasonic rumble can detract from sonic quality of audible frequencies. However, most folks who care about vinyl sound will have some means for acoustically isolating the platter from rumble, and if they have a suitable preamp or integrated amp, it will likely have a rumble filter to supplement. Apart from that, and risk of eventual warpage, thickness or mass should have no bearing.

Vinyl audio is fundamentally a matter of_* physics*_, rather than coding or resolution, and those unfamiliar with it will find it perplexing. I had to explain to my other kid that "hit songs" would frequently be found as opening tracks on a side, simply because the audio quality on outer tracks was higher. If a given single did not require substantial dynamics or frequency range, the producer and artists could afford to situate it several tracks in (e.g., "Yesterday" is the 5th track in on that side). And it was higher because, with constant speed, the greater circumference of outer grooves meant that audio information was distributed over a much greater surface area, thus potentially higher quality. Of course limitations of how much side to side wiggling could be pressed onto a side meant that dynamics and frequency content was always traded off against amount of music. Things kind of topped out at 23-25 minutes. Two of Todd Rundgren's albums - _A Wizard, A True Star_, and _Initiation_ - go well beyond that, and as much as I'm a fan, those two albums have what has to be about the worst sound I've ever heard; VERY compressed, and zero oomph.

The depth of grooves, apart from simply being able to sustain better tracking by stylii in decent shape, makes little difference in sound quality. It is the side-to side motion of the stylus that produces the sound, not up and down. Tracking is aided by the shape of the stylus. This is why you see them described as "elliptical". Thin and long (egg-shaped) allows for better ability to be "grasped" by the grooves, while still fitting nicely into them.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Pretty much agree with all that mhammer.


----------



## OldGuitarPlayer (Feb 25, 2013)

Who or what is queen of the stoneage?

Anyhow...I for one prefer the digital age. I have never been an "audiophile" and besides all that plastic crap takes up too much space.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

OldGuitarPlayer said:


> Who or what is queen of the stoneage?


 a kick ass band


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

blam said:


> a kick ass band


+1 Josh Homme is the driving force behind the band - a modern creative genius IMO. He is a hot commodity these days collaborating with a veritable who's who of the modern music industry, it would seem. Not only that, he's one of a few contemporary guitar heroes now. 

Check them out - the new Queens of the Stone Age album is loaded with tasty riffs and arrangements, some very dynamic, inventive stuff. This coming from someone well over 50... ;^)


----------

