Personally, I've always preferred 33.3 records, as I think they sound just fine and you don't have to change the record every 10 minutes. But the industry insisted that you had to have 45 rpm and that it was totally superior and that you had to have two records instead of one to clean and store. Well - guess what? Now Acoustic Sounds is telling you that their 33.3 reissues are superior to the 45s. So now you can all go out and buy another copy of Sidewinder or Dark Side of the Moon when it comes out. I just thought I would let you know so you can rush to pre-order.
I've gone in for Blue Train since it is a different mix (mono) from the previous 45 rpm version. A true mint mono first pressing recently sold for $3000, so for $35 the reissue is considerably less :-)
I looked at this post again after looking hard again at getting into digital download and computer audio. The final verdict, I'm done. I look at some of the on line retailers pushing digital download and DSD, it's all the same titles they were pushing for LP, CD, Sacd. So, no computer for me. I found all the software choices a pain. I just want to listen to music. If I did not have a library of music my decision may be different but for now and into the next several years, no more major changes. I am actually going to sell some records and limit what I own to only those several hundred that have a real appeal to me.
Isn't analog, analog? Meaning the faster the RPM, the more capable the sound quality? First thing that comes to mind is reel to reel. 15 IPS is superior to 7.5 hands down! While 45 RPM does not double the reproduction speed of 33 1/3, you get the idea.
I have the remastered 45 RPM of "Rumors", and it sounds great!!! Granted some of that maybe a superior "cut" of the studio take, but I understand the principle. Therefore IMO, rerelease on 78 RPM!!!!!!
I won a Mobile Fidelity Rolling Stones Box Set from Natural Sound back in the 90's. Since I didn't like the Stones, I sold it to Luke's Records in Pawtucket for around 60.00. The set even came with the Geotracker tone arm alignment platter. Should of kept it as Audiogon wasn't invented yet.
Is a remastered version of an existing title conceptually any different than an equipment manufacturer trotting out a Mk2 or Reference edition of current production preamp? The purpose of a remaster is to improve upon an existing versions. How is that bad? Whether they actually succeed is a whole other question. I leave it to individual tastes whether someone should keep buying the same old songs.
HaHa, just got back from Christmas shopping. Looks like Santa got me a mint Mobile Fidelity Rolling Stones box set ( the price was very very good ), to go with my entire collection of english pressings, that I play instead of the US issues I also have. Man, I have about 2000 LP's but am starting to realize only a few dozen separate titles.
I was just thinking the same thing. It seems like were producing the same 50 albums over and over. Thats to bad because there is a lot of great music out there. I wonder if it's because of the difficulty and expense of finding and licensing master tapes. Perhaps they want to avoid risk by sticking to their "hit" titles similar to what Hollywood does with sequels to hit movies.
Lewm, IMHO, those jazz musicians would think we are crazy. They wouldn't say it because at the end of the day, we're still buying their music.
One wonders what those jazz musicians, most of whom lived a hand to mouth transient existence, might think of this craziness, if they were around to see it. I suspect they'd laugh at us. The solos and improvisation that we go ga-ga over were mostly one-offs; they probably played the same tune differently from day to day and thought nothing of it. Listening to an LP rendition is like looking at a snapshot of your summer vacation 20 years ago. But it's all we have.
Hi Davt, That's funny and insightful. The good thing is this is voluntary and the choice to buy or not belongs to us the consumer. The market supplies these multiple formats and we determine the demand or need for the products. Charles,
Personally, I've always preferred 33.3 records, as I think they sound just fine and you don't have to change the record every 10 minutes. But the industry insisted that you had to have 45 rpm and that it was totally superior and that you had to have two records instead of one to clean and store. Well - guess what? Now Acoustic Sounds is telling you that their 33.3 reissues are superior to the 45s. So now you can all go out and buy another copy of Sidewinder or Dark Side of the Moon when it comes out....
Whhaaat? You did Listen AND compare???? You are Not a serious Audiophile. You ignored the most Important rule: Be deaf and buy the newest, latest and rave about it. Be careful, not everyone is ready for such news .... :-)
A whole record collection with only one title. That's hilarious! Unfortunately, it's too true. I, for one, won't be fooled by another format or a remaster of the remaster. Sorry, music industry, but these marketing ploys have really gone too far.
I love audiophilia! We get to buy the same thing over and over and over and over again. I got the LP, then the cassette, then the CD, then the remastered CD, then the SACD, then the remastered LP, then the remastered LP in 45 rpm and now! THE REMASTERED REMASTER LP IN 33.3! I am in heaven. When is the 78 version coming out? Oh, wait, I need the download, then the hi res download, then the DSD download. I can have a whole record collection and only own one album. Yep, amazing.
Its amazing as I find the original pressings in good shape to sound better than the reissues every time. The reissues sound a little cloudy in comparison 45 or 33 1/3.
Chayro and Lewm, Yes, it's hit and miss I don't find that 45 RPM in practice is inherently superior to well implemented 33 1/3 LPs across the board . You're reduced to judging on an individual basis. Charles,
Potentially, based on the science, 45 rpm ought to be superior to 33. But there are real world reasons why 45 rpm LPs may not in fact sound any better than their 33 rpm equivalents, on a case by case basis. So, as in all things audio, "you pays your money and you takes yer cherse".
No need to fret about it. I buy 45s mainly when I already know that the combo of the artist and the music is something I truly love and cherish. Sometimes I am floored by the increased fidelity over standard, sometimes not.
I guess what I was trying to say was that I never really saw the inherent superiority of 45 rpm. Companies like Stockfish and Opus 3 have been turning out incredible sounding records cut at 33.3. So I think the new "superior" 33.3 reissues confirm my belief that higher cutting speed, standing alone, does not make for a better recording.
It's all to make you hotter. In reality it's all about quality of mastering and pressing somewhat regardless of speed. Anyone knows if 16rpm ones are back any day soon? Glad none still argues that 15ips reel speed is superior to 7.5ips
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
