2. analog
  3. 1104199778

Are 45's really THAT good?

I'm just sitting here enjoying a boatload of LP's I got for Christmas. Good stuff, Coltrane, Rollins, Davis, Krall, Clapton, etc. While listening I was skimming through an Acoustics Sound catalog. I see they sell the same recordings on 45 RPM format. The price is usually around $50 for (2) 45 LP's. I could get the same version on (1) 33 1/3 LP for half the price, sometimes less. My question, to those that have experience is:

Is the sound in 45 RPM format that much better? Good enough to pay twice as much and get up and change sides twice as often?

Happy Holidays,
John
128x128jmcgrogan2

Showing 5 responses by inpepinnovations1e75

inpepinnovations1e75
395 posts
 
The hell with 45s, let's talk 78s and really get quality sound!
inpepinnovations1e75
395 posts
 
Not any more stupid than claiming that all 45s are better than 33s! Again its not the speed, but the application of the technology. Some old 78s did indeed sound pretty good when played back with good equipment and the proper equalisation curve.
Lighten up!
Salut, Bob P.
inpepinnovations1e75
395 posts
 
Agreed on the potential for 78s to have better performance, but using 8 sides to listen to Beethoven's 5th isn't my idea of fun. The 33s did turn out to be a good compromise and 16s were good for speech only.
Salut, Bob P.
inpepinnovations1e75
395 posts
 
Mint604, agreed! Now tell that to Nrchy and Albert Porter!

Bob P.
inpepinnovations1e75
395 posts
 
Jcground, there isn't more data contained on 78s or 45s than on 33s. The same data is spread over a SAME period of time, but the amount per sq. inch on the medium is less. It is easier for the recording medium to do justice to the data (less distortion) if the amount of data per sq. inch (density) is less, hence faster speed usually gives better sound quality. Of course, I don't think that 78s have better sound than 45s or even 33s!
Salut, Bob P.
More to discover