2. analog
  3. 1375503272

Do you know why

the vast majority of today's records are warped regardless of where they are pressed? This has come to a boiling point with me in the recent months. I've bought numerous records, most of them heavy vinyl as is the trend these days, and the vast, vast majority of them are seriously warped, to the point that I would not play them without my periphery ring. Warped heavy vinyl records have to me now become the norm. I suppose my anger and frustration have been particularly fueled by warped records pressed at RTI or QRP, which are considered and hold themselves to be the best pressing plants in the business.

I recently returned a Norah Jones album pressed at Kassem's QRP as it was horribly warped (in addition to being pressed off center), which I find absolutely unacceptable at a price of almost $40. Then I put on a brand new Black Sabbath album (Heaven & Hell with the late Dio) pressed at RTI and the record has warps and bumps throughout so bad that I can't even stand the thought of subjecting my Delos' suspension to over an hour-long torture test. Julie London superb sound-wise 45 rpm $50 reissue by BoxStar? Warped. Most of my MoFi albums, which are pressed at RTI as well, are also warped to some degree, although easily tamed with the ring, thankfully. So seriously, WTF?!!!!

In contrast, the vast majority of my used records from the '60s, '70s, and '80s, all of them pressed on the thinnest vinyl, are perfectly flat with a rare exception here and there.

I simply do not understand this phenomenon. Do you?
actusreus

Showing 4 responses by actusreus

actusreus OP
733 posts
 
Rich,
I have heard such comments before, but it certainly has not been the case in my experience. Record after record, new vinyl is flawed in one way or another, most frequently warped, while record after record, old vinyl I get is flat with some exceptions here and there. Just yesterday I bought a reissue of Rodriguez "Cold Fact," which is otherwise a beautifully done product, but the record is again warped quite badly (and it sounds awful, but I assume so did the original). It is obvious to me that the QC at pressing plants is seriously lacking nowadays, which to me seems a basic thing and not that hard to do.
actusreus OP
733 posts
 
Raul,

I completely agree with your sentiments. I used to curse under my nose for a few seconds, then slap the periphery ring on the newly acquired warped record, and move on. But after experiencing, record after record, new vinyl being warped and pressed off center, I've decided I will contact the record company to express my discontent, disappointment, and disapproval. I still want to support the vinyl revival by buying new records, but I agree with you that perhaps not buying might just be a stronger statement.

I think this issue is critical as vinyl has been seeing an unprecedented resurgence. Seems to me, almost all of the discussions on the topics covered in the analog thread are just about irrelevant if the vinyl record that is at the very center of music reproduction is warped and/or pressed off center. Is that Schroeder or Durand tonearm, Atlas or Anna cartridge, mounted on an SME or Caliburn, to use extremes, going to perform to the maximum of their potential if they have to play warped and off-center records? A flat, perfectly centered record is the baseline without which any comparison or evaluation is just about useless. And yet the record companies shamelessly pretend to embrace and promote vinyl playback when they are really in it only to cash in on the revival with the lowest possible cost to them, and in reality don't give a damn about the quality of both the sound and the pressing. It really makes me angry as a vinyl enthusiast and a consumer.
actusreus OP
733 posts
 
Jjrenman
An awfull lot of the blame is being placed on the record label companies. It seems to me they do not own the pressing plants that would need to slow down their production to ensure less warped albums.

Right, but ultimately, the logo that's on the final product is that of the record company, not the pressing plant (at least I don't see pressing plants listed anywhere on the cover these days except for the stickers on the plastic wrap). If anything, the QC process should be doubly enforced by both the pressing plant and the record company, and it seems neither cares that their product is of a much lower quality than they claim or should be the norm.

Vinyl records are truly a peculiar industry; any other product that is continually offered to consumers and manufactured with no attention to quality would either fail in the market, or the manufacturer would be sued under a breach of warranty cause of action. Hell, I would even tack on a false advertising claim for good measure. But record after record, we are duped into buying an inferior product wanting to hear this or that artist on superior sounding vinyl. Isn't that called fraud?

The suggestion that there is a backlog at pressing plants should be no excuse. It just makes stronger the argument that it's all done for the biggest profit at the lowest possible cost with no regard for the quality. That is unacceptable.
actusreus OP
733 posts
 
I agree with Raul. Reviewers from Stereophile, et al, should make physical evaluation of the records they review, or listen to while reviewing equipment, part of the review. Pulling sponsor ads will never happen since money talks too loudly, but given the awful quality of new pressings all around, this is the least we should get.

More to discover