RCA Classic Records-180 versus 200 gram

recently saw a Canadian? Ebay seller claiming that the earlier 180 gram Classic reissues of the RCA recordings are worth more than the recent 200 gram pressings. Some story about the pressing plants not really knowing what they were doing or some such. Is this indeed true? I have noticed some sealed copies selling recently fron an Ebayer in austin for only $20 but the listing failed to mention the weight. Many thanks,LS
180g should be better if they were from the original masters however in most cases the original pressing is better with more air. This being said i would never buy lps on ebay i tried twice and got pure crap both times.Good luck.

The originals are pretty good, but many have very noisy vinyl and if you do find a good one, it will take a long time because most are in horrible condition.  The classics are very good.  I am very lucky to have the ones I do have.  These were done with care, very rare these days
Original in prime condition is way to go. London FFss, RCA shaded dog... No 180g or 200g will compare ever. Also check 80's 45rpm Angel releases. Not sure how heavy they are, but sound is fantastic. 
I do not agree.  I understand what you are saying but many of these records are so damaged and worn. To find a playable copy is difficult.  The London/Decca recording are fantastic, much better than the speakers corners but the rca shaded dogs are very hard to come by in playable condition.  eBay is a crap shoot.  The classics are very good and the engineering was done on many of them with the original engineers present during the mastering.  The local used record store never have classical  the record shows do not either.  Some of the original RCA's, if in very good condition are amazing, agree.  But find them.  You could pay a large sum of money and get garbage. If you find a mint copy of the reiner pines of Rome, and it is not 100.00+., by all means, grab it

I heard that pretty much all of the 180gr classic records are good but the 200gr had some quality control issues. There are definitely good 200s out there but it is more of a crap shoot. I wouldn't bother with originals unless I could examine them in person or buy from a reputable dealer with returns. 
Welcome to my world, where you can find original RCA shaded dog, London FFss blue-backs, Deutcshe Grammophon - red stereo- tulip in MINT and only MINT condition. Original London FFss are somewhere in 150g range and will easily humiliate any 180 or 200gr re-issues.
My ultra high-end classical catalogue includes
Heifez -- Beethoven -- Violin Concerto in D -- shaded dog plum color 2s/2s
Ansermet -- Stravinsky -- Petrushka -- FFss blue-back
Michael Rabin -- Tchaikovsky -- Concerto in D -- Angel UK
Van Cliburn -- Rachmaninoff -- Piano Concerto 3 -- Mercury Living Stereo
Rafael Kubelik -- Smetana -- Ma Vlast -- DGG red stereo

Michael Hobson, who ran Classic Records, used to have a blog where he discussed the problems encountered when he switched to 200g flat profile records. The blog is now gone as far as I know- since Chad bought what remained of the company. There were well-documented QC problems with the 200g Classics; my impression was that when Hobson switched from RTI to a smaller manual press (Smith? sorry, can't remember without checking) at around the time he did the Clarity vinyl, most of the problems went away, but I can't say that definitively. The Classics at the time gave audiophiles the chance to buy fresh, unmolested copies of what in some cases were  expensive, and hard to find in good condition collectible records. I have a few of the Classics, like the Royal Ballet box cut at 45. I have many of the originals- even in good condition, the US RCAs have a different presentation. They are softer, not as bright, not as much 'detail' in an audiophile sense, but the massed string tone was great. They weren't cheap when I bought them in the late '80s- in fact, the market was 'hot' for these at the time due in part to Sid Marks' columns in The Absolute Sound. I also bought a bunch of the old UKs, but haven't listened to them in decades. 
I think Fremer had a listening comparison up at one point- between a modern remaster and an old pressing that he got from Tom Port. The differences were obvious, even over a lowly internet stream. Some people may prefer the more modern sound of the re-dos. Haven't heard the ones Chad is releasing under his moniker. I have enough classical; how about some reggae? :)
Some of the original living stereos are not that good.  Some are fantastic.  The classic reissues can sound pretty incredible.  I can see why they received the attention they have.  I frequently go to see the Cleveland orchestra at severance hall.  I usually sit about 7 rows back right behind the conductor.  Many of The classic reiisues really do sound eerilly like the real thing to these ears.  Some original shaded dogs that I have that sound real are pines of Rome and Gershwin an american in Paris, rhapsody in blue, harry belafonte at Carnegie hall.
Another analogy,  the classics bring you closer to the orchestra, the original living stereos would be like 15 or 16 rows back.  The string do sound amazing on the originals.  They are definitely softer sounding.
Scratch that last statement.  I am listening to an original living stereo called the Rubenstein story.  Chopin concerto number 2.  It is amazing.  Midrange to die for.  However,  the classics are good as well. If you can get an rca living stereo original or other originals in great condition you should grab them, but the classic reissue are definitely not terrible, some are very good like the royal ballet.
My choice is 180 gr in every second of the day

Lol, right.  They are so quiet and you really hear just how good those old recordings really are.