180g new vs. NM used


Hi all, 

Following up on my previous post on vinyl repair.  So assuming I want to replace the record, am I better off going with used in VG+/NM or just some sort of new 180g pressing?  If this has been previously discussed feel free to direct me to that thread.  

Thanks,

EW

 

128x128mtbiker29

Speaking of Led Zeppelin: Avoid the LP reissues Jimmy Page did recently; in this case the source WAS digital.

According to an interview with Jimmy Page, the original analogue tapes were used. Each was digitized and the mix and mastering were done in the digital domain. I'll try and find the interview. I think one of the main points was to clarify Jimmy's remastering process.

I prefer the LZ originals, although these remasters sound pretty darn good. I’m disappointed to find out the sources went straight to digital but there's a lot of wear on those tapes.

Something that can be said for these remasters is the reversed channels and polarity issues were corrected.

LZ is a very good example as original vs remaster. I had most of LZ remasters and sold all of them. But it's not 100% true in all cases - some remasters are awful some are good ones. I am always looking into price difference in Discogs if remasters aren't good ones original first press usually cost a fortune.

Also if to speak about originals - they differ as usually exist US, JP, UK, FR, NL, DE first press and all of them has own sound profile. 

Classic Records reissued the Led Zeppelin albums in the first decade of this century (all analogue of course, on 200g "flat-profile"---no raised outer "lip"---discs I believe), and in a couple of different configurations, including single-sided 45 RPM discs. There was a boxset offered that contained all the single-sided discs, and that boxset now sells for over $20,000!

 

I have all the original LZ albums and 96/24 files of all of them. With LZ 1 the digital file is so much better than the original it is hard to even make fun of it. With LZ 2 the situation mysteriously reverses and the original album is marginally better than the file. It all comes down to the mastering and the system the version was mastered and not on analog vs digital. None of us would be able to reliably identify an original vs a 192/24 copy of same. I have the Pure Vinyl program Michael Fremer uses nobody has been able to reliably identify the original. I certainly can not. When comparing different versions of the same album it comes down to which mastering job you prefer. I personally do not understand this digital phobia so many of us have. I have thousands of wonderful digital files many of them superior to their original analog versions. But, for some odd reason I still also buy records. Go figure.