Where do classical vinyl records get their rumble from?

@lewm 

Completely agree that Deutsche Grammophon was highly regarded back in the day.  Herbert von Karajan was fastidious about the sound of his recordings, and the Berliner Philharmoniker under his leadership developed a particularly full sound.

Then DG and the orchestra went their separate ways, with the orchestra establishing its own label and usually recording in their home venue, which has been fully equipped for recording live concerts.  This enterprise is branded "The Digital Concert Hall" and includes permanent remote cameras which can be pre-programmed.  Outputs include webcasts, Blu-ray video productions, Pure Audio Blu-ray and SACD backed up by CDs.

Other orchestras have followed, one good example being the London Symphony Orchestra with its LSO Live label routinely producing SACDs of live concerts.

Decca is another recording company with famous recording quality which has become something of a bit player, where it sits as a sister company to DG in the Universal Music Group portfolio.  Decca has some superb recent recordings on CD but their vinyl equivalents have been marred by unacceptable scratches caused by high-gloss, printed inner linings, at least as delivered to me by Presto.

The DG recording of Mahler 2 mentioned in my original post was a live recording of a big-deal live event - the re-opening of the Sydney Opera House Concert Hall after a 3-year, A$100-m refit, done mainly to improve the venue's sound quality.  The concert was broadcast live on national radio and recorded using 15 cameras for a national TV broadcast.  It was also webcast.

So it is disappointing that DG's Australian vinyl pressing has oversized centre holes.  My first copy rivalled Decca's worst for dirt.  I don't know whether DG or the Australian Broadcasting Corporation was responsible for the original recording.  It may even have been the Trust, or the Sydney Symphony Orchestra! 

It was a special occasion for a special building, and the performance was comparable to Rattle's best.

@richardbrand 

"...their systems, including tables, are simply not resolving enough to hear what I report.  Alternatively, the noise floor of their listening environments could be so high that it masks the effects."

These are just a few of my faves;

Clifford Curzon - Beethoven "Emperor" Concerto No. 5 in E flat for piano and orchestra, The Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, Hans Knappertsbusch, Decca Stereo 1958

Georg Solti - Beethoven Symphony No. 9 , Lorengar, Milton, Burrows, Tavela with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and Chorus, Decca Silver Jubilee Recording Stereo 1972

Bruno Walter - Beethoven Symphony No. 6 in F major opus 68 Pastoral Columbia Symphony Orchestra Stereo 1958

Gyorgy Sebok, Janos Starker - Johannes Brahms Sonatas for Cello and Piano E minor opus 38 and F major opus 99, Mercury Living Presence Stereo 1964

Antal Dorati, Janos Starker - Dvorak Violoncello Concerto in B minor Opus 104 Bruch Kol Nidrei Opus 47 London Symphony Orchestra, Mercury Living Presence Stereo 1962

My equipment will out resolve any thing you’ve got and no rumble. So where do you live? In the Outback?

@faustuss 

Recording technology has come a long way in the last 50 years. 

I am glad you have no rumble.  I believe you posted elsewhere that you have no surface noise either.  You have a truly miraculous system.

Of course, none of the works you cite contains the dynamic range of a Mahler symphony and these days vinyl has digital to compete with.

@richardbrand 

"Recording technology has come a long way in the last 50 years. 

I am glad you have no rumble.  I believe you posted elsewhere that you have no surface noise either.  You have a truly miraculous system.

Of course, none of the works you cite contains the dynamic range of a Mahler symphony and these days vinyl has digital to compete with."

Yes, and any half-baked argument will do won’t it Richard, especially when you deliberately take my statements out of context. I’ve commented extensively about handling vinyl and simple, inexpensive methods of cleaning records elsewhere in the forum that you deliberately ignore but only focus on the ones that really don’t bolster what you’re disputing in the moment. You mention advancements in recording technology when you preface this thread on a recent Deutsche Grammophon recording that by your accounts contains rumble and I just simply pointed out multiple examples of very old ones that don’t. Anyone can read the inconstancies in your incongruent arguments. Why is digital suddenly a fallback position when we are discussing vinyl? Also, attacks on my spelling and grammar? Hm?

I will go on to say that yes there are advancements such as superior stylus profiles over the biradial elliptical which tracks very close to the surface of the record much like a spherical where most of the groove imperfections are and it’s only real advantage is it’s ability to resolve high frequency information slightly better but is just as susceptible to pick up surface noise as well. Line contacts, Micro lines and Micro ridge ride deeper and contact more pristine groove surface significantly reducing noise.

The bulk of the noise that accumulates on vinyl over time is the result of lackadaisical handling and improper hygiene. Record noise and wear are not an absolute and there are countless examples of vinyl’s permanence as a sound storage medium dating back to it’s beginnings in the late 1940s. I believe I’ve said this elsewhere too.

You want to hear dynamic range then get a copy of this Buddy Rich - Just In Time - The Final Recording on Gear Box records. Buddy has a very long solo on the third disc that perfectly demonstrates dynamic range and the incredible low noise floor vinyl is capable of in a live setting! 

faustuss -

"1kHz/5cm/sec"

Yeah, well beat me about the head!

@richardbrand 

"That’s the standard for measuring output voltage of a cartridge."

Copied from Shure PDF leaflet. You’ll note that Shure expressed trackability as cm/sec. I don’t see 1000 Hz there do I?

V-15 Type 111 and V15 111-G
Typical Trackability (cmlsec peak recorded velocity at 1 gram in
Shure-SME Tone Arm). Reference: Shure TTR 103 Laboratory Test
Record.
400 Hz-26 cmlsec 5000 Hz-35 cmlsec
1000 Hz-38 cmlsec 10,000 Hz-26 cmlsec
Frequency Response (using Optimum Load): 10 to 25,000 Hz
Output Voltage: 3.5 mV per channel at 1000 Hz, 5 cm/sec peak recorded
velocity. Output from each channel within
2 dB
Channel Separation: Minimum 25 dB at 1000 Hz
Minimum 15 dB at 10,000 Hz
Tracking Force Range: '14 to 1'14 grams
Optimum Load: 47,000 ohms resistance in parallel with 400 to 500
picofarads total capacitance per channel. Load resistance
can be up to 70,OM) ohms with almost no audible
change in frequency response. Total capacitance includes
both the tone arm wiring and amplifier input
circuit. (Most amplifiers and tone arms meet this
requirement.)
Inductance: 500 millihenries

faustuss -

"why does everyone equate warp information with rumble?"

@richardbrand 

"That was what you originally posted, followed by"

"Hopefully you have only one warp per record, so it will have a fundamental frequency of roughly 0.55-Hz, which is in the wow range below 6-Hz.  A bit higher up comes the flutter frequency range of 6-Hz to 100-Hz.  Meanwhile rumble is usually below 30-Hz.  Of course the Japanese measure these things differently."

@richardbrand 

I wasn’t asking and another example of how you like to take things out of context. My actual remarks. -

"After some thought I attempted to edit my post for grammatical errors but @pindac was about to commit his comments which superseded my edits before I posted them. So here they are.

...it will never work if the cartridge’s compliance and mass wasn’t chosen for the tonearm’s in the first place. The resonance will forever be too low or too high which will either accentuate warp information if too low or affect tracking and bass response if too high. 

Secondly, why does everyone equate warp information with rumble? Rumble is a mechanical artifact of a poorly designed, machined or damaged main bearing and as the platter spins, the noise generated is transferred up through the platter and the vinyl and is then picked by the cartridge and often sounds like a faint cyclical roar in the background during quieter music passages. I used to think it was groove roar until the quality of the turntables I was using improved and had much better fabricated main bearing’s, thus the phenomenon became forever inaudible."