I am also new to the vinyl revival. Until July I did not own any vinyl or the gear to play it. Today I have maybe a couple of dozen records of which 3 are 'new vinyl'. Only one of my used records does not have problems with skips, surface noise, or tracks unplayable. All also have many tracks that sound fine. All my new vinyl is more or less silent. My record cleaning system consists of a brush and fluid, nothing like state of the art. I would recommend a record cleaning machine be included in your purchase plans.

The biggest advantage to vinyl in my view is the universe of old records not on CD out there and all that music, plus the folk who are into the revival. It is possible to have fun without having to spend a vast amount of money and hear music only available on vinyl. I find new vinyl well worth the price.

First understand the recording industry is all about getting everyone to buy yet one more copy of
"The White Album". Second I would advise you to ignore all this garbage and concentrate on the music you enjoy. There will always be poor recordings and poor masters that make for poor sounding little flat discs of either the analog or digital variety. Therefore, your approach to a system IMO should not be to strive for the few discs that display the superior qualities of of a "high end" system but rather the discs which allow you to enjoy the function of a better system.

Listen to the music and not the hifi. That's very difficult advice to hear and even more dificult to put into practice. Audiophiles have a well deserved reputation for never having heard the "B" side of too many albums. I've been to too many friend's/client's homes to listen to some music and heard one "killer" cut after another but never an entire album. It becomes a truly schizophrenic experience as we bounce from blues to classical and from classic rock to new rock making only a short stop at each way station.

My preference is to stay and take in the local scenery while I linger for awhile at Ernest Tubb's Record Shop before travelling to Carnegie Hall and then to Buddy Guy's Blues Bar. To make that trip succesfully, if that's how you decide to listen to music, you'll have to put together a system that gets to the heart of the music and forget about the "high end" aspirations of your system and your sources. A system that only sounds good on a few tracks of a few albums is headed in the wrong direction. It should not be about 180 gram vs 200 gram but rather about having access to the music you wish to own. If that's how you buy music, then your system should be able to extract the music in a coherent manner and make virtually any recording sound pleasant or at least "musical". My opinion is your system should allow you a better understanding of the musician's skills and how they approached each performance. If that's to be found on a 200 gram pressing into virgin vinyl or a rather beat up disc from the $1 bins at the local used record shop is not that important. It's the music I'm after and not the status of where I find it.

Too many audiophiles stay away from live recordings and especially live recordings of the performers they heard live in their youth. "Thin", "wiry", "lacks warmth", "no soundstage", etc. are the reasons given for not hearing the musicians as you heard them - live. If you must have a wall to wall soundstage from the recording before you'll listen to the music, you're missing out on many fine performances and some very nice music making.

Put your system together so all recordings sound as if you are as close to a live performance as possible then listen to the music and not the hifi.

Hi

I agree entirely with Jan.

Dont worry about 180 or 200 or anything else. Ive recently also returned to vinyl and by far the biggest pleasure is the music, not the sound quality. A fantastic pleasure is to find a good used LP shop and just buy albums for the fun of it at $2-$5 a peice, you will find an occasional dud but for the most part the sound quality will be fine.

The latest high quality pressings are mostly a marketing thing, new LP's are only pressed in small numbers so they elevate the prices by claims of 200 gm vinyl etc. Dont worry about it, get a system that appeals to your general sound preferences and then just buy music and enjoy.

Alan

jan gave you a fine answer on the big picture. more specific to your question though, i have old original albums, expensive hi end records from the late 70s and early 80s (mostly mofi), new standard vinyl of contemporary artists and new expensive 200 and 180g remasters. i think most of the bases are covered (don't get started on mono). from my experience, everyone of these can sound as good as the other depending on the mastering and the cutting. what you tend to get with the expensive albums is a quieter surface. that is great if the recording is great. if the recording is so-so, then all you get is the chance to hear a so-so recording even better. some of the pre cd era records can sound better if not too compressed. some people will argue that lps that were made on analog systems sound better than those done on the newer (at the time) digital systems of the early and mid 80s.
one thing to keep in mind is that before cds, the record cutting equipment was making millions of copies so that earlier copies could sound better than those near the end of the run. new standard vinyl should be more uniform because of the much smaller producion runs. in fact, i have a new jack johnson lp (standard pressing, $15) that may be the best sounding record in my collection followed closely by fleet foxes.
if its 70s and 80s rock that you love, be prepared to wade through a lot of mediocre vinyl.
if you really want to get into this, look for discussions of all of the many remasters of dark side of the moon. most people seem to agree that there are no really good lps of this and the most complimentary piece i read praised the sacd version. i bought the echos pink floyd collection on 180 gm vinyl and it is good but not great.
just get out there and try it is my advice.

I second the comments that it's the music choice that matters and not the medium.
Although I like my vinyl, I do prefer CD for music that has a lot of very quiet passages. CD's (and SACD, DVD, etc) have no surface noise, of course. Even quiet vinyl can have some noise and that does bother me in quiet parts. Others may comment about how quiet the best vinyl can be, with excellent equipment, but still...

I'm a serious musician and I've been into record collecting for 50-years. As you would suspect, I bought many of my LPs back when they were new and the only choice of format. I bought music that I loved and kept what I bought in good condition so it still sounds good today.

Still, I can't disregard sound quality. Almost invariably, any second hand LP that I buy sounds sonically bad in comparison to my own LPs purchased over the years. If I really treasure certain music, then I want to hear it sounding as good as it can get. That usually means buying either a SACD or remastered LP.

I happen to enjoy a wide range of jazz, including classics from the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. There's a ton of that reissued on 45-rpm LPs that sounds gorgeous. Why wouldn't I want that??? So, if I don't have the original and there's something I want on 180-gram, 45-rpm LP or SACD, I buy one or the other.

BTW, prior to getting a super-duper CD/SACD player, I bought almost everything on LP. Now I chose between the two formats based on price or reviews of the comparative remastering quality.

Buying a bunch of old records and bargain bin prices sounds like a great way to explore new genres and artists, but I can't help but think that you'll want to hear your favorite discoveries in the best quality possible, so that'll mean buying a remastered LP, CD or SACD somewhere in the process.

Dave

I have not found any used vinyl that is really quiet, though I lack even a basic record cleaning machine. I have found quiet new vinyl. I believe the vinyl game can provide a good music experience to about anyone, you just have to select media that suits you. On the plus side, one can buy a lot of used vinyl for very little.

Also, IMHO even used vinyl is more music like than compressed MP3 sound.

Just so my comments are not misunderstood, I'm not saying anyone should forgo better quality source material. A new remastered 200 gram disc has a higher potential for "better" sound than something from a second hand shop. Not always though, I have hundreds of LP's purchased from the $1 bin on up to the (for my budget) pricey $40 super discs that are equal in quality in some way. Possibly it's just that I prefer the mix on one or the other but that comes down to taste in music not in disc gram weight.

When LP's were the format to own many companies took great pride in what they produced. Pick up an LP from the 1950's and you'll likely be amazed at the weight of the disc, its flatness and it's good sound with quiet surfaces. I also own a few remasters that I find no better really than the original copy I purchased 40 years ago for $3.98.

My advice was meant to point to the value of the music and not the disc itself as there are too many variables in the production of any source material to even begin to suggest one is always better or worse than another. What makes it better or worse IMO is whether you enjoy the music. Most Grateful Dead or Dylan bootlegs sound pretty crappy but, if it's the music you want to hear, you need a system that can get through the crappy recording and get to the music. Mono offers treasures many audiophiles pass by and can sound outstandingly good due to the production processes of those early days.

To enjoy these discs your system must be able to play the music, get to the point of the music and allow the music to rise to the top. That is in how you choose your components more than in which disc you choose to purchase. Given the choice of two dozen used, cheap LP's from artists I want to hear vs. one 200 gram LP from one those artists the sound quality of the one would not sway me into giving up the many hours of music I could choose to hear. That doesn't mean buy beat up junk at bargain prices but there are tremendous values in excellent music waiting for you at the used LP shops. When you come across that 200 gram remaster that you think is worth the money for the music, then spend wisely and choose the music not just the sound quality to show off your system.

If you are just beginning in vinyl, what you will require to get the best performance possible from any disc old or new is a quality cleaning system. If you can afford a vacuum assisted cleaner, more the better. If you cannot afford the luxury of a vacuum machine, then you still need to clean your discs as thoroughly as possible to get to the real music and not just the surface noise.

Quote:
I have not found any used vinyl that is really quiet, though I lack even a basic record cleaning machine. I have found quiet new vinyl. I believe the vinyl game can provide a good music experience to about anyone, you just have to select media that suits you. On the plus side, one can buy a lot of used vinyl for very little.

I've picked up plenty of used vinyl that is in astonishingly good condition and plays as if it were new. Admittedly, a lot of it is classical music, but I've also scored some real nice jazz titles. I also agree that buying used records is a GREAT way to try new music on the cheap.

I will add that a good record cleaning machine is a must for anyone who is even semi-serious about vinyl playback, even moreso if you buy and play second-hand records.

Quote:
Also, IMHO even used vinyl is more music like than compressed MP3 sound.

Truer words were never spoken.

Quote:
Just so my comments are not misunderstood, I'm not saying anyone should forgo better quality source material. A new remastered 200 gram disc has a higher potential for "better" sound than something from a second hand shop. Not always though, I have hundreds of LP's purchased from the $1 bin on up to the (for my budget) pricey $40 super discs that are equal in quality in some way. Possibly it's just that I prefer the mix on one or the other but that comes down to taste in music not in disc gram weight.

Jan, we're not trying to "understand" your position, we're offering alternative positions. You're not right and I'm wrong or vice versa. We just have two different views.

Dave

OK.

Are you going to tell us you're a serious musician?

I offered the post because I thought someone might have misunderstood portions of my original post. If you got it, fine, maybe someone else didn't. I'm not arguing with anyone as far as I know.

And I did think it important to mention a record cleaning regimen.

So I posted again.

OK?

Quote:
I've picked up plenty of used vinyl that is in astonishingly good condition and plays as if it were new. Admittedly, a lot of it is classical music...

Yes, for some reason, used classical LPs are in much better condition at a lot of the record stores than other genre albums. I routinely find unopened copies for sale. I've also gotten some RCA Shaded Dog LPs in fantastic shape from some street sellers in Manhattan, for like $1-2 each.

You can easily pick up a VPI 16.5 for $300 used. Get some fluid & brushes and that's done. Or you can always go with a home brew cleaning fluid & go manual, but as for me, $300 justifies the kind of song & dance crap I can cut out from the cleaning routine.

Back to record quality, if we're talking about new release indie bands, these have been pretty astoundingly good, IMO, at least what I've gotten so far. Credit the recent interest among younger music listeners or whatever, but they're pressing out some great shit. Too bad that the classical industry can't really abide by this model yet, and for that matter, jazz. But if you're a real fan of great indie rock, you have a real reason to celebrate. Of course there are some lemons, like the recent Daniel Johnston double LP I picked up, of which spindle hole couldn't accommodate a toothpick... but in most cases, the new records by these new artists sound pretty damn fantastic. We're really living through this vinyl renaissance & I count myself as one of the fortunates.

Quote:
First, thanks for taking the time to help,...This is one confusing maze of information for a newbie...

I am just starting to put together a system and a turn table is a must for me. I have my eye on a few pieces of gear, but as I search it seems that each time I learn something, I find 17 more things that I think I should know. I know there is much discussion on the topic of how much importance to put on the source components, but it seems to me that the recording itself must be great, or nothing in the system will sound great. Simple logic.. does that work in this hobby?

I have a few LP's from long ago, but am looking to expand my collection. I see on several websites that they sell different types of LP's, ie. 180 g and so on.

My questions are how much difference does this make to the sound, more accurately, what terms are used to denote higher quality sound in the vinyl world?, and are certain manufacturers well known for great pressings? (or poor pressings?...)

When I see modern music (2008 recordings) on LP, are these typically high quality or just re-recorded and put on vinyl? It seems like the stuff of yester-year is what is always talked about.

Thanks for the help.

That best new vinyl is 180 gram with the source from the original studio tapes. Here is a good example.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/grapevine.cfm

The best vinyl period are the gems you can find that are still sealed from the sixties and seventies. My pride and joy is Nat King Cole at the Sands in mono. Excellent live performance on quality vinyl that was impervious to time.

Quote:
Any suggestions on a cleaning system at a reasonable price?

Read through the archives of the forum. There are several threads concerned with LP cleaning.