33rpm vs 45rpm - which is better

Back in the late 40's when RCA and Columbia were fighting for format ascendancy, the general consensus among those with good audio systems (my father sold them and I grew up with one in the living room) was that the 45's were the best in dynamic range especially at high frequencies.  The AES (Audio Engineering Society fellows) were really surprised that the LP won the popularity contest.  

The Music Direct version is 33 1/3 from the original master tapes. The Acoustic Sounds version is 45 Rpm. It says for better sound quality. 140/ 150 gram. Both are from Craft Recording. This is also from the original master tapes.

Vince Guaraldi-Its The Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown-140 150 Gram Vinyl Record|Acoustic Sounds

Vince Guaraldi - It's The Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown: Pumpkin Shaped Vinyl (Vinyl LP) * * * (musicdirect.com)

All things being equal, 45's sound better. Usually they have a much bigger gap at the end of each side where the sound deteriorates due to the angle change between the stylus and record deviating more and more from 90 degrees. May be less apparent with linear tracking arms.

Also, having more information coming through in the same time improves the depth of the sound. Usually 45's are produced with higher standards and are more expensive since 2 discs have to be used.

@zazouswing Actually I started a discussion on colored vinyl a couple of weeks ago (check it out) and was amazed at the number of respondents who actually like the colored and clear vinyl records. To each his own, I guess I’m a dinosaur.

Never dived into the 45 vs 33 question - but I always found 78's were the best compared to a 33 of the same song. I assumed this was because faster speed = longer groove = the ability for more information to be captured in the cut. Applying that logic to your question, 45's ought to have the edge.

@aewarren Agree on the orange disc. Bought a Soft Machine Vol 1 to replace my 30 year old copy - amazing packaging compared to my original - working dial and all. Then, I pull out the record to see colored vinyl. Somebody need to tell them to stop doing this - just stop.

12 inch 45's are King. I have this and it's my go to demo. You can watch the stylus and cantilever move....like a bee in a bee hive. 

Talking Heads – I Zimbra (1979, Vinyl) - Discogs

                                             So Many variables!

     I own half-speed mastered, direct to discs and 45s, that all take me to to the event, as well as the same that don’t.

     Much depends on the recording techniques, who did the mix and master, quality of the vinyl, who built/adjusted the cutting lathes, amps, etc.

     Thus far: no vinyl tech I’ve personally heard, has outperformed the stuff that Sheffield Labs, Nautilus, Crystal Clear and MFSL produced, back in the late Seventies/early Eighties.

     Then too: Brubeck’s ’Take Five’ on Columbia, was my first Jazz album (conventional, bought around 1970) and it still sounds phenomenal.

     Crystal Clear’s ’San Francisco Limited’, D to D, 45 RPM album, is one of my favorites for evaluating a system’s sound.    White vinyl and (funny with that title) really good New Orleans Jazz.

There are plenty of nice sounding modern jazz recordings too.  They are almost exclusively available in digital formats.  I don't think sound quality for jazz or classical has gotten worse since then, it just hasn't improved much despite all the supposed technical improvements.

@larryi 

I do have fun shocking people with some original recordings that demonstrate how the art of recording has NOT improved in the last 60+ years.  I can put on a 1959 Columbia Brubeck "Time Out" or Ellington's "Blues in Orbit" to show that even stereo was fantastic way back in time.  Both recordings have had audiophile reissues, none quite match the originals.

Depending upon whether you're an optimist or a pessimist, that's either wonderful or a tragedy.

Wonderful that some people knew what they were doing back in 1959 or a tragedy that they don't or can't be bothered now.

Or perhaps it's just a simple question of economic demand and supply?

Maybe the average 1959 jazz afficinado expected a high standard of playback quality from this new LP format but the 2022 one is content with what they're given?

It's 2022, if you don't ask, you don't get.

@larryi , the WallyScope  has three objectives. It is great for setting VTA and also for evaluating stylus wear. It comes with a nifty software program that makes measuring angles a snap

@wallytools , I am attaching the head of a certain magnifying device to the stage of this microscope which had it's magnification head cut off with said cutting wheel and tossed in the garbage. I'll be able to sell it as Picasso's last sculpture. How much fun can a guy have on a Sunday?

wallytools,

I know your scope is used for setting dynamic vta, but, is it also ideal for more basic overhang adjustment?  Do you have any other suggestions on what optical device to use for doing basic adjustment.  I have your latest protractor, which is very good because proper adjustment is unequivocal when you follow instructions.  But, it does require looking at the stylus from both the front and the side, and so I wonder if your scope or any other instrument is helpful in this application.  I don't know about whether focal length being appropriate for viewing head on, for example.

Thanks.

I wonder what sounds better.   Vinyl or Cd's?  I have always thought the reason CD's came out was to eliminate the noise from vinyl.  Also, what sounds better, a CD or Streaming?  You can stream 24/192 and a CD is 16 bit.  You would think hi-res would sound better.

@mijostyn  - that's cool! What is max magnification on it?

Once I catch up from all my travels I will be redesigning the top and bottom plate of the WallyScope to offer more "overhang" and "cantilevering" as well (I couldn't resist using our parlance in this case). Thanks for the inspiration on this.

@wallytools ,Hey, I brought home an old medical binocular microscope. I'm going to do some surgery with a cut-off tool and start modifications using it's stage and heavy bottom structure. 

If you can find the same recording pressed in both 33 and 45 and engineered by the same recording engineer, I would get them both to use as a simple evaluation tool for zenith error. Sonic differences between the two speeds are certainly minimized when zenith error is eliminated and the stylus contact edges are tracing in a collinear fashion with the radial line of the record  

The test works by identifying the track on the 33 RPM record that plays at the inner null point area.  Listen to that area of the record (+/-5mm) and then find that same musical passage on the 45 record, regardless of where it is on the record. If you hear a significant difference between them in high frequency extension, dynamics, soundstage size, image specificity and overall coherence/intelligibility of the music then it is SUGGESTIVE of a misalignment of the contact edges of your stylus contact edges relative to your cantilever. (Industry tolerance for two out of the three stylus/cantilever assembly manufacturers is +/-5°.) Go back to your 33rpm playing selection and begin playing with the rotation of the cartridge in the headshell. This can be quite a tedious process without something like the WallyZenith to make changes repeatable and controllable, but it is doable. 

Of course, conical and elliptical stylii need not apply for this process. I’m also critical of Shibata profiles not behaving like fine line contact profiles. I’m not sure whether this subjective approach to finding proper zenith alignment is even practicable with a Shibata as the entire front half of the stylus is conical and therefore is induced into the same type of pinch effect errors (albeit at half the frequency) as conical styli. Add to that it’s curved contact profile which now behaves more like an elliptical contact edge, etc., etc.

Sorry, this isn't to suggest that 7 inch 45rpm's sound better than 33.3 LP's They do not. Joe

baylinor,

I agree.  I rarely buy 45s because of the inconvenience of flipping sides.  Then again, I don't play that much vinyl because I am too lazy for even that.  With many recordings, the originals are better than the audiophile reissue, perhaps because the master tape has deteriorated over the years.  But, with a lot of great music, it is pretty hard to get originals, and the cost is prohibitive.  If we were limited to buying only originals, so few of us would have access to Bluenote recordings.  

I do have fun shocking people with some original recordings that demonstrate how the art of recording has NOT improved in the last 60+ years.  I can put on a 1959 Columbia Brubeck "Time Out" or Ellington's "Blues in Orbit" to show that even stereo was fantastic way back in time.  Both recordings have had audiophile reissues, none quite match the originals.

The quality of the 45 RPM speaks for itself. Why on earth would anyone spend more money and go through the hassle of dealing with four sides to listen to one album if the quality wasn't better? Joe

If people hadn't wanted the playing time offered by 33.3, 45rpm on 12 inch would have become the standard for sound quality.

45 LPs don't do it for me because normal sides are cut in half and usually better sounding LPs are originals, not recent remasters. I have a few but don't play them very often at all even if they may sound better, which is debatable.

I’ve heard audiophile releases by the same company in both 45 and 33 versions and the 45 version is slightly better—more “open” sound.  But, in this particular instance, where the 45 version is also on a single disc, one has to wonder how that was accomplished and whether that entailed some other compromises.

45 RPM

NOT a crap shoot.

Correctly engineered the 45 will always sound better because the higher speed enables more faithful recording of the music.  Compare with reel to reel tape - 7.5ips is better than 3.75 and professional studios often used 15ips.  Some of those recordings remain the best masters we have.

Consider - an LP should not contain more than around 20 mins music per side.  More than that requires compression of the grooves which reduces dynamic range (but look at the brilliant job Decca did on the Stones' 'Aftermath' that runs 52+ minutes) .  Do the maths - cutting less than about 9 minutes on a 45 side allows the engineer to cut at a higher level without crashing the grooves.  But if you try to cram more than that, then the advantage is gradually lost..

I bought a lot of used 45s in the 80s and 90s, mainly 70s and early 80s rock.  As others have posted, many of these are the best sounding vinyl I have.  A particular favorite is Frank Zappa's Stairway to Heaven b/w Ravel's Bolero - both outtrageous over-worked parodies of the originals.  I also have singles by most of the 80s big names.

@emrofsemanon    If some of your 45s are noisier, it is because they are dirtier, or perhaps they were played a lot or mishandled by a DJ in the day.

in my experience, 45 sounds "airier" [cleaner extended trebles, greater sense of EASE from bottom to top esp. towards the inner grooves] than 33 but that it also has a slightly higher volume of surface noise, what noise there is in higher in pitch and more audible to me, the effect is similar to being outside in the wind and you hear the wind pick up. 

Wow, that didn't occur to me.  Guess I'll do that - $26 + $30 ain't much nowadays.  Thanks

@kennyc - save the packing… You’ll need the packing to ship it.
(And we can work out a price off-line.)

@holmz

Maybe get them both and put the less liked one onto Disc cogs?

Wow, that didn't occur to me.  Guess I'll do that - $26 + $30 ain't much nowadays.  Thanks.

@lalitk

You didn’t say anything about your analog setup, does your system allows you to discern differences between 33 1/2 and 45 RPM vinyls? 

It should be - still assembling.  VPI Avenger>Etna/VDH Grand Cru/VHD Grail SB/Constellation Inspiration Pre+StereoAmp>Vimberg Mino D (just purchased AXPONA demo). Waiting for my 3 tonearms delivery (4point,Schroeder CB-L,Schlick) and about to purchase Siltech interconnects.

I usually assume that 2x45rpm is always superior to 1x33-1/3, but the single 1x45 had me perplexed.

Yes. Absolutely. The answer to this and every other single question is…….

Streaming!       LOL 

The streaming version!

My vote goes to 45RPM.  Almost all of my best recordings are on 12" 45RPM discs.

I don't know why the 45rpm is not on multiple discs like so many other vinyl reissues of late. Cost, I guess?🤔

45 rpm without any debate.  The faster the record spins, the longer the groove length per unit (note, whatever) and therefore the greater the resolution.  Period.

33 rpm is simply a trade off between fidelity and long playing. Note the 33 1/3, whcih replaced 45s and 78 is called the "LP".  not the "good quality".

Same with tape where 15 ips >> 7 1/2 ips >> 3 3/4 ips >> cassette

Basic physics.  and a rule int he record industry.

That said it will take more sides to achieve the same number of songs.

The Tidal version is excellent.  Far simpler :-0

78's they have been around longer. 

Sonically the 45 should be superior to the 33 1/3 pressing especially if mastered by Kevin Gray. And personally, I wouldn't buy an orange record.

I was taught by the various audio magazines that 33rpm LP was the best available format for sonics, and yet when a friend bought round his 45rpm 12 inch single of Duran Duran's 'The Wild Boys' the dynamics were something my Linn/Naim system had never before conveyed.

In fact I can't recall hearing a poor sounding 12 inch 45rpm single. Therefore my vote goes to the 45rpm.

+1 @mijostyn 

The highest quality audiophile recordings I have are 45 rpm… typically causing one disk to need to be split into two… and requires flipping disks at a ridiculously short interval. But they do tend to be more dynamic.

45 RPM records are more dynamic and seem to have lower distortion levels. The only problems are, you have to turn them over more frequently and whatever noise is on the record occurs at a higher frequency which makes it more noticeable. Quality pressing is vitally important. 

In theory, the higher speed pressing should sound truer to the master, as with tape speed. 15 inches per second sounds closer to the source tan 7.5 ips. But with records, you may not want to have a 2 record set or get up every 10 minutes to turn them over. Personally, I prefer 33.3 pressings in general. Or if you love the music that much, just buy both for fun. Plenty of people have multiple copies of the same recordings 

+1, @holmz …..You won’t know until you compare both side by side. I just looked at specs on both records. The 45RPM Lacquer cut by Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio so 45RPM should be slightly superior sounding. And the 33 1/3-rpm version presented on Limited Edition Pumpkin-Shaped Translucent Orange Vinyl…both are reasonably priced, heck why not buy both 😊

PS: You didn’t say anything about your analog setup, does your system allows you to discern differences between 33 1/2 and 45 RPM vinyls? 

If it were a two-record set for the 45 rpm recording, I would expect that to be slightly better.  The reason for 45 rpm albums is for the higher quality (grooves with not as tight turns on the wiggles).  But, if both are done to just two sides, you have to now factor in disadvantages of 45 rpm.  The 45 would require closer spacing of the grooves, or lower cutting level, or cutting closer to the label, or a combination of these compromises.  My guess is that it will be cut much closer to the label.  This means playing where the stylus is farthest from the ideal of perfect tangency to the groove.

It all depends on many factors but I can tell you I have more great sounding 45 cut LPs than 33.

It’s a crap shoot (I would think).
Maybe get them both and put the less liked one onto Disc cogs?

How much are they?