I've bought 2 picture disks (one on purpose, one on accident) and they both are awful. One of them is even out of tune (how do you screw something up that badly?).
Never noticed a problem with colored vinyl. Bad sounding colored vinyl would likely be bad sounding if it were black too.
I don't think the colour of an LP is any more relevant to playback on a conventional turntable than the colour of your speakers or the colour of the shirt you're wearing when you listen. On the other hand if you're using one of those exotic laser turntables, then it is plausible that the colour of the medium could affect the reading ability of the laser.
The issue is how good the recording was made, the mastering, the cutting and pressing, and also very importantly the quality of the vinyl plug used. Only virgin vinyl is best, recycled vinyl is not as quiet. All the major NOS vinyl pressers bemoan the hard to obtain and quality virgin vinyl for modern pressings.
My old puke colored Dave Mason Alone Together that I've had since 1971 when it came out sounds great and much better than some of my Classic recent releases, such as the new Coldplay that was pressed on total junk vinyl. After one pass it has devloped "potholes" where the vinyl had no elasticity as the stylus passed over and now these micro chips are permanent. That crap vinyl is brittle at the groove stylus interface. More like a foam than a solid. Same thing with the recent Classic pressing of The Who's Quadrophenia. And no, it's not my stylus.
Inpepinnovations post above is the most accurate and correct answer. As far as picture discs go, normally they sound terrible. However, recently I bought one that sounded fantastic, almost like a master tape, except for an excessive amount of background noise.
One can make a case that black vinyl is likely to be the WORST sounding color because of the carbon. According to the blurb on the back of my Peter Appleyard direct to disc album, "Salisbury Labs decided to use white virgin quadradisc vinyl after several tests proved it to be quieter than black vinyl. Carbon Black normally is added to records to strengthen them."
It is indeed a very fine sounding LP, but I suppose by the same reasoning, without the Carbon Black may not remain as good sounding after 25 or 30 plays.
Stevecham - interested in your comments on The Who pressings. have you heard the classic pressings of Who's Next and Tommy, and what did you think? I have been thinking of picking these up, assuming they would be better than my US mca issues. anyone else who's had a chance to hear these would welcome the input.
The remark about the use of carbon black to strengthen the vinyl is incorrect. Initially carbon black was used because the previous material used for records (78 rpm shellac) was black and it wouldn't do to change that colour! The very tiny carbon black particles (essentially soot) would not contribute to the strength of the vinyl in any meaningful way, but might help with the noise problem, however.
I have Tommy, Who's Next and Quadrophenia. Tommy is the only one that is defect free. All the way through Baba is this right channel scratch noise that is irritating to the point that the disc is no longer playable. Side two is defect free, thus this is a pressing defect. Side two of Quadrophenia has several similar defects; the other three sides are defect free, but side two happens to be my favorite complete side of that album. My MCA reissue pressing of Who's Next is somewhat better but is not defect free; it has several pops and ticks in places that make them clearly audible and distracting. My old Who's Next on Decca is still my best version of this classic rock recording. For shame to the nu vinyl wannabees. I still think they are trying to press too quickly, need to leave the biscuit in the press a little longer, and need to use higher quality vinyl.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
