Why aren't all modern vinyl releases 45s?

That’s a loaded question and I’m sure others can elaborate deeper than I can. But I’d say this. Not all 45s sound better than 33s, but in general if an album is being prepped for release on 45, it should mean that it is specifically mastered for vinyl,  and is a quality pressing. That is not always the case. 

To be honest, 45s are quite a pain in the butt to get up every one or two (maybe if you’re lucky, three) songs. There’s not a huge market that will invest the money and time to do that. Most record purchasers are doing it these days because they love the sound of analog, tactile feel of medium, and the artwork that accompanies the album. But the typical consumer does not have a sound system that will easily demonstrate the benefits that a high quality record can bring.

But to go back to my opening statement, there are many, many albums that sound great on 33. Michael Jackson’s Thriller first pressing. The recent Jimmy Page remasters of Led Zeppelin albums. So many more. I think the question then might become “Why do so many 33 records sound so bad?”. And this is usually due to poor pressing quality and albums that have not been mastered separately for vinyl. With vinyl delivering differently on dynamics, any album that hasn’t been properly mastered for the medium is a huge miss. 

Most releases are put out there to capitalize on consumerism and make as much of a return as possible. But there are some labels, plants, and artists that still strive for quality. 

Thanks, the poor-sounding 33s seems to be the question at hand. I have my handful of 33s with great sound stages released across many decades (1st pressing of But Not for Me comes to mind), even if that's not my system's strong suit. Mastering is the other big consideration, I have some LPs that jump off of the speakers, while you have to crank the volume on others to get them going.

Don't have the technical knowledge to further the conversation, so we wait...

Why aren't all modern cars replicas of the Mazda Miata?

My guess is the people who sell records have figured out that there is not a big enough market for 45 rpm LPs, and that may be because the majority of us end users do not want to get up to flip LPs even more often than usual and have found that 45s are not so reliably superior to 33s as you seem to think.  Also, the producers need to charge much more for 45s, because in general it takes two discs to encode the info found on one 33, which is another reason they may not sell as well, certain pressings always excepted.

I think when it comes to reissues it has to do with the licensing agreement. When Music Matters was reissuing Blue Note jazz titles, some were done at 33 while others were at 45. 

I was incorrectly ascribing who is making these decisions. The artist would probably have to fight for anything beyond what the label offers. I have the same album on CD and vinyl, and there's hardly any difference in the layout and artistic details between mediums.

Yes, the labels are looking to make money, and that comes down to cost of production vs expected sales. The average consumer wants 33, so they're going to put their production dollars where the demand is. I guess my mind was processing the idea as an audiophile, and not as a businessman.

That's kind of the point of posting onto these forums, though.

Often, artists have little say in how their recordings are licensed. Audiophile releases are a tiny chunk of the market and 45s are more expensive to cut, press and manufacture, along with additional expenses in packaging and shipping.

Steve Hoffman has said that the only real difference is that 45 LPs are louder. 

A good 33 is fine by me-- since my baseline is standard issue stuff. And 45 LPs are a PITA. Maybe this is about sonic spectacularity, but I'm not gonna buy some warhorse I probably already own simply b/c it was reissued as a 45 or on some new vinyl formulation. Indeed the last batch of MM stuff that Kevin Gray did went back to 33. 

Buy what you like. I'm not trying to persuade you otherwise. Just my take as somebody who has been around the block a few times (too many). 

@whart , I tried something like 10 times to get through. Would you like to recode the situation?

As for 45 rpm LPs, they are as a rule better sounding. The dynamic range is a little wider as is the bandwidth. Distortion is a little lower particularly at the inside of the record. If they are not pressed to the highest standards the noise they produce can be more annoying as it is pitched higher. It seems that more care is taken in the production and manufacture of these discs as their consumer base tends to be more discriminating. They cost more and require more exercise. An auto lifter makes life a lot easier. The Little Fwend is handily the best, highly recommended. If it is a well recorded and mastered favorite work it is worth it. The only other discs that can compare are the D2D's. 

Bill, cut it out. You know you need the exercise:-)

Nah, 45 is barely any better than 33 1/3. Just wait a little bit. I'm working on producing high fidelity 78 RPM discs. Two and a half minutes or pure sonic bliss. They will sound so great that the rest of your system won't matter. Coming soon

Contact me if you're a qualified investor looking for the next big thing.

It’s not worth issuing on 45 rpm vinyl unless it’s a top notch recording mix. I have a few from MoFi and Analogue Productions and they are superb. Very quiet, accurate and tons of image. Dream with Dean (Martin) by Analogue is amazing. But I don’t buy many 45’s due to the cost and as Blisshifi says having to turn the record over after just a few songs. 

Why aren't all modern cars replicas of the Mazda Miata?

A valid question, though I've learnt to save what remains of my hearing with earplugs when the roof is down. I bought an NA in 1991 and have put nearly 50k km on her during the 31 short summers since.

As for 45rpm vinyl, buy one of Reference Recordings releases of Doug MacLeod and you'll quickly see why it would be wonderful if everything sounded like that!

Reference Recordings are not comparable to any average 45. First, they’re not reissues; they are derived directly from live performances, but I agree they’re marvelous.

I prefer 33 RPM reissues because I think 45s are a PITA in terms of enjoying music. I’d rather sacrifice a little bit of extra quality (and I question that’s always true anyway) if I don’t have to get up every 5-8 mins. I have a ton of 45 RPM reissues, and for not-so-small handful of them I also have the 33 RPM reissues that have come out since from the same place (e.g. MMJ and AP). Guess which ones I play? Yes, the 33s. I want to to play my system to listen to music, not the other way around.

I also listen to classical a lot and refuse to buy them as 45 RPM reissues. I bought one and it never gets played.

Another practical point for 33 releases is that any given album takes half the space in your shelving, leaving more room for your collection*.

Prioritizing the 'ultimate' sound quality against the experience of playing a record and record storage space gets things seriously backwards for me.

*a benefit that is often negated by labels like Acoustic Sounds who double the space taken with the addition of a bunch of poorly reproduced, alternate session photographs: making a double LP package out of what should be a single.

ATO regularly presses their artists at 45RPM. My Morning Jacket is just one