2. analog
  3. 123621-59633

Do 180g vinyls sound better or is it a myth ?

After just recently getting into vinyl and buying a few albums I’m wanting to know opinions from like minded people. Does the weight of the vinyl make a difference to overall sound quality, and to add a bit more substance to the post, does it sound better than CD ?
Thanks for taking the time to read my post .

Steve
128x128steve1979
steve1979's avatar
steve1979 OP
18 posts
 
Thanks for all the info, it's great to hear all your views. All this info is giving me a better understanding on everything. 

Thanks again 
krellviscscom
15 posts
 
Just another scam to get your money. Something could be pressed on 500 gram, but that does not mean it will sound better. I too have given up on these 'new' re-issues. They are warped, full of noise and don't live up to the hype. I like to look for clean original first pressings.  I have bought 180's and 200's till I can find a good first pressing. Plus that's part of the fun. Some of the Rhino's, Analog Production and Audio Fidelity's are pretty good.  To me the new Mo-Fi issues are bad. They don't compare to the old original Mo-Fi's.
robboss
3 posts
 
180s don't always sound better, but I've got several that replaced some VERY worn albums from high school that popped like a pan of bacon. Cases in point were the Led Zeppelin reissues, Quadrophenia and Stills' Manassas. Jeff Beck "There and Back" and Wings Over America weren't any better than the original, except that it was a fresh, clean copy. That was worth it to me. The last round of Stones reissues are being universally panned by listeners, so I passed.

Sometimes, original pressings sucked to begin with and the new ones were given attention by people who love them (like Led Zep). In the Court of the Crimson King was a bad pressing when I got it in the 80s, and there were several generations of gawd awful CDs. Virgin had lost the masters and consumers got third and fourth generation tape copies (see the King Crimson site for the whole story). They eventually found them and Robert Fripp recovered the original master tapes a couple years ago, and the 200g reissues are wonderful.

There's plenty of information out there. If you're inclined to buy, check the critics but especially the customer reviews. If it's an album you love, it's usually--not always but usually--worth it. Kinda/sorta/on the fence about it? Buy a used copy.
mofimadness's avatar
mofimadness
4,937 posts
 
"To me the new Mo-Fi issues are bad. They don't compare to the old original Mo-Fi's."
That's just not true.  Some of the new MOFI's are incredible.  There have been a few duds, but for the most part they are indeed very nice. 
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,540 posts
 

Steve, anyone who tells you that vinyl always sounds better than cd or vice versa does not know what they are talking about.  The turntable or cd player is only one small part of the system that determines the quality of the sound you hear.   There are many cd based systems that sound better than most vinyl based systems and vice versa.

Some albums recorded all analog simply sound bad.  Bad recording, bad pressing, warped, scratched, worn out, spindle hole off center, there are plenty of ways to make a vinyl record sound bad.

There are also many cds that were never released on vinyl, so, by default the cd sounds better.  The cd boom caused the release of compilations of music from the 1920s to the present that would be unavailable otherwise.

If you like classical, you can purchase a very nice sounding SACD player for not a lot of money  (Marantz SA8005 for example) and have access to a huge number of modern classical recordings in excellent sound quality.

You seem to be a guy who is getting into vinyl and wants some assurance that you're doing the right thing.  If it sounds good to you, you're doing the right thing.  But you don't have to choose one format exclusively.  I think it would be a mistake to do that.  Keep your options open and enjoy the best of both formats.

More to discover