Thick Records = Deep Grooves = More Bass

[Aussie0zborn]

Can we agree or disagree on this topic??

1. Thick records are better.
I don't totally agree.

2. Thick records = deeper grooves.
What does the disc cutting engineer have to do with how thick the pressing plant makes their records? What if stampers from the same cut are sent to two different plants... one that makes thick records and one that makes thin records - will the grooves vary in depth when each plant is presisng from the same cut?

3. Deep Grooves = more bass
Generally yes, but in my early days of cutting I cut my first Top 40 12" dance msuic single way too deep and there was no extra bass. Should there have been?

If we can't agree on any of that do we at least agree that the thickness of a vinyl pressing has NOTHING TO DO with the depth of the groove?

[blacknwhite]

Thanks Aussie0zborn for asking GREAT questions, here goes, my two cents, spoken "from the viewpoint" of myself and all the other like-minded vinyl collectors (old & new) I've Merged Minds with...

1. Thick records are better.

What's "Thick"? I'll say,>= 150g (12-inch).

What is the measure of "better"? As in "better", do you mean "will sell more copies"? For Non-DJ releases, I'd say Yes, thicker records will sell better (after the first few releases, when people become familiar with what grade of thickness a certain company typically produces). I avoid thin vinyl when possible, as well as other like-minded collectors. Why? Is thicker TECHNICALLY better? Many audiophiles will argue with me; I say, NO, thicker isn't TECHNICALLY better.

A bigger question: Is the vinyl format really technically better than CDs at all? I say, suprisingly: to my ears, which get annoyed with sounds above about 16,000 kHz: NO, vinyl is not INHERENTLY better than CDs, below 16,000 kHz; it's just that the standard practices used for equipment to cut, and play back, vinyl, gives a "warmer" sound. If you take a CD made from good quality vintage 1950s master tapes, and play through a good warm vintage tube amp with roloff around 16 kHz (to cutoff the "fingernails-on-chalkboard" annoying "dirty" CD frequency range), sounds as good as vinyl on same player to me.

So, why do I buy vinyl at all?? This is the point: For me, and for all those vinyl junkies, who, when asked the question, cannot give a real answer:

Its the UN-EXPLAINABLE VINYL EXPERIENCE. If I can't see the band LIVE, then dangit, I want to enjoy the experience of playing a HEAVY vinyl record on an original tube amp player, rather than a CD. Does a thicker pressing change the sound? No, but that's not the POINT; you're selling the PACKAGE, the LOOK AND FEEL; there's no real substantive advantage of vinyl over CDs other than that, far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, I admit it, I'm a vinyl nut and go out of my way to get thousands of LPs on vinyl rather than CD for the "VINYL EXPERIENCE", if I can't see the band live. And a thin "cheap-feeling" record just defeats the whole purpose of buying vinyl to me. That's just as important as the large-format vinyl cover art. Otherwise, might as well just buy the CD, and play that through the aux input of an old HiFi.

So technically, Thicker = better? I think, No; Sales-wise, for folks like me (NON-DJ vinyl-junkies who spend LOTS of $$$ on vinyl, old and new), YES, VERY important.

But then, I like EVERYTHNG made more heavy-weight, "just because": thick drinking glasses, thick ceramic diner-style plates & mugs, older sturdier steel-framed cars, etc. I just hate thin cheaply-made stuff. I LIKE "OLD SCHOOL" HEAVYWEIGHT STUFF. That's a big part of THE WHOLE REASON I like the vinyl format. I realize thin discs saves the pressing plant money & cycle time, but I'd rather PAY 3 OR 4 DOLLARS MORE for the Heavy Stuff.

2. Thick records = deeper grooves.

I see no inherent correlation between the two.

(But, on an unrelated note, deeper grooves are generally better when space allows, as obviously it allows tracking on non-modern-DJ turntables. I understand why many like DMM, but after my first purchase, I learned to avoid the logo - I'm VERY GLAD they use that logo: that way I know grooves are shallow before buying. That's fine with me as long as I get a Warning. There's plenty other people out there who Want to buy DMM; more power to them.)

3. Deep Grooves = more bass

Again I'd say, no inherent correlation between the two.

But, IF you're going to cut with more bass, THEN I'd hope you'd use deeper-than-average grooves, to prevent skipping.

If we can't agree on any of that do we at least agree that the thickness of a vinyl pressing has NOTHING TO DO with the depth of the groove?

Aussie0zborn, I think you and I (& like-minded vinyl junkies) can agree on all the technical aspects: Technically, there's no correlation between thickness, groove depth, and bass level. It's just that from *everyone* I've talked to with huge vinyl collections both old and new who are NON-DJ vinyl collectors, we LOVE the thicker pressings, "just because". I know that's hard to rationalize, but I guarantee you, I *do* pay $3-4 more for thicker pressings when the choice is available!

"Stupid"? Well, when you get down to it... isn't MUSIC stupid? The whole concept of music. Its just vibrations of air. Air vibrations won't fix your car when it breaks, or cure your cold. Why do we PAY for air vibrations?? "Just Because That's What We LIKE." Same for thick ( >= 150g) vinyl.

- Bob

[Jesus H Chrysler]

one could make the argument that a thicker, heavier record might help to dampen some barely perceptible rumble or noise from the turntable, and I'd imagine they're less prone to warpage, but I really think the only difference is in the buyers perception of quality. a heavier record just feels better when you pull it out of the sleeve and drop it on the platter.
as for groove depth, bass, etc. I'd say wider groove spacing would contribute more than vinyl weight.

[TotalSonic]

Can we agree or disagree on this topic??

1. Thick records are better.
I don't totally agree.

I'd say having good mastering, good plating, good materials, correct timings and temperature for each part of the pressing cycle, good diligence for quality control, and even careful sleeving make up much more critical factors for how good a record will sound way more than the weight ever plays a part in it. I've heard excellent sounding 120 gram records and I've heard crappy sounding 180 gram records.

However - generally a plant knows that when a client orders a heavier pressing that they are likely to be more picky than the client that orders the cheaper product - so they will generally pay more attention to the other factors when making the heavier pressings. I'd say that's a big reason that more often than not thicker records often do in fact sound better.

2. Thick records = deeper grooves.
What does the disc cutting engineer have to do with how thick the pressing plant makes their records? What if stampers from the same cut are sent to two different plants... one that makes thick records and one that makes thin records - will the grooves vary in depth when each plant is presisng from the same cut?

NO. Never. Cutting depth is set at mastering and the thickness that the record is to be pressed at is a complete non-issue at determining the desired cutting depth.

3. Deep Grooves = more bass
Generally yes, but in my early days of cutting I cut my first Top 40 12" dance msuic single way too deep and there was no extra bass. Should there have been?

Phase coherent (i.e. mono or straight up the middle) bass frequencies are lateral (horizontal) movements in a groove. You can have tons of bass going laterally as long as there isn't a sharp transient (i.e. a kick with a square wave pronounced "tick" at the start of it) with high amplitudes that might knock the stylus out of a shallow groove (which is one of the reasons compression and limiting are sometimes placed in a cutting chain).

Non-phase coherent material (i.e. a reverberated stereo chorused bass synth bouncing from Left to Right channels - or a kick panned hard Right and a Bass Guitar panned hard Left doing non-synchronized parts) create vertical movements that often can in fact make the groove disappear if they are at too much amplitude. A great animated illustration of this can be viewed at http://www.vinylrecorder.com/bass.html

With greater cutting depth you can get away with having a wider variety of equipment be able to track more "difficult" passages. Generally this means that releases oriented to the DJ are set to cut at greater depth. This doesn't mean that they generally actually have any more bass frequencies than if the depth was set shallower - it just means less potential problems tracking on playback.

I want to note though that a ton of very commercially successful DJ oriented dance records were mastered to DMM for labels like Strictly Rhythm, Men At Work, Groovalicious, etc. DMM has a general cutting depth of around 2mils - which is certainly lower than what is possible with lacquer. My experience with it is that mastering DMM was that it was fairly easy to get bass response to match that of the original source - so again depth is not the most critical factor in getting good bass response when mastering. However - having said that I have found that many DJ's or producers who were able to compare the two formats often preferred lacquer mastering.

For longer sides obviously the greater factor in determining bass response is the choice of cutting level versus how much ultra-low bass was kept. A better pitch/depth computer in this case allows more level or more bass for long sides - but at some point in any cut the cutting engineer either has to start reducing the bass content (usually with a High Pass Filter - but sometimes with a low shelf cut) or turning down levels.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[TotalSonic]

one could make the argument that a thicker, heavier record might help to dampen some barely perceptible rumble or noise from the turntable, and I'd imagine they're less prone to warpage,

Yup - both these reasons are valid. It definitely is easier to get consistently flat records if just a little more material is used than if you try to economize. I think that 130 - 140 grams works for most profiles fine for this purpose though.

but I really think the only difference is in the buyers perception of quality. a heavier record just feels better when you pull it out of the sleeve and drop it on the platter.

Bingo! We have a winner.

as for groove depth, bass, etc. I'd say wider groove spacing would contribute more than vinyl weight.

Again - completely true.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Aussie0zborn]

Hi Bob,

Point taken. its all about perception (and the fact that there are technical benefits such as low rumble etc etc) Bob, you should join us over at the Record Colelctors Guild forum http://www.recordcollectorsguild.org

NO. Never. Cutting depth is set at mastering and the thickness that the record is to be pressed at is a complete non-issue at determining the desired cutting depth.

Thank You Steve!! I rest my case. I started this topic because in another topic here someone mentioned that thicker records = deeper grooves. And we all know... you can have those same deep grooves on a thin record (the kind that Bob doesnt like!

Over in the Record Collectors Guild forum, there is a popular misconception that thicker records = deeper grooves = more bass. Obviously more bass will give you a deeper groove but as mentioned in my example I once cut a record way too deep and let me assure you.. .there was no EXTRA bass... just what was on the master tape in the first place and nothing more.

[mossboss]

Very good thread this one Most enjoyable Here is a bit of an intersting one for all
Has any one heard of records being pressed at a different thickness from the same die? Well they do it by varying the final closing pressure of the press
It is done by some plants and that is the reason that some 180 G records do sound crap The grooves are not quite filled in due to the lower pressure used
Auto presses unless set correctly also suffer from that The auto press needs to leave a thicker "flash" around the record so the arms can pick it up some times the operators reduce the closing pressure when they start them up, so so you do get some records that are not quite filled in
Steve made a point of correct settings temperature sleeve etc so I thought that this bit may be of interest
Cheers

[PALOMINO]

We here are by no means experts but since we master, electroform, and press all in the same shop I think we have found some pretty interesting things. I feel that you should be able to get perfect sound quality across the frequency curve with any groove as deep as 3 thousandths. Anything deeper doesn't seem to improve the low end and only puts more wear to the stylus. As far as the thickness of a record, we are able to vary that quite a bit. Yes, the thickness of the stampers has somewhat of an affect, but we find it mostly to be in the cycle time and temperature. We can play around with our boiler, sensor, relay, and extruder settings to make VERY thick records, however they do not sound any better or worse than normal ones.

I hope that makes sense!