A truism it may be, but why is it that in the audiophile /
high fidelity audio world that anything bigger than necessary and run faster
than necessary always result in better sound quality?
By: Ringo Bones
Some say the propensity of over-engineering everything –
i.e. building something bigger than necessary and running it faster than
necessary - in the high fidelity audio / audiophile world is nothing more than
hype over common sense, but we with the requisite ears begs to differ. As in
open reel master tapes run at the manufacturer’s maximum recommended speeds
tend to sound way better than master tapes recorded at a much slower speed in
inches per second. On the subject of turning a band’s / musician’s master tape
into something that the general public can play in their homes – i.e. music
playback medium may they be vinyl LPs, CDs, cassettes, MP3s, etc. – being a
little more conscientious than your typical egotistical big wig record label
owner when it comes paying attention in the mastering and pressing phase really
pays dividends when you aim for a good sounding product whose sound quality is
way better than average. And when it
comes to the subject of vinyl releases, does the 45 RPM record really sound
better than the 33 1/3 RPM vinyl LP?
During the latter half of the 1990s when I was involved in
one of our local punk rock band’s toe-in-the-water exercise to release their
master tapes in vinyl form, I’ve noticed that the 45 RPM singles sound much
closer to the original master tape compared to the 33 1/3 RPM vinyl LP
compilation pressing – especially at the frequency extremes of the audio band.
Strange how something I’ve read a few years earlier in The Absolute Sound
magazine seems to jibe with my first ear witness experience.
Back in March 1994, The Absolute Sound magazine’s
editor-in-chief Harry Pearson was one of the first folks to listen to Michael
Hobson’s initial 45 RPM test pressings of iconic the Golden Age of Stereo era
Classical music recordings – i.e. the Reiner recording of Strauss’s Also sprach
Zarathustra. At the time, Hobson was wont to dispense 45 RPM versions of the
RCA reissues to record critics, which then included Pearson. As vinyl
enthusiasts now know, the 45 RPM vinyl record contain about half of the music
per side of an equivalent 33 1/3 RPM and are, for all practical purposes, makes
the 45 RPM sounds as close to the original master tapes as ordinary mortals are
ever likely to get.
As Harry Pearson went into Bernie Grundman’s mastering room
that has an audio system that allowed one to A/B comparison between the
original work parts – as in the original open reel master tape - and a master
disc being cut from those recordings. At 33 and 1/3 RPM, the difference between
what was on the vinyl and what was on the master tape were so pronounced –
notes Pearson – that it was laughable, the 33 and 1/3 RPM pressing being a pale
imitation, like a faded movie print from a visual perspective, when heard
directly against the original master tape. Pearson notes that the amount of
musical information that was lost was, poetically speaking, more than an order
of magnitude and he also notes that certainly part of these differences could
be attributed to the old Shure V-15 Type Whatever vinyl replay cartridge
Grundman was using at the time, but there was no denying that the vinyl LP at
33 1/3 RPM was simply not an acceptable replica. However, a simple switch of
the cutting lathe from 33 and 1/3 RPM to 45 RPM and out of blue from Pearson’s
perspective, the differences between the original RCA master tapes and the
vinyl pressing disc were reduced to the minor. So does a faster running speed
more often than not result in improved sound quality?
As a further insight into why 45 RPM vinyl sounds better
than its 33 1/3 RPM long-playing counterpart, consider this intriguing
explanation of the 45’s advantage from Mary Cardas – daughter of the great
George Cardas – and one of the first record critics who got one of Michael
Hobson’s first 45 RPM test pressings. According to Mary Cardas: “As the stylus
moves through the groove, it makes an attempt to precisely trace each `peak’
and `valley’ it comes across, given the same one-second section of music cut at
the same level, the amount of groove modulation is the same whether the lathe
is moving at 33, 45 or 79. The difference is in the slope of those modulations.
The best analogy is that of a ski slope. Compare a 500-foot drop over a
distance of 1,000 feet (a more pleasant slope). My own recovery in order take
the next drop would be substantially different – whether or not you factored in
a 25 percent increase in speed. For a cartridge, there may not be enough time
after finishing one slope to mechanically recover and be able to completely
track the next, By cutting at a faster speed, we are able to `soften the
terrain’ with precisely the same information being transferred. The audible
differences between a record cut at 45 and the same at 33 are generally heard
in more clearly delineated instrument placement and sizing, and greater
low-level detail (one of the first things to suffer in mistracking). The
drawback is that the amount of music one can press on one side of a record is
cut by almost 50 percent.”
2 comments:
Given Mary Cardas' analogy of a ski-slope on the difference between how the grooves are impressed on a 45 RPM record and a 33 and 1/3 RPM long-playing record, does this mean that 45 RPM vinyl records are less stressful on the cantilever and stylus assembly of a typical vinyl playback pickup cartridge? And how about inner-groove distortion - does 45 RPM vinyl have less inner-groove distortion than their 33 and 1/3 RPM long-playing record counterparts?
Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs should release all their vinyl in 45 RPM form - 2 of them for a full-length album to get closer to the original master tape that they use.
Post a Comment