Question about record speed (RPMs)

[YaQuin]

Is there a direct correlation between record speed and fidelity? In other words does a 33RPM record sound better than a 78RPM record all other variables being the same?

It seems to me that 78s are sought after by collectors.

Thanks.

[Sckott]

There's a lot of variables in there. Some 78RPM discs sound absolutely killer while some just don't. Same with 45's and 33.3.'s

Speed doesn't really mean much unless you're talking about the record technology at the time....

[tim_neely]

Originally posted by GammaSpace
It seems to me that 78s are sought after by collectors.



It depends on what kind of music is on them.

Most 78s that the average person might have in the attic or basement aren't sought after at all. There is almost no collector interest in classical 78s (especially longer works that are split up among multiple sides of the same set) or 1940s big-band 78s or 1940s-early 1950s pop vocalist 78s. The supply far outstrips the demand, so they can be found cheap, even in collector's circles.

[Dave]

I agree with Sckott Gamma. The variables are the mastering numero uno. Think of it kind of like the tape speed situation. Higher speed = less info. on more space = better (possible) fidelity. Kind of rudementary I know, but still valid.

Where the heck is Gary as I know he has the Joni Mitchell 45's on 12 inch vinyl?

[Graham Start]

Don't forget that 78s use a much wider groove than 33/45, which necessitates a faster speed. They also don't have the RIAA curve, which pretty much eliminates the possibility of getting any serious bass on them.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Graham Start
Don't forget that 78s use a much wider groove than 33/45, which necessitates a faster speed. They also don't have the RIAA curve, which pretty much eliminates the possibility of getting any serious bass on them.
Oh, I do agree with you Graham. I was just particularly referring to the 45 vs. 33. Sorry for any confusion.

[YaQuin]

Originally posted by Graham Start
Don't forget that 78s use a much wider groove than 33/45, which necessitates a faster speed. They also don't have the RIAA curve, which pretty much eliminates the possibility of getting any serious bass on them.

Graham,

Forgive my newness to this subject. But does the 78s wider groove in and of itself mean the ability to represent a wider dynamic range or a wider frequency range?

[YaQuin]

Originally posted by Dave
I agree with Sckott Gamma. The variables are the mastering numero uno. Think of it kind of like the tape speed situation. Higher speed = less info. on more space = better (possible) fidelity. Kind of rudementary I know, but still valid.

Where the heck is Gary as I know he has the Joni Mitchell 45's on 12 inch vinyl?

Dave,

Do you mean again that it's all in the mastering?

What if all variables remained static with the exception of RPM, such as mastering, recording equipment etc. What qualities would a higher RPM record have that a lower RPM record does not have?

Thanks.

[Mike V]

Well, I'm not really sure this is a good explanation, but I'd say that because grooves contain frequency as well as amplitude changes over distance, those changes would be physically "stretched" over a longer distance on the higher RPM disc. I would think that fast transients would be easier to capture at higher speed, since they would be stretched as well, meaning they wouldn't jolt your cartridge as much. The movement within a groove would be more gradual at higher RPM. It does make a difference in the sound..

[Sckott]

Originally posted by GammaSpace


What if all variables remained static with the exception of RPM, such as mastering, recording equipment etc. What qualities would a higher RPM record have that a lower RPM record does not have?

Thanks.

But that's the clinch, isn't it? There IS no way to judge technology by just saying "it's all about the speed in which it was cut". That is just NOT true.

Let's see... You had cylinder recordings (and many types in that), records made from many different mixes of shellac, you had different cutting and recording technologies and even plating processes - On and on.

Edison Records were pretty neat. They resisted fingerprints, were practically noiseless and were very long lasting. You've heard of 180g pressings?? Great. How about >300? Possibly one of the most perfect records ever made pre-WWII. The sound was very good, but had limited dynamics. And I'm not sure about this, but I heard that most of them were cut at 80 RPM. Oh, also they cut laterally.

The question is a good one, but you can't answer it without giving conscience consideration to the fact that even for shellacs technology varied greatly.

Faster does not necessarily mean "better". That ain't the ONLY thing.....

I've heard acetate "home" recordings that had more dynamic range than most commercial 45'a or 78's. It truly runs the gamut.

[Dave]

Originally posted by GammaSpace


Dave,

Do you mean again that it's all in the mastering?

What if all variables remained static with the exception of RPM, such as mastering, recording equipment etc. What qualities would a higher RPM record have that a lower RPM record does not have?

Thanks.
I'll bow out at this point because my knowledge about this could fit in a thimble. I'll leave you to the real vinyl pros who I know have gone into detail about just what you're asking before.

I'm just a Parrot in this case, but I do trust if Steve and Kevin make 45's, they must be good. ;)