Suggestions for Vinyl Newbies

I think your are talking about "ramp" ware... Thats that little bit of wax round the outer edge of the record when the needle first goes down to start the side. I used to look at those under strong light as a buyer of a store buying used record collections. By looking at the ramp you can tell if a record has been very wekk played or abused even...If it has all kinds of nicks and scrates on there, chances are the record will be very noisy, if not skipping.

Of course you need ot look at the grooves as well, and often, in the label, if there are all kinds of maeks form old turntable slindle arms, that can be a sogn of a "well loved" lp... i.e VG+ at best...

Ideally, the ramp ware should be minimal to nill if you are looking for a mint or pristine slab of wax. I got a Green Chrysalis copy of Jethro Tull's Benefit the other day at a thrift store (even though I have five already...) just because the record had NO wear at all on the ramp and lok like it was unplayed, like new...unfortunately, I was not that impressed with the sound of this pressing.

hope some of this helps..


cheers,

 

[I apologize to all for the long delay but I have been without much personal time the last couple of weeks.]

To continue with dead wax matrices, sometimes, the best sounding pressings of a given record was NOT the first pressings or runs.

Here, I must digress and discuss the different definitions of “pressings” used by collectors. Goldmine and many “collectors” (as opposed to audiophiles) define a first pressing, second pressing, etc. based mostly on what the label on the record looks like (or the street address or other words and numbers printed on the label of the record) and the outer cover for the record. For an audiophile (and, actually, for collectors also), this is like judging a book by its cover. What should be important is the content and not the packaging. My suggestion to you is that one should try to determine a first pressing (or first runs), etc. by the dead wax information. For example, the much-sought-after Blue Note records (for those not familiar with Jazz records, Blue Note records from the 50’s to mid 60’s are THE most collectible US Jazz records in general) did not sell very well in general at the time of their initial releases and the record company routinely used “newer” (or the then current) labels on records already pressed as part of their first pressing or run. I have found some Blue Note records with much “later” labels hiding the deed groove indentation underneath the label and the dead wax showing the identical markings as the first pressing with the “original” labels. Conversely, I have found Blue Note records with the original label on the record but with later dead wax markings and much thinner vinyl typically used in the late 60’s and early 70’s. In these instances, the record company (or manufacturing plant) was simply using up the inventory of old labels which were no longer the company’s the then current label to cut cost. The same was true for outer covers housing the records. Sometimes, the record company was simply using up the inventory of the original record covers to save on cost.

In fact, contrary to what record collector guides such as Goldmine leads you to believe, sometimes a “later” label is the first pressing or first run of a given record, NOT the “older” label. This happened many times especially during transition periods for a record label. For example, James Taylor’s Sweet Baby James LP was initially released when its record company Warner Bros. was switching from the olive green label with a “W7” at the top of the label to the olive green label with a “WB” at the top of the label. From the dead wax information, it can be proved that the record was first released with the “WB” logo at the top of the label, not the “W7” logo. I have seen several “WB” pressings with the dead wax matrices ending “-1A” on each side (i.e., first lacquer), “A1” or “A2” elsewhere (i.e., first mothers), and “1S” stamper designations. I have yet to see a “W7” pressing with as early a dead wax matrix as the earliest “WB” pressings I have seen. The “W7” pressings were a later run with the company using up old inventory of old labels to save cost. Many LPs by Warner Bros. around this time were done the same way. If you are a fan of Van Morrison, you should be doubly careful about this.

Now, back to my statement that first pressings are NOT always the best sounding pressings. Of course, with EVERYTHING being equal, the very first run of a LP should sound better. A great example of this would be Blind Faith’s debut and only LP, which (perhaps due to the master tape degrading over time) sounds fresher and plays with less guitar distortion on the first runs cut by U.K. Polydor.

But, again, as I previously mentioned, not all vinyl is created equal. Sometimes, even if the same mastering engineer cut all of the pressings, a second or later lacquer cut at a later time may sound better. There are many possible reasons for this, such as the mastering engineer improving on some “mistakes” made during the first run, the use of a better mastering system during a later run, the later run being pressed at a better record plant, etc. More likely, however, a later run may sound better because a different mastering engineer cut that lacquer. A good example of this is Billy Joel’s The Stranger LP. As many folks here already know, I am a HUGE fan of this record – wonderful lyrics, great music, great musicianship and incredible sonics, to boot! The very first pressing of this record was cut by a highly-regarded mastering engineer Ted Jensen of Sterling Sound (who also mastered wonderful sounding records like Toto IV, Eagles’ The Long Run, etc.), as indicated by the dead wax matrices ending with “-1A” etc. and his initials “TJ” etched next to the machine-stamped “STERLING” on the dead wax. A later run of this record was cut by my personal favorite Robert Ludwig at MasterDisk, as indicated by the dead wax matrices ending with “-2A” etc. and his initials “RL” etched next to the machine-stamped “MASTERDISK” on the dead wax. Even on a casual comparison of the two pressings, it should be obvious that the later Robert Ludwig cut pressing sounds better, with deeper and better bass, more realistic piano and vocal sounds, sparkling high frequencies such as cymbals, better focus and more spacious sound stage. You have not heard this record on vinyl until you have experienced a Robert Ludwig cut. So again, back to my statement that dead wax information is more important to an audiophile than whether it is a first pressing, second pressing, etc.

One caveat here, however: Occasionally, an audiophile (and, of course, collectors) may wish to track down a very first pressing or first run of a given record for reasons other than sound. On rare occasions, later pressings of a record was cut from a different mix of a particular song on the LP, contains more or fewer or different songs, or was mastered with certain valuable “glitches”. For example, I understand that only the very first runs of Grateful Dead’s Aoxomoxoa LP has the original mix of a song on that LP which cannot be found on any other pressing, including CDs. A different example would be America’s debut LP, which originally did not contain their hit song “A Horse Without a Name” and which later added that song to the LP. Again, another example would be Reiner’s performance of Also Sprach Zarathustra on the famous RCA Living Stereo LP, the very first run of which (as indicated by the dead wax matrix ending with “-1S”) has the subway train noise which can be heard and has incredibly deep bass at the beginning of the record. A similar example is one of the test pressing and promo label pressing of Moody Blues’ Long Distance Voyager LP, at the beginning of which there is a heart-thumping sound similar to Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon LP.

Since we are on the subject of dead wax information, I would like to point out just one more thing. Some folks may automatically assume that just because a given LP was later reissued by an audiophile record label (such as Mobile Fidelity, Nautilus, US CBS/Columbia “Half Speed” series or even Japanese CBS/Sony “Master Sound” series) that it must have been mastered or remastered by a different mastering engineer. This, however, is just not always true. There are Nautilus Super Disk LPs which show the same dead wax matrix information as the standard pressings of the LP released by the original record company. I have seen several US Columbia “Half Speed” LPs with the same dead wax matrices as their standard pressings. I have also seen some Japanese CBS/Sony “Master Sound” LPs with the same dead wax matrices found on a standard US Columbia LP. Again, the lesson here is NEVER ASSUME – look at the dead wax carefully, regardless of what is stated, claimed or advertised on the record cover, inner sleeve, inserts or packaging.

Now that you are armed with just enough information to be dangerous to yourself, I will list some general rules that I personally use in buying used records.

1. As an audiophile, the best policy, of course, is to LISTEN TO THE RECORD YOURSELF (and compare with other pressings of the same record) and decide for yourself if the record is worth buying. After all, most of us vinyl junkies here have purchased and compared a number of pressings of a favorite record and formed our own personal biases and rules. In listening or comparing different pressings, however, one should remember that depending on the listening “circumstances”, one may prefer one pressing over another. Aside from all other factors and “illusions”, one’s audio system and the acoustics of the room may affect one’s judgment. The listener’s hearing limitations and personal preferences also play a part. For example, on a “budget” system without much extensions in the low and high frequencies (typically, more the low end) or EQ’d up at certain frequencies (after all, you pay more money to find a more “neutral” sounding system) or in a room with certain acoustic quirks (which, by the way, is most of the listening rooms of even the folks here), a great sounding pressing with great sound stage, frequency extension, etc. may not sound that way. In fact, a “worse” sounding pressing with EQ’d sound may actually sound “better”. But since as an audiophile, one should expect that one’s audio system and listen environment will improve over time, an audiophile should try to find a pressing that will sound the best in a more ideal condition. For example, don’t think that you will always enjoy that particular pressing with “boomy” sounding bass, since if your system and listening environment improve, you may discover that that particular pressing “rolls off” the bass at mid-bass range and does not reproduce the low extremes well. Also, an audiophile should not let one’s hearing limitations and personal subjective preferences rule the day. Although one’s hearing limitations (e.g., not being able to hear the high or low frequency extremes) will likely not improve with age, one’s subject preferences may change with experience and better audio system. I have heard many folks who claim that a particular pressing has better bass because they can hear the mid-bass more loudly. If you are an audiophile, however, you should strive to find a pressing that reproduces sound EVENLY down to the very low bass extreme. After all, a bass player does not play the middle keys more loudly in person. An example of this is Pink Floyd’s The Wall LP. Some folks prefer either a particular US or UK pressing of this great LP because, as some put it, it has louder bass (I think, they meant mid-bass). I have found, however, that on a good system well set up in a neutral sounding room, the Japanese pressing of this LP has the most spacious and detailed sound stage and presentation, as well as the most even and far reaching frequency extremes.

2. Of course, not all of us have unlimited money to buy different pressings to try for ourselves. If you do not wish to take a chance due to a limited budget, then the next general rule would be to ASK A FELLOW VINYL JUNKIE whose opinions on records you have learned to trust or respect over time. The chances are there is someone here at the Forums who has previously compared several pressings of that very record that you are deciding whether to buy. Or, if you don’t already have that go-to-audiophile, then try posting a thread with the question.

3. If you don’t have the luxury of time or other circumstance to ask others’ informed opinions, you should look at the DEAD WAX (and other information on the cover, inner sleeve, etc.) carefully to determine whether a mastering engineer that you trust has cut the record, how early is the lacquer/mother/stamper, and which plant manufactured it. The tips that I have given you above should help you some.

4. The next thing I typically consider is the COUNTRY OF ORIGIN rule. Oftentimes, where the artist recorded the LP and where the record company that originally released that LP can help you guess (the key word is “guess”) whether a particular pressing will sound good. For example, The Clash was originally signed with UK’s CBS label and, as far as I know, their London Calling double LP was recorded and initially mastered and released in the UK. At least until this time, The Clash was not a huge household name in the US and it is probably safe to assume that the original master tapes were in the hands of UK’s CBS. UK CBS’s original pressing of this record has noticeably better bass, etc. than the US Epic first pressings or even the Japanese first pressings. In fact, this is one of those records that you must hear on the UK CBS original. The power and presence, mmmmm! Jimi Hendrix’s Are You Experienced and Axis: Bold As Love LPs are another example. The original UK Track Mono pressing of Are You Experienced and UK Track Mono or Stereo pressing of Axis: Bold As Love are records to die for. One more example is Elton John’s self-title LP (the one with “Your Song” on it) originally released in the UK by the DJM label. The impressive full bass on this UK original pressing (especially the ones with the earliest matrices on the dead wax) is missing on all other pressing.

5. The country of original rule, however, has many exceptions. More important than that rule is to find out WHO USED THE ORIGINAL MASTER TAPES. For example, The Who was a band who was on contract with UK Track at the time and their Who’s Next LP was apparently recorded in London, England. But for whatever reason, the master tapes were shipped to the US and the very first lacquers cut were done by Doug Sax in the US. As my thread that I started some time ago suggests, however, one of those US lacquers (or metal parts) were either shipped to the UK to press the very first runs of that LP released in the UK or used in the US to press the very first runs of that LP sold in the UK. The records pressed from these very first lacquers cut by Doug Sax in the US are the best sounding pressings (i.e., the US Decca pressings with dead wax matrices ending with “-W1” and the UK Track pressings with dead wax matrices ending with “A//1” and “B//2”).

6. Sometimes, a very WELL MASTERED PRESSING from a dub of the master tapes is better than a mediocre mastering job from the original master tapes. This, of course, is a part of Rule Number 3 above, and contradicts Rule Numbers 4 and 5 above. Although with all being equal, a pressing mastered from the fresh original master tapes would sound better than a pressing mastered from a dub of the master tapes, who and how it was mastered can sometimes overcome the fact that a particular pressing was mastered from a dub of the master tapes (or even “aged” master tapes). A good example is a 1961 or 9162 LP by Ray Charles and Betty Carter originally on the US ABC Paramount label. The original US stereo pressing of that record sounds wonderful (and was an audiophile favorite for many years). The best sounding pressing of that record, however, is the Japanese King pressing from 1975, probably mastered from a dub of the original master tapes. On a side note, Steve Hoffman mastered DCC reissue also sounds wonderful but I think the tapes used by Steve Hoffman was either not the original master tapes (as Ray Charles had ownership of the original master tapes by contract) or the tapes had degenerated over time to a point where the sound on the DCC reissue was the best Steve Hoffman can get.

7. Finally, I consider the PRESSING QUALITY. I have found that on some occasions, quiet, good-quality vinyl can bring out more detail of a recording. With all being equal, I would prefer a Japanese pressing from the 80’s over a US non-audiophile pressing mastered by the same mastering engineer using the same tapes. A good example of this is Donald Fagen’s Nightfly LP, which was mastered by Robert Ludwig for both the US pressing and the Japanese pressing. While the US pressing was pressed on pretty good vinyl (especially the Quiex promo), the Japanese vinyl is quieter and brings out the detail more in places. Similarly, with all being equal, I would prefer a UK or German pressing from the later 70’s and 80’s over a US pressing mastered by the same person using the same tapes. A good example of this is Pink Floyd’s The Wall double LP mentioned above. Both the UK and US pressings were mastered by Doug Sax (although it has not been proved to me that Mr. Sax, and not someone else at The Mastering Lab, actually cut all of the lacquers with the “TML” stamp on the dead wax) and I think that the UK vinyl is quieter and brings out more detail.

There are other factors that I consider as well, obviously, but the above are the most basic and general guidelines that I use – sometimes, I even consider whether the particular pressing was mastered using tube gear!

[On the next post (which may be another week or so from now), I will try to give you some tips on guessing whether a particular used record will play cleanly (as opposed to just looking clean). As all of us audiophiles who buy used records have experienced at some point in our collecting history, there aren’t too many experiences more disappointing than shelling out big bucks for a used record that visually heightens your expectations only to be crushed by the continual crunching noise with faint music sound in the background when you go home to play it. I will explain to you why visual grading is no grading at all and discuss the limitations of a 100 Watt light bulb and why, sometimes, you can rely more on the condition of the inner sleeve and the spindle hole on the label than the visual condition of the actual vinyl. Please stay tuned.]

 

My posts thus far in a single post

I don't know why, but this thing will not let me combine my previous posts into a single post.

I had added additional information to the earlier posts also. Oh well.

Sorry folks.

 

I have attached my previous posts on this thread as a single Word document.

I hope this helps.

 

Thanks again, Sung!

 

Clarification on dead wax info for Allen Zentz and his associates, Brian Gardner and Chris Bellman:



Between 1974 and early 1980, AZR lacquers were signed in the deadwax in two different ways: Allen's initials (if he cut the lacquer himself), and the AZ 'logo' followed by one of the associate cutter's signatures, initials, or both.

The 'AZ logo' as used in deadwax (almost exclusively by the associate engineers, and very rarely by Allen himself) appears in the deadwax as the letters AZ connected together thus:

​

Allen signed his cuts with his initials, but almost always with a upper case A and lower case Z thus: Az

He has also signed with the uppercase letters AZ, but with a gap in between them thus: A Z.

On a few rare occasions he has signed in the style of the AZ logo shown above, or in the mastering house code in MCA matrix information.

Between mid-1980 until 1984, AZR lacquers had the text MASTERED AT ALLEN ZENTZ, L.A. CALIF. stamped in the deadwax which was followed either by nothing (if Allen himself cut the lacquer), or by the associate cutter's signatures, initials, or both.

THE ASSOCIATE ENGINEERS:

The two associate engineers that cut virtually all of the lacquers for AZR during this time are Brian Gardner and Chris Bellman. The following paragraphs provide information on how they signed their lacquers:

Brian Gardner: Brian signed after the AZ logo or the deadwax stamped text with one of two signatures- a flower and one or two birds (or seagulls):

​

On some of Brian's lacquers he also signed with the initials BG or BKG in addition to the flower or seagulls.


Chris Bellman: Chris signed with the initials CB following the AZ logo or stamped text.

-Aaron

 

Wow... I just picked up a very nice copy of The Stranger for $0.49 at a thrift shop... Side 1 is -2A with RL in dead wax... Side 2 is -3D with RL also. Haven't played or needledropped it yet but now I'm really looking forward to it!

 

Thanks, Aaron, for the great and detailed explanation of the dead wax markings of Allen Zentz and his associates! Now I know what to look for.

I hope other experts here chime in here and give additional info regarding dead wax reading or other related subjects.


major_works, you have an amazing piece of vinyl there. Play it loud and enjoy! Side 2 is especially great starting with "Vienna". I must have seen at least 10 Ted Jensen mastered copies to every 1 Robert Ludwig mastered copy (and 1 non-TJ and non-RL copy). You should feel fortunate, as I know folks who have deperately sought after a RL copy for months without success.

 

This is true sometimes. Many of the classic late 60's UK island label records (Jethro Tull, Free, Traffic, Fairport Convention, etc.) were re-cut (many by George Peckham of Porky Pecko fame) and pressed by EMI in the early 70's. While these are not always 'better' sounding than the originals, they do sound superb and have a different 'feel' to them. Some of the Capitol label 60's releases (Hollies, Beach Boys) were re-cut in the 80's in their mono configuration and these (I've found) sound better than the original pressings.

Aoxomoxoa was re-mixed several years after its initial release, in 1971. Luckily the LP cover says so, on the back side.

America's debut without 'Horse' can be found in -1A / -1A. When Horse was added soon after its initial release, side one bore -1B with the 're-1' code as well. Fortunately, the sound quality didn't suffer noticeably. An audiophile-like release nonetheless.

The longer I compare LP pressings, the more I find this to be true. The two exceptions that come immediately to mind (UK bands bettered on US pressings): Cream and Led Zeppelin.

how do I put this....uumm......the UK Mono Track 'Are You Experienced' is....definitely NOT to die for! Its got mojo (being what it is) but this is not a great sounding LP. There is no low end. I mean literally none. The drumming is awesome even if it doesn't have any kick. The tracks are considerably different sounding against their counterpart US stereo bretheren. Totally different animals.

Amen! And its openness and ambiance is far ahead of US pressings.

 

Just found this thread, really interesting to read as it corroborates things I knew and teaches me new stuff too...

Thank you to all contributors!

 

Raunchnroll - have you ever compared the mono Backtrack reissue? It would be nice if someone told me that the reissue is better than the original, because it's something I could actually afford.

The UK track listing is the only one I want to live with, so I'd like to get the best sounding edition of that version

 

Just a little bit of caveat on the Backtrack issue: Notwithstanding what it says on the cover and the label, some of those Backtrack Are You Experienced is STEREO! I have had both, Mono and Stereo, with both stating that it is Mono. Go figure. It is interesting, though, because just about everyone erroneously thinks that the first stereo pressing of that LP released in the UK was the late 70's/early 80's Track replica series.

Also, regarding sound, the Backtrack is not as solid sounding as the original Track Mono but it is still worth the price of admission, especially considering that a nice clean copy of the Track Mono usually goes for at least a couple of hundred dollars.

By the way, thanks Raunchnroll for the post. I wish more experts here would post. Raunchnroll is one of the folks here whose opinions I value and his opinion of Track Are You Experienced just goes to show that the first rule is the most important, which is that one should always judge for oneself. I agree that the LP is not the greatest sounding recording in the first place, especially the first couple of tracks, but later in the LP the UK Track has some amazing deep bass and sparkling high end, which for me, make this an essential part of my record collection. Viva la difference!

 

Most tasty stuff...

By the way, thanks Raunchnroll for the post. I wish more experts here would post. Raunchnroll is one of the folks here whose opinions I value and his opinion of Track Are You Experienced just goes to show that the first rule is the most important, which is that one should always judge for oneself. I agree that the LP is not the greatest sounding recording in the first place, especially the first couple of tracks, but later in the LP the UK Track has some amazing deep bass and sparkling high end, which for me, make this an essential part of my record collection. Viva la difference![/QUOTE]


Great posts Sung, and Raunch, very informative, educational, and entertaining stuff, please do keep it up, Vinyl 101 for newbies... share the knowledge, feel the love... The combined knowledge here is truely amaxing.

cheers,



And I +1 Sung's request for more "experts" to post here... on anything, music-wise your an expert on... I could tell y'all all aobut Roy Harper's amazing canon, but you'd say Roy who~per?

 

Thanks a lot! It is a lot to absorb.

I would be interested to know how to tell from the dead wax when a Blue Note record came out.

 

Question: I've got a pretty modest system that doesn't have a mono switch, but I want to play mono releases sometimes.

For no particular reason except that it seems intuitively not a bad idea, I tend to just crank the balance hard right (since that's the speaker closest to the center of my wall), but should I be doing something else instead? I read some reference to something along the lines of summing the channels or something. How does one do that, and do I need to if I'm already just listening to mono stuff out of one speaker?

 

It's much easier to tell from the label styles. This information is in the Goldmine guides and most other collector type books (though not generally online).

Find someone with a collection and take a look at it. Records are surprisingly consistent in their different epochs, so a 50's Blue Note and a 50's Prestige or Contemporary will share many features, as will 60's and 70's ones. This is fairly serious collector stuff and 90% of listeners won't care.

 

Well, I have some early Blue Note records and they sound incredible -- noticeably better than later pressings. Sung notes in his write up that it is best not to use the labels, since they are often off, better to use the dead wax. That sounds like a good way to get a deal on an early pressing: find one with a later label but an early stamper.

I suppose I could use the early labels that I have, hope that they are early pressings (as is surely likely) and try to generalize from that about the dead wax. But if someone has the deadwax info, that would certainly be easier!

I just picked up some of the Blue Note Japanese King pressings that Sung often suggests on this forum. They do sound great. I don't have any duplicates of the same title to do a real comparison, but they roughly sound as good to my ears -- which is to say great.

 

If the only important thing is the sound quality, then you'd need to know which titles had more than one cut during it's lifetime. I'm pretty sure all I've seen have been incised, and only say (catalog #) A and B. No sign of an A1 or A2, no other marks other than the RVG signature, no RE-1 or anything until you get to the 70's reissues and they follow more familiar rules. But this is Blue Note, and the label makes a huge difference to the book price whether it sounds the same or not.

It wouldn't surprise me to find the same cut used right from the earliest to the Liberty issues, only changing when the blue label debuted - even then there's plenty of van gelder stamps on them.

 

I'd get the reissue of vs. by Mission of Burma that just came out

 

Well, I've found the quality of the early Blue Note vinyl to be better. I don't know if it is in part because it is thicker or not, but some earlier pressings sound better than liberty pressings even if they appear worse. So even if the same cut was used, that doesn't mean the sonics will be the same. As I understand it, a lot more recycled vinyl was used in the 60's than was used in the 50's and I assume it was happening more and more as the 60's progressed.

But if I could find an actual 50's pressing with a 60's label, that would have the sound without the sticker.

 

Geez, alright.

I REALLY did NOT want this thread to be a vinyl expert thread but, since you genuinely seem to be hooked on Blue Note, I will try to give you some tidbits.

CAVEAT: ALL of my theories come from having owned and/or inspected literally thousands of Blue Note records over the years (as opposed to historical knowledge), and I no longer own those records and all of the following is from my memory (or a lack thereof).

First of all, just about all of the writings (including Goldmine and internet articles) and word-of-mouth theories that I have seen or heard over the years have some merit but basically I have found them so full of holes (I did not say crap) that I think that it hurts audiophiles more than it helps them.

Ugh, now I sound pompous, and this is exactly the reason why I never wrote about this. I hope you can ignore how this sounds.

For the reasons below, for an audiophile, the only thing you really should concentrate on is whether the dead wax has a big machine-stamped "RVG", a smaller machine-stamped "RVG" (and on Prestige and perhaps other records, sometimes, it is a hand-written "RVG") or a even smaller machine-stamped "VAN GELDER". Of course, as I will explain later, you may wish to audition before you buy those Rudy Van Gelder Blue Notes pressed on the "paper-like" or "matte-like" blue/white A Division of Liberty label (as opposed to smooth and shiny label) and really thin vinyl.

Now, this is just a theory but I think it applies to most (if not all) of the Blue Note titles: Because Blue Note records really did not sell millions of copies, Mr. Van Gelder cut the lacquer once on each title most (if not all) of the time. Now, this means that the true first run of a title and a late 60's reissue on a Liberty label were from the same lacquer (or metal parts). This is evidenced by the fact that a late 60's reissue of an early title (say, before 1961 or before around cat. not 4090's) shows on the dead wax Mr. Van Gelder's typical larger handwriting of the catalog number and a "RVG" instead of "van gelder".

It appears from the dead wax of the Blue Note and Prestige records that I have seen that Mr. Van Gelder USUALLY hand wrote the cat. no. in larger-sized letters and numbers prior to around 1961 and used a machine-stamped "RVG" (on some Prestige titles, he hand wrote his initials "RVG"). Thereafter, his handwriting typically was smaller and he used a "van gelder" stamp. I think this theory is correct since the very first runs of each title (as I used to have a collection of Blue Notes from a DJ who used to receive them as they were being released as a promotion) up to AROUND Duke Pearson, Sweet Honey Bee, cat. no. 4252, had what is commonly called by Blue Note collectors as an "ear". An "ear" is a handwritten marking resembling an "alpha" Greek sign or an ear. This is just an unconfirmed hypothesis but I think that marking indicated a first lacquer.

It is interesting to note that while an original, say, 1959 release has the ear, a later, say, late 60's Liberty reissue does not have the ear BUT the exact same markings on the dead wax otherwise. The only exception would be some extraneous letters and numbers, such as "9M" or a series of numbers.

Also, Mr. Van Gelder only wrote the cat. no. plus a "-A" and "-B" (to denote the Sides), sometimes followed by a "." and sometimes by a "-1" or "-2" etc. All other markings (other than his "RVG" or "van gelder" or "stereo" stamps), I believe, were etched AFTER Mr. Van Gelder cut the lacquer, INCLUDING the EAR.

Therefore, one sure way to look for a true first run of an early title (i.e., title released on or before around 1961) is to look for an "ear" in the dead wax.

The next clue is to inspect the actual vinyl. The very earliest Blue Note titles were originally pressed on really thick vinyl with what is commonly called by Blue Note collectors as a "flat edge". I have not been able to personally confirm this theory.

The next period of vinyl would be up to around 1960 when the vinyl was really thick on "rounded edge".

Then around 1961 or 1962'ish, the vinyl became a bit thinner (but still thick).

Around the mid 60's, when Liberty bought Blue Note, the vinyl was thinner (but still thickish) and it started releasing the new titles on the shiny blue/white A Division of Liberty label (many of which had a circular indentation around the spindle hole around the size of a quarter). I am of the belief, however, that the circular indentation is just a sign of a particular pressing machine, as opposed to a first, second, etc. pressing.

From here, it gets a bit fuzzy.

In whichever order, Liberty started selling older Blue Note titles on really thin vinyl with a "paper-like" or "matte-like" A Division of Liberty label (which does not track very well and sometimes can be noisy). Again, in whichever order, Liberty also started selling older Blue Note titles on older Blue Note labels with thin (but not super thin) vinyl with "jagged edge". It also reissued many (if not all) older Blue Note titles in MONO with a darker blue/white A Division of Liberty label. This last group do NOT have Mr. Van Gelder's markings and I think they were cut from new lacquers cut by someone else.

Then later Liberty redid the entire catalog (either late 60's or very early 70's) on the black/blue Liberty label. I believe these were all cut from the original lacquers (or metal parts) cut by Mr. Van Gelder when the titles were originally released. These are on thicker vinyl than the thinner Liberty vinyl of the late 60's (and around the same thickness as the original Liberty vinyl of the mid-60's).

Then there were blue label (with either black-colored note or white-colored note, etc.) reissues of the 70's, many of which were simply pressed from the old existing Van Gelder lacquers.

Please note that "Deep Groove" is NOT a good way to distinguish when it was pressed, as I have found Blue Note records with the label pasted over the deed groove indentation, which probably means that the record itself was pressed in the 50's (or up to around 1960 or 1961) and a label was pasted on over the deep groove pressing and sold.

The label is also not a good way to tell since I have found numerous Blue Note records with a "street address" label on thin Liberty vinyl (and some with a "jagged edge", a sure proof that it was not pressed in the 50's or early 60's).

I hope this helps.

 

Thanks for the help! Didn't seem pompous.

I just meant to be asking if there was something like “B U C K I N G H A M” and “G R A M O P H L T D.” I didn't mean to turn this into an experts forum on Blue Note records. Although I feel like this whole thread, while quite useful, is well above the beginner level.

What you said makes sense of why at least some of my RVG's don't sound as good -- the cheaper, very thin vinyl from some of the Liberty pressings.

 

As someone who is just starting to pay attention to matrix and deadwax information, I appreciate this thread! Thanks for all your knowledge and help, guys.

 

After a while you learn to look for reliable indicators for 'better sounding than all others' type of pressings - esp. albums that were in print a long time.

The Artisan stamp (a record or plate with 2 chop sticks), Masterdisk, Sterling Sound or 'SS,' The Mastering Lab (TML).... and one that has been surprising me for some time now: Monarch (small M in a circle).

Take ABC / Dunhill records for example. I bought every different copy I could of Steppenwolf's catalog: US, German, & UK. Lo and behold those original shiny label US Monarch pressings were 'the ones' up through Monster. I did the same thing with The James Gang - discovered the very best pressings (noticeably too) were the SS stamped 'Yer Album' and the others having that magical artisan mark. Cat Stevens on A&M records bearing the 'Sterling' stamp, and so on.

 

That YOU very much for this info. on groups I collect, who's dead wax I need educating on.... I did get an Artisan After the Goldrush the other day, but it was an RE-1 (but at least not RE-2) Sounds real good...

Please, feel free to ramble on some more about what you know dead wax wise, and help educate us newbies to the wonderful world of wax...



Newbie, also do a search, as I know there are some threads already that have actual photos of some of these dead wax designs... cheers,