"The Rising Cost of New Vinyl"
button
1,475 Posts
interesting read:
http://recordcollectornews.com/2013/05/the-rising-cost-of-new-vinyl/
I def. don't pay any attention to rock reissues or new, big name indie releases, but I've definitely noticed this price creep in the comp. world. That being said, the quality of compilations over the last 10 years has risen exponentially, so it still seems like a fair enough deal @ ~$30. What does the Strut say? Will the spike in vinyl prices will make short work of the young collector scene thats sprung up over the last 5/6 years?
http://recordcollectornews.com/2013/05/the-rising-cost-of-new-vinyl/
I def. don't pay any attention to rock reissues or new, big name indie releases, but I've definitely noticed this price creep in the comp. world. That being said, the quality of compilations over the last 10 years has risen exponentially, so it still seems like a fair enough deal @ ~$30. What does the Strut say? Will the spike in vinyl prices will make short work of the young collector scene thats sprung up over the last 5/6 years?
Comments
1) vinyl is short for polyvinyl chloride or PVC. This is a petroleum based product. Now ask yourself if vinyl prices have kept pace with gas prices since the early 90's? The short answer is hell no. Vinyl should, in theory be double what it even is now but the cost is not passed along to the consumer evenly, it's eaten by small labels (hi) who can't afford to amortize the cost across large runs of pressings.
2) EPA regulations on the processes involved in lp manufacturing have devastated the manufacturing industry both in quality and cost. The removal of lead from lp black PVC has increased noise floor and distortion over the last year and it will only get worse. The regulation of the highly toxic materials used in platibg has caused laquer backlogs country wide. The bottom line is we all are inadvertantly producing the shittiest quality records in the history of the industry.
3) unlike 99% of other industries, vinyl is still made the exact same way it was 80 years ago. It's outdated as a manufacturing medium and people with know how are dying, as is the equipment.
Man I could go on and on. Buy vinyl now adays to support te artist and file away - but don't fool yourself - now releases WILL NOT sound better than the digital alternative.
seems like a dubious comparison but...
This I've often wondered about. Most bands are recording digitally now anyways, so has there ever been a difference between a CD and a record in these cases? Isn't it just a digital file grafted on to an analog record? I obviously dont know shit about gear, recording, producing, mastering etc...
as for your second question - this is EXACTLY the point. I would venture that 99.9% of new records are cut from a digital file, which means they have to go through a d/a process to even get to the cutting head electronics. Most of these, from reissue companies I have personally witnessed submit a shitty cd-r burnt in itunes to the cutting engineer. So in essence the LP is a dub off of a cd of the original file. It's clearly an inferior product at that point.
The only way vinyl could and has ever sounding better is OLD VINYL. With it's lead, it's cutting from tape, it's qualified living engineers and teams of techs, it's brand new well functioning manufacturing equipment, it's good pvc and plating, etc. This all died in the mid 80s. Anyone who believes they can make a superior record now adays is truly fooling themselves.
I continue to struggle to manufacture vinyl with 0 profit margin because i believe in the medium, and I have educated myself on it's shortcomings to try and avoid all of the possible pitfalls of operating in an archaic manufacturing environment. By the record because the package is rad and it is something to cherish and hold on to.
but if you want to listen to music, play the digital file and move on with your life.
One of my upcoming releases will be cut straight from the master tape, but outside of high priced audiophile labels, the practice is pretty rare these days.
b/w
Great article, I agree with the whole thing. The first paragraph is pretty much word for word what I've been saying since I started.
That's a great question. It's not just a matter of spooling up a tape and playing the music while you cut the record. Lathes are equipped with a device called a pitch system which reads a "preview" stream of music and opens and closes the pitch of the grooves accordingly to save space. That is why you see grooves tightening up on quiet passages and conversely why it's usually easy to visually see the break on the record. The grooves are more open and darker.
To create a preview stream in the days of yore, a special tape machine was needed with two sets of stereo heads. One set would actually sit ahead of the main repro head and send that audio - a second or two ahead of the actual audio - to the lathe pitch system. The pitch system would then open or close the grooves according to the audio it heard and in advance of what was coming down the pipe, ao as to avoid overcuts. As you can imagine this was very complicated and a general pita but there was no better way back in the day. Different size heads, different spacing for different IPS tapes etc. then again with a staff of engineers salaried and on hand plus hundreds of competent techs around town, that's just how vinyl was cut.
When the cd revolution started and digital took over, cutting engineers, understandably, sold off this gear as quickly as they could, especially the valuable extra sets of heads. But the fact of the matter is unless you have one of these rare and complex set ups, you just ain't cuttin off of tape. There are two places left I know who didn't sell of thier Rigs (Bernie grundman and sterling and maybe Doug sax) but other than that, tape isn't even an option.
So short answer, yes it's still possible, it will cost you an arm and a leg and there are about two places left in the us who can still do it.
Everything else is a dub of a CD.
Actually, there are two places in NYC alone, Salt and Bonati, that do it.
Not sure I agree with the dub of a CD statement, unless you include hi-res (96k/24 bit) as a CD, which is not really accurate.
Yes 96k/24bit cut vinyl is an analog dub of a 96k/ 24bit file.
I checked Bonatis websit and they have a vms 70 with a digital delay for the preview. That's not really the same thing as a preview head on a tape machine. Just sayin'.
Is this just in the US?
Furnace is expensive to press with but the good thing is that they add the shipping into cost of pressing. Outside of the delays, I am happy with them. Anyways, what plant these days isn't experiencing delays and back ups.
amir
No doubt this is the norm, but not everybody does it
Does this affect the sound quality of the final product?
@horseleech well, it's splitting hairs but yes - if I understand correctly the digital delay holds up the actual audio feed for a second or two and allows the real time audio from tape to control the pitch system, so in that sense it adds an extra round of digital conversion. The other alternative from tape would be to cut "fixed pitch" but it's risky as you could have an overcut and not know until you get the test pressing back (if you can't see it on the microscope off the lathe)
At Bernie grundman and sterling they still have thier original decks with the 4 head set up, preview in front of playback. It's so damn expensive though the records would be like $40 a piece just to amortize the cost in at 1000 units
You have your tape machine with 4 heads, and you have a throw switch behind it. The throw switch routes audio to path A and Path B, each of which has an identical set of EQ's limiters or comps etc. You chart out your moves for each song and start cutting the first song on Path A with your mastering settings. While A/Song 1 is cutting, you set up the EQ on path B for the second track. When the first track ends, you throw the switch and route the audio to Path B with it's mastering settings. While that is cutting you wipe Path A and set the EQ etc. BAck and forth like a Cameo song till the side is done.
This is how pretty much ALL records were mastered/cut up until 1980, and this is why ALL those records potentially sound much more rad than what we are doing today.
I'm thinking one of the things that have kept it a bit in check is the use of recycled vinyl no? For a good 20+ years the only people that were using virgin vinyl were some plants in Europe. And it always showed in the final product with the quality. I had people willing to spend the money for UK presses of albums. The the majority just wanted it for as cheap as possible (Buy the shitty US press). So now we still have people willing to spend for a quality product, but now add a bit of rarity into the mix... You just loose the buyers that just wanted it cheap (Who buy or dl the digital).
http://m.guardiannews.com/music/2013/may/25/pete-hutchison-interview-new-vinyl-recording
BTW, my post No.1000. Wanted to save it up but...who cares anyway.
When I reflect on prices then versus prices now, they have gone up a bit; say $1 (give or take) per domestic, and maybe $2 per import.
Nothing shocking, though.
I wish this were true, but it's not.
Some labels have kept prices low, in the $12-$15 range, but they are the exception. A lot of the titles I have in stock now are closer to $20 and way too many are $25-$30 (or more). 25 years ago the list price of Lps was $8.98 to $9.98. I'd say that the average price has close to doubled in that time.
Great thread.
Just had my mind blown by Thes' posts and I tried to convey it to my wife. "Wow I just found out why new records sound kinda shitty. Something about not using lead anymore and PVC and pasting digital tracks onto an analog format. This is crazy."
"Oh. Cool."