[Ingo]

So, I have two copies of Led Zeppelin II. One copy has zero scratches, looks basically brand spanken new, and plays pretty good. I've always thought the sound was a bit dull, but I always attributed it to the age of the recording.

Well, thing is, I never broke out the other copy of 'II' because I knew it had a bunch of scratches, the label was faded, and overall it just didn't appear to be in good shape.

I pulled the older copy down today just by chance and realized that it had never been cleaned, so I cleaned it and threw it on the table. I was amazed to hear that it sounded very good. Very little surface noise, despite the scratches. Not only that but I thought,"Dang, I don't remember this album sounding this good". So I pulled it off and put on the "better" copy. First, from the lead-in groove to the very end it has much more noise. It took me a while to pin it down, but it happened on "Lemon Song". There's a definite difference in the dynamics of these two copies. I took off the "better" copy and cued up 'Lemon Song' on the other. Night and day difference. WAY, WAY, better. After that I noticed that the "better" version is on pretty thick vinyl while the one that actually sounds better is on floppy vinyl.

I've had this happen before. I have a copy of 'Brother in Arms' that's on very floppy vinyl that is AMAZING. Not a tick or pop on either side. So I'm wondering to myself, is floppy vinyl generally quieter than thick vinyl?

Anyhow, it was quite a discovery since I've had both these lying around for a few years without ever realizing.

Thanks for reading!

 

[TimJo]

I'm wondering if the better sounding copy is a Robert Ludwig cut version. His mastering is the best, and is one that will give you that 'night and day' difference in sound quality.

Any chance of letting us know what the matrix info is in the deadwax on the two versions?

My guess the good one will have this...

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've had this happen before. I have a copy of 'Brother in Arms' that's on very floppy vinyl that is AMAZING. Not a tick or pop on either side. So I'm wondering to myself, is floppy vinyl generally quieter than thick vinyl?

I've had the same experience with "Brothers in Arms." When I bought my first turntable (used) the guy I bought it from cued up an original copy of Brothers in Arms he had bought new years before. It sounded awesome, completely quiet and wonderful. Later, I came across a nice copy of the original for somewhere around $1.85 at a used record shop. I bought it and put it on. Also quiet and sounded great.

I agree with you about the vinyl - you never really know how good something is just by looking at it. I've got a few records with scratches, etc. that actually sound pretty good. I don't overlook anything any more. If it's cheap and looks interesting, I buy it.

 

[derekbmn]

Same thing here also. Having doubles and triples of several records I can agree that looks can be very deceiving.

Ones that look pristine sometimes being noisy and other ones that look like they have been skimmed across pavement being rather quiet. And yes strangely Brothers In Arms is one of them,with Pink Floyds The Wall being another example of where my better and quieter sounding copy(s) looks worse.

 

[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimJo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm wondering if the better sounding copy is a Robert Ludwig cut version. His mastering is the best, and is one that will give you that 'night and day' difference in sound quality. Any chance of letting us know what the matrix info is in the deadwax on the two versions? My guess the good one will have this...

No, it's not the Robert Ludwig version. I wish, though. I've heard a lot about that.

It simply has a W and the ST-blahblah.

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, it's not the Robert Ludwig version. I wish, though. I've heard a lot about that. It simply has a W and the ST-blahblah.

Earlier pressing? vs. late '70s or '80s reissue when the quality of the vinyl wasn't so good maybe.

I have noticed the same thing with Bowie and a few others. With Atlantic you can also sometimes tell by the colour of the label. Then you have arguments about US versus UK versus Dutch versus German etc etc. Different pressing plants etc...it's the tip of the iceberg.

Best Led Zeppelins I've heard are the Classic Records reissues it has to be said.

 

[robm321]

Looks can definately be deceiving - Every time I shop for used vinyl. I end up being suprised at the ones that end up sounding good and the ones that look sound bad. It's almost a crapshoot, but at $2 a pop, getting one good one out of 5 is still only $10 for a quality record, so it's worth it.