NOTE TO MASTERING ENGINEERS - no more skipping records

[blacknwhite]

On behalf of everyone, everywhere, who likes to play back vinyl on anything other than modern turntables with magnetic cartridges:

(This includes everyone in the vinyl buying market, who either collects and restores classic vintage 1950s-60s high-end "Golden Era of High Fidelity" vacuum tube players, or plays records on classic juke boxes, or people who use those Crosley reproduction record players which are turning up everywhere now:)

NOTE TO MASTERING ENGINEERS: Modern vinyl is getting a *very* bad rap in many circles because much of it is unplayable on anything but modern magnetic pickups, and then, some won't even play on that. I've got a handful of modern reissues (45 and LP, mono and stereo) which probably were never playback-tested - they SKIP like crazy. Sony is bad: They reissued 180-gram 1950s Columbia jazz LPs, one of which the grooves actually merge throughout one side, and I can't play it on Anything, modern or not. Looked at it under a 'scope: The adjacent grooves merge till there's less than 1/3rd of the normal groove wall height between the trenches of the grooves. This is not that unusual; happens on a number of reissues.

Skipping records are the bane of collectors who like to play back records on WELL-RESTORED classic 1950s-60s high-end tube-amplifier "Golden Era of Hi-Fidelity" gear, OR those Crosley and Philco reproduction players - which is where a LOT of vinyl demand is coming from!

I'm not talking about 12-inch club singles, hip-hop, or techno. It's understood that those are only SUPPOSED to playback on modern magnetic pickups; the levels are Supposed to be driven to the max.

But, come on... re-issues of vintage 1950s & 60s material??? And mono at that?

Mastering engineers need to KNOW THEIR AUDIENCE: When you're reissuing "classic" 1950s-60s-70s stuff, KNOW that people will want to play them on old jukeboxes and Hi-Fi tube units with older ceramic pickups, so PLEASE, cut them with the same proper amount of land between the grooves as was done on the original vinyl records, and Don't cut with super-shallow grooves!

Reasonable volume levels, reasonably deep grooves (no shallow DMM cutting for the "retro" audience!!), with Proper Spacing, PLEASE.

Vinyl's getting a Bad Rap for this in many circles. It's become a general rule of thumb, to avoid reissues for this reason if you want reliable playback on classic players like vintage jukeboxes and hi-fi gear. These are folks who buy a LOT of records.

The market for newly-made vinyl *could* be a LOT bigger than it is currently, if folks doing the cutting would take this into account...

(Sorry for the rant)

- Bob

[cymbalism]

i've noticed that a lot of remastered or repressed classics are run of the mill lately too.

for one example, i picked up all of the mobile fidelity metallica remasters and you would imagine the ones cut at 45 would be a lot louder and pressed better but in all honesty, some if not all of them i've referenced so far are horrid - the uk 12"s sound WAY more amazing than these do - especially for that style of music.

the spacing on them is ridiculous - you would imagine someone at mfsl would understand spacing when cutting especially when compared to a uk 12" single of the same material. the "justice" box set has a lot of sides where it is only one track on one side due to the length of the material but it only utilizes half of the side!! space the grooves more guys...it doesnt make sense if you're cutting a side at 45 and you have half a side left - loud and proud.

even some of the lennon reissues that mfsl put out lately are subpar when compared to the original mfsl ones. the "imagine" reissue is tolerable but when compared to the original one from the 70s, it doesnt even come close to reproduction to me.

sorry - had to vent

[emorritt]

Funny this should come up; I mainly cut club, rap, hip-hop, etc. i.e. stuff the kids want cut "hot" for night club use and have never had a complaint... until a juke customer ordered some 45's of some current music for his restored AMI machine. Sent the disks cut "as usual" and he said they skipped. Took a hard look at how I had the machine set up and decided to start cutting deeper so on tight sides (run time) there's at least enough of a wall if there's not much land to keep the pickup stylus in the groove. Re-cut the job and have done several since. Not had another complaint from him. Been using a deeper cut even with long running LP sides. Always wondered how the "hen scratchings" on those Capitol EP 45's ever tracked... Had another guy send some Dinah Washington and Ella Fitzgerald - I cut it a little above average for playback loudness and he said they were too loud. I guess the rule of thumb is blow DJ's away and cut everything else at "normal" level.

Yeah, younger audiences who were weaned on CD's tend to think if you put a recording on and it doesn't blow you out of your chair like the old Maxell poster it's "low" level, and younger engineers are attempting to cut to accommodate.

[bancho]

Me too noticed this... I'm more in the ska/rocksteady/reggae scene where records (especially late reggae/digital - late 70s and 80s) ARE supposed to be played loud.
In recent reissues of Firehouse label there are some horrible recuts. One of the deadliest tunes - Tenor Saw - Babylon - is skipping! Under microscope there is visible the merging of grooves - exactly as emorritt said. I don't know how could this happened but it did. Especially I noticed this in bootleg represses showing up like mushrooms after rain in the past few years.
One of the best reissuers these days are japanese - I don't know how they do this but their re-cuts are better then originals!
You have to be careful these days when you buy reissues. Sad but true.

[cymbalism]

the fault lies in quality control. another couple of examples of recent i've run across have been from universal. the latest killers lp and the latest snow patrol lps both have serious problems. they were pressed off center! i dont understand how a big major company like universal can put out a record and not check it for a flaw THAT bad. the killers lp is on the b side and its so off center that you cant even really enjoy the lp to its fullest because of the tone shift, especially on the last cut. i cant remember off the top of my head which side of the four it is on the snow patrol wax but its equally as disappointing.

when we get our tests for my labels, i check them on various different systems and tables to make sure they're up to par. especially with dj vinyl being slowly strangled to death by digital djs, the quality control of the vinyl needs to be spot on otherwise we're digging the hole for the dj scene using records.

[blacknwhite]

I guess the rule of thumb is blow DJ's away and cut everything else at "normal" level.

WELL PUT, in a nutshell.

I'd imagine that if you run a business where your predominant customers are constantly asking for LOUD records, it's easy to think that's what everyone wants.

One size does NOT fit all; you're doing a great service by realizing this and cutting "normal" material at Normal levels, with deeper grooves, knowing that it might NOT be played on a DJ turntable with Stanton Trackmaster.

Me too noticed this... I'm more in the ska/rocksteady/reggae scene... recent reissues of Firehouse label there are some horrible recuts.

YES - In just the last few months, I ordered about $200 of Jamaican vinyl from Ernie B. Reggae distribution in the USA - great fun stuff, especially the 1970's/ early 80's "old stock" originals. But yes, a couple Firehouse and other re-issues skip, even on a Stanton 500 with new stylus. Of course I play reggae on a modern turntable because of high bass content, but still, if even That skips, the cut is bad.

You have to be careful these days when you buy reissues. Sad but true.

Yes. Shouldn't be that way. Some I don't even re-sell, or give to Goodwill, I just throw them away, if they won't even play on a Stanton.

SOMEONE NEEDS TO WRITE A BOOK AND SELL IT on how to master both DJ and NON-DJ vinyl, since so many cutters apparently don't seem to read the free advice on the net from the likes of Graham Newton, maybe a book would get more attention...

the fault lies in quality control. another couple of examples... the latest snow patrol lps both have serious problems... disappointing.

Too bad. I've bought some Snow Patrol colored 7" singles from out of the UK, good stuff; too bad to hear about their latest LP; will avoid.

when we get our tests for my labels, i check them on various different systems and tables

THAT's a vital step in the process which seems to have gotten lost, kudos to you. I think I heard the owner of the closest plant to me, United, in Nashville TN, mention that he still does that, on one of his youtube video tours.

I know Motown went to the other extreme, went Overboard, to ensure their records sounded good even played on a tin can; that's an extreme example, but there are a good number of lessons that could be learned from them by newer cutting folks on how to make "normal" non-DJ records.

Money-Making Idea:

Someone really should write a book and promote the Hell out of it as "The Bible of Vinyl Cutting" in DJ and record label circles, to get people's attention, so we can get more quality control, and not have ALL records cut just for modern DJ turntables.

If you want people without DJ turntables to be able to play your stuff: GO OUT AND BUY one of those Crosley reproduction players, and one of those old thrift store 1960's or 70's home players, to try playing test cuts on.

Another general rule of thumb: It is NOT ok to simply play it back on your lathe, and if it doesn't skip, just say, "It's good, because it didn't skip the one time I played it"! That could be Random Chance. I've seen modern vinyl with lifts. If the stylus lands back in the same groove after being tossed in the air, that's random chance. That just makes me want to tell the engineer, "The 'Scope is there for a Reason: Use It." Yeah, cutting vinyl is harder than burning a CD. And, one size does NOT fit all; non-DJ vinyl must have lower volume levels (use vintage 1950s-1980s full-length LPs for reference), and Just Enough spacing between grooves to prevent adjacent grooves from touching, and reasonably deep grooves.

Any takers on writing the Vinyl Bible?...

I've seen the last few remaining copies of an old vintage circa 1981 vinyl mastering book going for CRAZY prices; there's definitely money in it...

- Bob

[mossboss]

These are very good points raised here It has been said before that the demands in quality as well as loudness of a record today is much higher than it was years ago
In a way it is due to the missunderstanding of the diferences between the two different media Vinyl v CD they both have their limitations
There was a good debate in another forum about the "Loudness Wars" as well
Of course when it comes to a record been incorectly cut it is no excuse whatsoever besides stampers been used past about 1000 pressings would certainly be an issue
Monoaural re issuses we have done from the 60's are quite good in this regard
We have to "fiddle" with them to get them right the result so far has been quite good
We always stick to the published standards, which are well established in so far as cutting levels are concerned
Keep in mind kids today want vinyl to play on anything that resembles a turntable a $10 purchase at the local Brotherhood of St Laurence charity shop seems to satisfy them and some of the Chinese turntables hitting the market recently leave a lot to be desired
Nevertheless these comments are a bit worrying coming from members of this forum who are well beyond the $10 turntable club
Noted

[cymbalism]

Too bad. I've bought some Snow Patrol colored 7" singles from out of the UK, good stuff; too bad to hear about their latest LP; will avoid.

the UK stuff i've almost NEVER had an issue with, dating back to old 60s and 70s original UK pressings all the way up current normal and dj vinyl. the Snow Patrol LP i'm speaking of is the US pressing on white vinyl. i havent picked up a UK version of it yet but i'm sure it'll be just like all the other UK stuff i buy and love and not have an issue with it.

THAT's a vital step in the process which seems to have gotten lost, kudos to you. I think I heard the owner of the closest plant to me, United, in Nashville TN, mention that he still does that, on one of his youtube video tours.

I know Motown went to the other extreme, went Overboard, to ensure their records sounded good even played on a tin can; that's an extreme example, but there are a good number of lessons that could be learned from them by newer cutting folks on how to make "normal" non-DJ records.

i always check our releases and i use a variety of tables from a tech 1200 w/an ortofon to my dual w/a shure to my thorens w/a grado to a basic JVC w/an audio techica, it's the only way to insure the basic record buyer will be happy with the wax they're buying. i've heard some pure crap 12s coming out, they're pressed great but when it comes down to it - if the master wave file is over compressed and the mastering house try to push it to +6db or higher, all you get is a muddy mess on the receiving end.

granted we're pressing dj 12"s so it's not like we're planning on selling more than a few thousand copies but the fact of the matter is we're still trying to push dj vinyl in an era that is pushing digital mp3s to djs. most kids these days who are playing in clubs and parties and such would much rather spend 1.00 to 4.00 for an mp3 release than spend upwards of 12.00 for a 12", pay for shipping, then wait for it to arrive when they can click a button and play it hours from when they got it.

for people like me and a lot of the people on this forum, there's no replacement for a good vinyl pressing. i've been collecting records since age 6 so going on 30 years now and i've been djing for 15 years now, playing mostly drum n bass and it pains me as a label owner to see all these big named djs out there now jockeying cdjs instead of staying true to the form and playing records. kids see these icons rocking plastic numbered digital rubbish and they go out and buy a pair of pioneers and hit juno or chemical or itunes or *insert digital source here* and dont get the fact that the sound is compressed to hell and there is ZERO warmth to the sound. i'm not guilty of using cdjs because i was for a minute, trying out new sounds and what not for signing purposes but i totally had it with the 1000s i had and sold them last week with the hopes of getting a hold of a lathe to cut tunes for me to try out. i have a lot to learn about cutting and what not but i personally check the wave files we send for mastering and make sure they're not pushed to hell and back, i produce myself so i know the basics of eq'ing and i totally understand how everything works for getting a good cut so i'm sure once i have a cutter in my possession, it'll be just a matter of time before i'll be cutting 10s and 12s and playing out nothing but vinyl again instead of half wax and half cds.

VIVA LA VINYL!

[motorino]

mmm VIVA EL VINILO!

[Aussie0zborn]

A very good topic. One really does need to consnder who is going to buy these re-issues. While they're at it, they might increease the font size on the back cover... there is no way that someone buying a Dylan 60s re-issue LP is going to be able to read 8-point type without their reading glasses. So if anyone follows the suggestion to write THE BOOK, please include a chapter called, "Font Sizes for Song Titles on Back Cover". A sub-chapter could be, "Use BOLD TYPE On The Spine of the Record Jacket".

As for not spreading the grooves all the way to the end of the side, there is a very good reason for this. Only a consumer would feel cheated but technically this is the right way to do it.

[cymbalism]

As for not spreading the grooves all the way to the end of the side, there is a very good reason for this. Only a consumer would feel cheated but technically this is the right way to do it.

of course - the closer you get to the center label, the worst frequency range you get. that's a given but even cut at 45 it's nowhere near as bad as a 33 cut. i'm just saying they could've spread them a BIT more, the grooves are so compressed i'm surprised it doesnt jump spinning at 45

[emorritt]

Cymbalism said...

when it comes down to it - if the master wave file is over compressed and the mastering house try to push it to +6db or higher, all you get is a muddy mess on the receiving end.

Sic:



What were they thinking?!?!

Even on my website I say "WITHOUT excessive use of compression"... And as Jimmy Durante used to say "AND foithermore"... for some reason most of the source files I get especially for DJ's have an inordinate amount of midrange. I don't know if this is a function of recording and mixing on computer speakers or what it is. I usually have to adjust down varying degrees somewhere in the midrange area so the resulting record doesn't sound like a good portion of it was recorded over the telephone.

[cymbalism]

Sic:



What were they thinking?!?!

Even on my website I say "WITHOUT excessive use of compression"... And as Jimmy Durante used to say "AND foithermore"... for some reason most of the source files I get especially for DJ's have an inordinate amount of midrange. I don't know if this is a function of recording and mixing on computer speakers or what it is. I usually have to adjust down varying degrees somewhere in the midrange area so the resulting record doesn't sound like a good portion of it was recorded over the telephone.

exactly. we also have a bootleg label (which shall remain nameless to save my own ass ) and we had a release from someone who were big named artists (who shall also remain nameless) who sent us their master aiff files and i ran it thru the analyzer and it was horrid.

i told them i would not send it in for mastering unless they fixed it and they tried to make me feel inferior to them because "they had been doing this for X years" and "they had put out X amount of releases before" da da da - anyways, long story short - i explained to them that 85% of their records sounded like shit and this is probably the reason why. after they lowered their levels down and i checked it again and approved it for mastering, we had a slammin 12 that sounded better than ANYTHING they did on all these other labels and they even admitted it themselves.

i think most producers in edm dont realize mastering for vinyl and cd are two totally different worlds. it shocking to me that people think they can just push the levels to the max because it'll sound massive.

i've never had any sort of education in this field but i've read a lot, i know what i like and what sounds good from years of hands-on experience and being an obsessed music collector plus i run five labels and have performed for 15 years...i think i know what i'm doing just a little bit by now hehe.

i think this subject and the fact that some djs dont know how to keep their mixers out of the red both on a mix down and performing live are probably the two things that irritate me the most.

[emorritt]

Everybody doing any kind of mastering, digital or not needs to read this:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17777619/the_death_of_high_fidelity

It's sort of an outcry against the "mine's louder than yours" attitude toward music production today. I'm really, really hoping that people like us will eventually turn the music industry on it's ear (sorry, bad pun) and make consumers as well as producers realize that yeah, it's OK to cut a 45 for jukebox use a little "hot" but every single release, analog or digital, CD, tape or vinyl DOESN'T need to be blaringly loud on every point of the frequency spectrum to sell. AND, that different genres of recordings should be produced and mastered differently to fit their intended purpose/audience. It's not a 'one method for everything' which is what digital production and the CD format have made music become, since just about anything that would have been considered flaws (or at least needed "tweeking") 20 years ago can "pass" now because dynamically digital distribution formats are so forgiving.

Digital when used at high sampling rates comes very close to the best tape quality without the noise and is MUCH easier to 'tweek' and edit than using magnetic tape. However, it's convenience has become horribly abused. If you wanted to compress a tape, you ended up with a generation of loss but a 'punched up' recording. That doesn't happen with digital as you simply swipe over the waveform, click "compress" set the amount (of course too much!!) and voila - a probably very good recording ruined. Then, when the final mix is busted down to the 44.1/16 distribution format or even compressed for mp3's, the purity of the sound is damaged. Cut a well mastered 192/32 digital source file on a disk and IMHO you have a very good combination of technologies producing a superb sounding recording.

[mossboss]

Well well well
I certainly agree with most of these comments
A bad take will always be just that. EQ'ing it RE Mixing. mastering fiddling around with it will not do it It will always be a bad take
When are people out there get their stuff together and relise that Vinyl is not a CD, the plethora of plug in's will just not do it it makes it worse
We now have mastering guys and sound engineers in every bedroom
How on earth some of this music would sound on a direct to disc cut?
Not much good I would have thought
Here is a recent event:
One of our cutting guys put a Heavy Metal CD take on the lathe for a cut This was against all instructions that they are not to attempt to cut anything with static as part of the "music" from a CD
The end result of his attempt was thus:
The cutting head went up to about 120 degrees C in about 2 seconds flat This of course triggered the overloads saving the head (thank God)
However in the process it blew to smitherings 24 off, MJ423 output transistors on the main amps as well as a couple of drivers These MJ's are rated at 125 watts 10 amps and withstand 400 V.Work it out
His excuse was that the input setting was set initialy at -5 db, he than inreased to -4 db, quite well bellow normal
He felt that this was enough of a precaution so as to prevent any damage but this was not to be case
These digital "static" sounds play havoc with the cutting head
The most interesting aspect of all this was the artist's comments
"This is such a great record that it can only be had on a CD, Vinyl just wont take it"
Go figure
The cutting guy? back on the factory floor

Cheers

[blacknwhite]

Thanks for everyone's comments. Appreciate folks giving the topic serious consideration.

Thought more on it, and realized that in the original post, I didn't really get to
THE MAIN POINT:

I hate to see vinyl become an "elitist" product, exclusively serving only those who will play it on newer, high-end turntables.

This applies even to EXPERIENCED cutters who KNOW what they're doing, and are doing it on purpose, thinking they're doing The Right Thing.

It seems that so many cutting engineers are saying to customers, "Unless you play my vinyl STRICTLY on modern turntables with modern magnetic cartridges, then Screw You, you don't DESERVE to be able to track my vinyl!". That's just a Bad Attitude, and so many cutters seem to have it. It seems to be Industry Standard now. TERRIBLE! It didn't used to be this way!

Vinyl belongs to EVERYONE, even the kid who wants to play it on a reasonably decent-quality 1970's $20 thrift store HiFi phonograph! His money is as good as anyone else's. *I* was that kid for Years!

And really, is that TINY BIT of boost you can get in the levels on a NON-DJ vinyl album, going to impress your dear Audiophile customers so much, that it's worth rendering your records UNPLAYABLE on 90% of the old record players out there in existance, dating back to the 1950's, being revived out of people's attics???

There ARE lots of RECORD-BUYING folks like myself, who take VERY SERIOUSLY, the painstaking HOURS of work to restore classic vintage original 1950s-60s tube amp HiFi's to their original condition, FLAWS AND ALL. WE TAKE PRIDE IN OUR WORK. Listening to them is a TIME-TRAVELING EXPERIENCE. Properly restored, they DO NOT SKIP on 1950s-1980s pressings, so they SHOULDN'T skip on modern NON-DJ/rap/dance LPs and 45s.

And when cutting engineers cop an attitude like, "Your system is crap because it's not brand new, and everything old SUCKS", well, that just makes them look ignorant, and it just makes us vintage-gear-folks MAD. "Them's FIGHTIN' words!"

It's like, the ONLY customers that matter are those with NEW turntables.

Again, for DJ / hiphop / reggae sound system vinyl, Sure, OK... but for "normal" LPs and 45s for home use and jukeboxes: Please don't take that "elitist attitude", it's only Hurting the vinyl format.

Those kids you disrespected who wanted to play your vinyl on their $20 thrift store record player, but payed you and all they got was Skipping, will resent it, and may quit buying new vinyl entirely, and take the attitude "all new vinyl is Crap". I've seen that happen, too.

"Can't we all just GET ALONG?"

- Bob

[emorritt]

Bob I don't think most of us are the "screw you" type I don't think most of us in general would want our product only playable on the high end turntables, even something that is treated as "temporary" like a dubplate. Truthfully, those of us who have taken the time to learn the craft of cutting (I've been learning for 33 years and am still learning - it's an ongoing thing) as well as have probably invested every last dime we had - note the past tense - in equipment just in order to keep a superior product that was passed off as 'dead' by an industry that really would benefit from use of technology that promotes better sound rather than just loud record sales are IMHO some of the most dedicated people in the world. I'm sure I speak for all cutting engineers out there when I say that I'm always looking for ways to make what I create sound better, work better, look better, etc. on a daily basis. Settling for "that's as good as it gets" isn't in the blood of the real deal. I learned cutting on a Presto 6N - I remember paying between $7 and $12 each for cutting styluses and about $30 for a box of 25 recording disks when I started. Just like Paul at Aardvark (and he's one of the best) says on his website since I was a kid I was fascinated with how those little wiggly lines stamped on a piece of plastic made such good sound, and how they got there in the first place. Bottom line is, just about anyone with a few grand can buy a Vinylrecorder or Kingston machine and hang out their shingle, but being able to put sound in a groove and making something that you'd want to survive history (as most groove recordings have!) with your name attached to it are two entirely different things.

[TotalSonic]

In defense of mastering engineers everywhere I must note that there is a thing called a "reference" - which in the case of a vinyl release ultimately means a test record that the client (meaning the artist, label or producer) must approve before the pressing is done.

Except in the very rare case where the label is owned by the mastering engineer - it should be noted that the mastering engineer does NOT have reference approval! Only the client does. SO - if you end up with untrackable records due to overly ambitious levels cut for the master (and there certainly are a ton of other issues that can make a record difficult to track that can occur after the mastering) - then you need to take the issue with the label for either going with cheapest "cookie cutter" type of mastering, or for providing a source that is difficult to translate to the analog realm and not going to the necessary lengths to correct this (which usually entails paying for some more studio time) or to them requesting level over compatibility (which can happen for a lot of DJ oriented releases). Not to say that ME's shouldn't pay proper due diligence and sensibility when cutting sides - it's just that the people who ultimately say whether a record has been mastered to their satisfaction or not are the one's who actually are releasing it.

Having said all that - digital pre-masters that have been brickwalled to death or heavily clipped generally translate very poorly to the analog realm, so pre-masters for vinyl releases generally benefit from being more naturally dynamic.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[mossboss]

Emmoritt
You got it right Nothing to add Could not agree more with you
A little example:
In so far as the record presses are concerned this is how it goes
We got one machine built in 1967 and another 1972 the third is a new model most likely the last lot that come out of Alpha it was made in 1981-2 Try to keep them going No spares no service whenever they play up and they do we have to fabricate new parts from scratch Steam valves water valves spindles wear out so we got to make new ones Hydraulic Valves no longer avilable of the selves They got to make them up for you The cost? Std valve about $180 the ones we need $870,00 and it goes on and on
Oh We also have the electroforming baths to deal with as well as the cutting lathe, again I think we are the only operating one in this country and I do know of another one that sits in someone's Lounge room as an ornament So whenever the lathe plays up and it does sleepless night coming up
You are right and I do think blackandwhite has valid points No we do not produce for the elitist we do it for everyone to enjoy vinyl We don't make any money either Nevertheless one needs to have a reasonable turntable and a reasonable stylus on it regardless of the what it cost's $10 or whatever I have bought them myself for $10 and $20 We had so many issues with comments like "you cut it at the wrong speed"
it sounds to slow, only to find that the turntable their was using had not had a drop of oil in it for decades We suggest they give it a squirt of WD40 and see how it goes It does the trick We also solved that issue We now provide them with a strobe printed on heavy paper We always throw some in on every job for gratis so they can check out the speed of the turntable We also suggest they check their stylus just to make sure In the plant we have about 20 different turntables from high end to the lowest of the low ends and we do try pressings out on most of them
In general we find that people do know what is going on It is often with some missinformed individuals that one gets into all sorts of issues
Cheers

[cd4cutter]

TEE HEE, chuckle, chuckle. Reading all this commentary just makes me laugh. If this isn't a prime example of the old expression "those who don't know history are condemned to repeat it", I don't know what is. EVERYTHING commented on here from overcutting, cutter lift, and kissing grooves was OLD NEWS to every professional record cutter in the 1970s, me included. There are limits to what you can put on an analog record. Push it too hard and the system crashes. Just another reminder that digital is really superior to analog in many ways - it's why CDs actually became popular! People weaned on digital audio have NO knowledge of the multiple ways that distortion increases with increased recorded level, to the extent that the huge mistracking occurs with the ultimate result of groove skipping an/or sticking. Too bad about that - that knowledge was COMMON knowledge back in the day. The situation is different now because of the niche market that is analog records which is a small market served by a small number of vendors. Nobody is "in charge" of the technology anymore.

Back in the pre-CD days when vinyl RULED the music business, record manufacturers had a much bigger control over the quality of the product. We at RCA Records were leaders in the industry in being "pains in the butt" among mastering engineers. The reason is that we demanded that records be cut at rational levels that could actually be played back by consumer record players. What a novel idea! If a badly cut record got pressed by us, the customer complaints of groove skipping also came back to us as manufacturers, regardless of who actually mastered the disc. So we adopted the attitude that test pressings of ALL releases pressed in our plants be "skip tested" on a typical junky consumer record player that used a ceramic cartridge tracking at about 5 grams. In fact, we actually made calibration test records that we used to adjust the official factory "skip test players" so that they all behaved in a similar fashion. Many is the time that we rejected lacquer masters because they caused skipping on the skip test players, and the mastering house would have to recut the side at their own expense. We even pioneered the use of third-octave spectrum analysis to predict when a record was likely to be cut at too high a level, and we provided that technology to mastering engineers. This was before the commonality of computers and digital audio processing and analysis. Spectrum analyzers were free-standing analog instruments and were not commonly used by anybody in the audio business yet. THAT's the kind of power and oversight that the major companies like RCA Records had back then. Our anti-skipping standards were also informally adopted at both CBS and Capitol, more or less. Didn't matter whether the masters were cut by our own studios or by independent cutters - everybody was held to the same requirements. We reduced the number of customer complaints dramatically, and the skip testers were in use all the way up to when we closed the RCA pressing plant in 1987. But now that the vinyl "resurgence" is happening, apparently nobody is left in the business who remembers all the headaches that had been successfully dealt with 30 years before.

As I read some of the other posts here, I'm reminded of all the "black magic" that was inherent in record cutting and manufacturing. Stuff like the use of "elliptical filtering" to reduce the amount of out-of-phase bass in stereo records which leads to too much vertical stylus motion and potential cutter-lift, the use of de-essing and limiting to reduce high frequency distortion on playback and lessen the load on and the potential blowing of the cutting head. NONE of this is required in digital recording. Stuff like low-current preplating done before the high speed build-up of metal parts, the need to "dummy" the plating baths to keep impurities sequestered, the need to spin the parts for a while in the bath before turning on the current to prevent de-lamination, the addition of micro amounts of "magic" ingredients in the plating baths - none of this stuff is documented in detail anywhere, but it was NECESSARY to successfully carry out the day to day record making operations on a high-volume, high productivity basis. Yes, the analog record was a highly developed, high quality, and reliable piece of technology when it was largely abandoned in the 1980s. As many of you have noted, records made today suffer from multiple problems, all of which were known about and fixes for which were routinely in place 30 years ago.

Yes, somebody should write this stuff up for future documentation. Otherwise, some newbies 30 years hence will again try to resurrect the analog record (considered then to be a novel idea - again) and they'll have to RELEARN all this magical stuff all over again.