Home› The Porch

Vinyl purchase question: VS original or reissue?

Hugh Freaking DillonHugh Freaking Dillon Posts: 14,010
edited July 2011 in The Porch
there are some audiophiles out there that are claiming the reissue (remastered) version sounds not so good. Not knowing a whole lot about vinyl, please help. Tell me this:

1) is the packaging the same in both? if not, what is/are the difference(s)?
2) what's the big deal about 180 g vinyl? how many grams is the original?
3) any other reason I should buy the original over the reissue, or anyone who thinks the other way?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • DriftingByTheStormDriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    The original doesn't say "VS" on it.
    You'd be a LOT cooler if YOURS didn't have "VS" on it, too.

    8-)8-)8-)

    ps --
    wait a minute.
    THOSE SNEAKY BASTARDS LEFT "VS" OFF THE REISSUE TOO.

    OOOOH THAT STINGS ! ! !

    well, that settles it.
    may as well just get the CD then.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • Jokertt14Jokertt14 Posts: 2,566
    1. They are the same . except different country's have different covers
    2. 180G . just dont warp that easy . the Original pressing would be 120g or so
    3. http://www.pjcollectors.com/subcategory.asp?id=2 , http://www.pjcollectors.com/detail.asp?id=1948



    180-Gram Vinyl

    Vinyl pressings come in various weights. The heavier the record, the longer the press cycle, the more expensive that record is to produce. A standard record typically weighs 120 to 140 grams. A heavy record is in the 180 to 200 gram range. If you take these records out of the package and weigh them, they will always weigh at very least, the weight advertised.
  • ahill721ahill721 Posts: 2,071
    Hey OP check your PMs
  • Hugh Freaking DillonHugh Freaking Dillon Posts: 14,010
    ahill721 wrote:
    Hey OP check your PMs

    thanks so much! if you need anything, let me know!
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • Hugh Freaking DillonHugh Freaking Dillon Posts: 14,010
    ahill721 wrote:
    Hey OP check your PMs

    respond to yours. :?
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • brolocobroloco Posts: 1,237
    not sure if this matters to you, but I found it pretty interesting: The reissue contains the truer liner note artwork (inside the booklet)! This is different than the original release which has the liner note artwork photocopied (or that look). For example with many of the pages you can now actually see the blue pen ink used to make the drawings. Another example would be you can see the tape texture used on some of the pages.
    Usually it would be the other way around - reissue contains another generation away from original artwork. But this time they went back to the originals!

    Not a huge deal, but to a graphics freak like me, it's cool. Kinda like they remastered the artwork too. ;)
  • Back_PedalBack_Pedal Posts: 1,171
    I don't have high-end equipment, but the reissues sound fine to my ears.
    Thanks EPOTTSIII!
    "Vinyl or not, you will need to pay someone to take RA of your hands" - Smile05
    424, xxx
  • gibbitsgibbits Posts: 521
    broloco wrote:
    not sure if this matters to you, but I found it pretty interesting: The reissue contains the truer liner note artwork (inside the booklet)! This is different than the original release which has the liner note artwork photocopied (or that look). For example with many of the pages you can now actually see the blue pen ink used to make the drawings. Another example would be you can see the tape texture used on some of the pages.
    Usually it would be the other way around - reissue contains another generation away from original artwork. But this time they went back to the originals!

    Not a huge deal, but to a graphics freak like me, it's cool. Kinda like they remastered the artwork too. ;)

    Didn't they also censor some of the liners? I guess I could pull out both copies to compare, but I seem to recall people saying Malice Green was removed?
  • brolocobroloco Posts: 1,237
    gibbits wrote:
    broloco wrote:
    not sure if this matters to you, but I found it pretty interesting: The reissue contains the truer liner note artwork (inside the booklet)! This is different than the original release which has the liner note artwork photocopied (or that look). For example with many of the pages you can now actually see the blue pen ink used to make the drawings. Another example would be you can see the tape texture used on some of the pages.
    Usually it would be the other way around - reissue contains another generation away from original artwork. But this time they went back to the originals!

    Not a huge deal, but to a graphics freak like me, it's cool. Kinda like they remastered the artwork too. ;)

    Didn't they also censor some of the liners? I guess I could pull out both copies to compare, but I seem to recall people saying Malice Green was removed?

    oh shit, you're right. some of the photos are missing! man.. one step forward, one step backward. :mrgreen:
  • gibbitsgibbits Posts: 521
    Heh, I can't take credit for catching it, I just remember people talking about it when the reissue dropped. Hugh another difference I think is people were saying the reissue has an error in rats, not sure if that is the case as I haven't spun the reissue. I know it is not on the original.
  • RedMosquito22RedMosquito22 Posts: 8,158
    Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
    there are some audiophiles out there that are claiming the reissue (remastered) version sounds not so good. Not knowing a whole lot about vinyl, please help. Tell me this:

    1) is the packaging the same in both? if not, what is/are the difference(s)?
    2) what's the big deal about 180 g vinyl? how many grams is the original?
    3) any other reason I should buy the original over the reissue, or anyone who thinks the other way?


    1) Yes. Only Ten has a new color scheme since they never liked the pink one. Vs and Vitalogy are exactly the same. I'm sure all the others will be as well as they get released since they are all awesome.

    2) The record is thicker and heavier so it may be less prone to warping over time. Some claim sonic benefits on 180 g's like better stereo imaging, less noise, wider bandwidth, etc. Another factor is "virgin" vinyl (often a feature hand in hand with 180 g and heavier LPs) which uses no recycled plastic which can contain impurities leading to a noisier record.

    3) The older ones are more for collectors. If that's what you are looking to do go that route but know you will probably spend over $1200 in your search to get them all. I sold all of my originals when these reissues comae out. I will just get the new ones and have a lot of extra $$$.
    Member 164xxx

    8/15/92, 9/28/96, 8/28/98, 8/29/98, 9/18/98, 8/3/00, 8/9/00, 8/10/00, 8/23/00, 8/25/00, 9/1/00, 9/2/00, 4/28/03, 6/18/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 10/1/04, 10/3/05, 6/19/08, 10/27/09, 10/31/09, 5/21/10, 9/3/11, 9/4/11, 10/21/13

    More to Come....
  • brolocobroloco Posts: 1,237
    RedMosquito22 wrote:
    Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
    there are some audiophiles out there that are claiming the reissue (remastered) version sounds not so good. Not knowing a whole lot about vinyl, please help. Tell me this:

    1) is the packaging the same in both? if not, what is/are the difference(s)?
    2) what's the big deal about 180 g vinyl? how many grams is the original?
    3) any other reason I should buy the original over the reissue, or anyone who thinks the other way?


    1) Yes. Only Ten has a new color scheme since they never liked the pink one. Vs and Vitalogy are exactly the same. I'm sure all the others will be as well as they get released since they are all awesome.
    Does the new reissue Vitalogy vinyl have the same texture on the cover like the reissue Vitalogy cd does? The original '94 version doesn't have this.
    2) The record is thicker and heavier so it may be less prone to warping over time. Some claim sonic benefits on 180 g's like better stereo imaging, less noise, wider bandwidth, etc. Another factor is "virgin" vinyl (often a feature hand in hand with 180 g and heavier LPs) which uses no recycled plastic which can contain impurities leading to a noisier record.
    Now, some schools of thought out there is that the heavier gram thing was created so 1) it would justify people buying another version of an album they already own and that 2) the record companies could charge more for the heavier record, thus make more profits. Not saying I agree with this thought, but it is something to think about. I'd be reluctant to trust a record company..those bastards.
    3) The older ones are more for collectors. If that's what you are looking to do go that route but know you will probably spend over $1200 in your search to get them all. I sold all of my originals when these reissues comae out. I will just get the new ones and have a lot of extra $$$. old is cool...oldschool :mrgreen:
Sign In or Register to comment.