Re-Press VS. First Press

J

jono.p

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2010
This one's for the all knowing dnbforum vinyl heads..

I've been buying dnb vinyl for some time now but recently I've been trying to expand my collection to the classics of all genres. Buying recent stuff hasn't been a problem but when it comes to some of the older classics I've got a bit of a dilemma.

Most of the classics I'm looking at are from the 90s or before and obviously finding a good quality original can be expensive and difficult. But it seems there's a couple of companies like Music on Vinyl and Simply Vinyl who have gone about re-pressing the originals. Now these aren't remastered, they're re-presses.

So my question is this.. is it worth going for an original to get the sound of the first press or am I just as well off buying a recent re-press that is brand new?

Here's an example from Discogs to show what I mean. It's Cypress Hill's Black Sunday. You can see the original was pressed in '93 and there were a couple of re-presses done in 2004 and 2009.

http://www.discogs.com/Cypress-Hill-Black-Sunday/master/16404

Would really appreciate any opinions/info or any knowledge from those in the know as I'm really stuck on this one!

Thanks in advance!
 
Original press will be worth a lot money but as far as I'm aware there will be no difference quality wise best off just getting the re-press.
 
Unless you get some rag tag gippo pressing shit to mono or whatever... The sound quality is going to be of no difference whatsoever.

Repress is repress from a viable source...

Fill your boots mate ;)
 
The repress of 'The Nine' is much easier to mix than the original. And there was some moaning about Ram not cleaning their stamp before doing a repress.

That's all I have to say on the matter. HTH.
 
Back
Top Bottom