Adele's 25   Sells 22,000 Vinyl Copies in First Week, But Who Pressed Them?

Adele's 25 sold 22,000 vinyl copies in its first week. Yes, that's a fraction of the total sales of 3.8 million copies sold but it's still impressive in our niche world.

The album sold 1.71 million CDs and 1.64 digital downloaded copies, which represents an amazing 49% of all digital albums sold last week and 38% of all CDs sold.

The vinyl total, according to Nielsen, was the third largest first week sales in the tracking company's history, behind Jack White's Lazaretto, which sold 40,000 week one and Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, which sold 34,000 copies.

You can be sure strong vinyl sales will continue through Christmas and beyond. So who is pressing these records? Acoustic sounds.com says theirs came from RTI in Camarillo, CA. That would be based upon the shipping carton identifying labels. However the copy I bought from Amazon does not look, feel or sound like an RTI pressing, though it is a fairly decent 180 pressing, wherever it was pressed. However, the noise level would not be acceptable for a classical or jazz title in my opinion.

On this week's Analog Planet radio show I guessed Memphis Record Pressing because that's where the latest Dylan Bootleg series 3 LP set was pressed domestically, while Optimal pressed in Europe. But that's just a guess. You can listen to "Hello" on this weeks Analog Planet radio show and judge the pressing quality for yourself.

Readers who have bought 25 are reporting varying quality, with some insisting their copy was quiet and looked like an RTI pressing, while others had noisy pressings that they felt required replacement. So what's going on?

Clearly RTI is pressing the record—or at least some of the records. I doubt Acoustic Sounds would claim that if the shipping cartons didn't say so. But also clear is that someone else is pressing as well. Could be Memphis, or could be any of a number of domestic pressing plants including United, which doesn't communicate with Analogplanet.com so I didn't bother trying.

I did call RTI and spoke with RTI's owner Don MacInnis who told me the company is under an NDA (non-disclosure agreement) and so he was not at liberty to talk about any of this. So my speculation is this: RTI plated and pressed a lot of Adele records, but was not able to fulfill the entire order so RTIplated lacquers were shipped elsewhere for pressing. MacIniss's response to my speculation was "no comment" because he's not allowed to say anything. I am.

COMMENTS
Tyson Wahrenburg's picture

It's an interesting point you raise. Hearing the first single on the radio multiple times, I wasn't impressed and was going to pass on purchasing the record, but after hearing it on your show, I figured I'd give it a try since it was a much better version.

My preferred seller in Canada carries a version from XL Records (a European pressing according to Discogs) but then I also noticed that Acoustic Sounds were selling copies pressed at RTI, which contradicted your information on the radio show. Once I saw the contradictory information, I decided to hold for a little while to see if it would crop up on your site.

Does anybody have the XL Records pressing and know where it was physically pressed or who mastered it?

Sean Cusson's picture

I just opened up my copy this morning (from Amazon) and it's garbage. I couldn't believe the amount of noise. Sending it back today.

Garbia's picture

Very well done mastering by Ryan Smith. EU version most likely pressed at Record Industry, the Netherlands. The only plant which has enough capacity to do it.

Michael Fremer's picture
We'll have to sleuth this one ourselves because everyone's close mouthed. I hope every girl with a turntable buys this. The final number will then be huge!
Mile High Music's picture

Just bought my copy from the venerable Bart's Record Shack in Boulder, Colorado, USA. The back of the outside cover, at the bottom, has both the "XL Recordings" and "Columbia" logos, then the tiny print for all the copyright and licensing information and ends "...Made in France" .....sacre bleu!

Michael Fremer's picture
MPO. They did a good job on the Springsteen.
dbowker3d's picture

Picked it up at Newbury Comics (a store I assume you dropped plenty of bucks at in the past Mike!). But who knows where it was pressed?

Anyway, I think it sounds very good overall, though indeed there IS some surface noise. It looked like their was a "wash" of something on the vinyl itself, which I take to be spray release of something like it. I'm going to give it good record machine cleaning and see if that takes care of it. the dynamic range was very good, though not mind-blowing. But overall the tonality, the warmth and depth of the whole production was great. Her voice comes through rock solid and very natural sounding, which in the end is pretty much the #1 criteria for a record like this one, right?

My copy of her second, 21, also sounded excellent. Haven't compared the two yet.

JohnEcc's picture

My copy has everything but The Made in France. It does not sound like a typical RTI pressing, a little noisy. Does not sound like it was mastered from a high resolution source. I would like to hear this pressed by QRP. Nothing detracts from her amazing voice.

Martin's picture

Generally I tend to go for country of origin. For the Dylan bootleg series, I would take the mastering at Sterling, but pressed on noisier vinyl over a European mastering from who knows what files, but on quiet vinyl, say Optimal.
It's a funny one. People don't believe it, but US and European pressings generally sound different. For the new Dylan bootleg series, I've gone for the US pressed set over the European because I don't trust the European mastering although the vinyl is generally quiet.
Incidentally, judging from the number of copies I've seen about here, Dylans bootleg series 12 on vinyl is selling very well here in Switzerland.

Pretzel Logic's picture

I'm giving up on the Dylan bootleg series. Never heard so many ticks as on Dylan's raw basement tapes 3 set, and no amount of spin cleaning or repeated plays (not to mention a full replacement set) could fix them. (The last year gas been absolutely brutal for new vinyl quality. Non-fill on, no exaggeration, 50 percent of purchases.)

Michael Fremer's picture
Sterling Sound cut lacquers for the world. Optimal plated and pressed from Sterling lacquer overnight FEDEXed to Optimal. Don't forget most of the great "Pink Label" Island pressings of the '60s and '70s from British groups were mastered at Sterling by Lee Hulko. Doug Sax mastered many later Who and Pink Floyd albums and if you compare the American and British versions, the British ones sound far superior because of superior plating and pressing.
punkzter's picture

My first copy had a great deal of surface noise. I replaced it, and was still somewhat disappointed with the noise...but just sucked it up.

I know that vinyl can have noise, but I was not happy with this one.

rakalm's picture

Thanks for nearly getting to the root of this one Michael. My replacement copy (Amazon) was very clean and quite possibly an RTI pressing. I have only played side 2 which was the stinker on my 1st copy. I have also ordered a UK version and will let you know if I notice any difference. I just figured having an early UK pressing may be worth it with this one. Shame she didn't include the download card (like her 1st two LP's) and that nice double liner that came with 21. I bet she would have sold even more vinyl if it had the download included. It will probably be the best selling of all time at the rate it's going.

Michael T's picture

I was also baffled as to who pressed the record. I received mine from Amazon and assumed RTI as many of the audiophile online retailers listed is as 'pressed at RTI'. While the quality is not as crappy as a typical URP pressing (I'll give them some credit - they have improved on my latest new release purchases), it does not feel, look, or sound like an RTI pressing.
I was very impressed, however, that the label had Ryan Smith master the vinyl edition. That shows they were specifically targeting a vinyl audience (they had to after the horrible URP pressings of the previous two Adele releases). Everything that comes from Sterling Sound, even the standard RJ (Ray Janos) cut albums sound very, very good, but I can definitely tell, at least on my system, that this was not a 'lathe operator' cut.
My copy is flat but does have some noise, which is not typical of an RTI pressing.

rakalm's picture

My recently purchased copy of 21 has MPO in the dead wax and sounds very nice. I am guessing they used various pressing plants as well. A shame there seems to be so much inconsistency here (and I don't mean us). I will have get to 19 from Britain as well, hoping for a better pressing per your information. Thanks.

Andrew Petterson's picture

My UK bought copy appears to have been pressed at Optimal in Germany but also has the RKS Sterling stamp.

Andrew Petterson's picture

that the UK version is badged XL Recordings rather than Columbia because in the UK she is signed to XL.

Mile High Music's picture

I've just compared the twp brand new pressings I fortunately have at hand:

Pressing #1 - Sold In The UK - Printed "Made In The EU" (both record labels)
Pressing #2 - Sold In The USA - Printed "Made In France" (outer jacket, rear, bottom)

Both pressings are what I would call noisy vinyl. They certainly are not dead quiet compared to many other titles I have. Both have a light vinyl "white noise" at the start of every quiet track, in the background in quieter audio passages and in the bands between each track. This vinyl noise was consistently a bit louder on #2 which also played with a few more light clicks or pops..

As for the sound of the songs their detail, dynamics and space is certainly very impressive. The songs just consistently sounded just that bit noticeably better on #1. For example, you clearly hear Adele's breathing on "Hello" (Side1, Track 1) on both pressings, but on #1 she seems that bit more right there live, yes virtually in front of you. So for now my winner is #1 and I hope a true quieter, 'audiophile' pressing will de done one day. Merci! :-)

FYI - Both pressings were played straight out of the packaging with just a light carbon fibre brushing. The turntable set up was a VPI Classic 3 with Nordost Valhalla wiring, VPI's record ring and center weight, plus Ortofon's 2M Black (MM) cartridge. This stood on Mapleshade's 4" maple block. The tube pre-amp was Jim Fosgate's Signature, connected to Unison Research's "Unico" integrated amp with professional modifications. The speakers were Definitive Technology BP2000's - bi-polar and floor standing. Cables were Tara Labs interconnects between the turntable and pre-amp. All the rest werel Nordost Blue Heaven (Version 2). Accessories were Nordost's QB8 'power strip' and three Nordost QV2 'power conditioners').

J. Carter's picture

I know mine was definitely not from RTI. As Michael has said it doesn't have the look, feel or sound of an RTI pressed record. It is pretty noisy overall. I don't think my copy sounds any better than the CD version. Also the Target copies have a couple of nice bonus tracks on it.

rakalm's picture

http://www.optimal-media.com/en/news/waited-eagerly-25-adeles-3rd-studio...
My UK version is being shipped from Germany per the tracking. I think that's good news. I have been very happy with their pressings. My Optimal Stereo Beatles really was much better than Rainbo. The Mono's were pressed there as well and who could complain about those.

Cam08529's picture

and I was in the store on Sunday buying the cd. A few days later my LP version arrived from the house of Chad. My copy is acceptably quiet even with a few scuffs that likely came from stuffing the record in those awful hard paper inner sleeves. That won't happen again thanks to my Black Friday score of black rice paper sleeves from another vendor that advertises on this site.
It was kind of fun to hear an artist on SNL and buy the music the following day. Been a long time since that happened to me. Even if you don't like her music, you've gotta respect her talent and what she pulled off in first week sales.

Garbia's picture

I cleaned my EU pressed copy a couple of times with Spin Clean, and it helped with the noise. The vinyl mastering has been done a quite low level to achieve better dynamics. According to DR Database vinyl DR is 11 and CD's just 5!!!. CD must be very compressed and limited, or it has high distortion if compression and limiting not used.

Tony Plachy's picture

I picked up my copy just the other day at Tutntable Lab in NYC. Have not had a chance to play it yet, but it says nothing on the outer jacket about where it was made or pressed. I have opened it and as mentioned earlier I found paper slivers all over the record. I cleaned them off with a microfiber cloth and put the record in a proper sleeve. Is there anyway to tell where it was pressed by the markings in the dead wax? In the dead wax "Sterling" is stamped in as well as the LP's bar code number which is proceeded by the initials "BL". The are also some letters and numbers hand written in the dead wax that are hard to read, but I can give it a try if there is any hope that they would tell me where it was pressed.

cjp123's picture

I can't tell by my pressing either. Usually the tell-tale sign of an RTI pressing is the pink inner sleeve (or the "HQ 180" sticker) neither of which this has. My copy doesn't have any of the stuff on the back, and haven't read the matix numbers yet. I did notice some paper slivers (just a few) on the record, but that is likely from the inner sleeve paper. So does anyone here actually have what they know is an RTI pressing that can comment about the matrix numbers? Is it possible that only the audiophile outlets--elusive disc, acoustic sounds, etc. got RTI pressings?

Tubemaniac's picture

I ordered from Amazon. The disc was filthy when I took it out of the inner sleeve...I mean nasty. I thoroughly cleaned it, but I still had FAR too much surface noise and cracks and pops for a brand new piece of vinyl....Otherwise I thought the recording was good and better than her other two albums. I will be getting this filthy thing replaced.

Rudy's picture

I just received a remaster from another well known artist (an iconic album from 1965), and while the parts I spot-checked seemed to play somewhat clean, I used that exact same word to describe it: FILTHY. It has this fine dusty haze all over it. And it has a very wavy surface, almost like heat damage except the rest of my order from the same retailer was flawless. And it also came in some cheap-arsed paper innersleeve that was shedding all over the record.

I would bet money it's the same plant. I can't mention the artist's name publicly just yet, but there are other reissues coming next year, and I am hoping they are not from the same pressing plant. What I received was inexcusable.

GeorgesCrochet's picture

Vinyl, digital, cassette, she's lousy.

D.West's picture

I got mine from Soundstage Direct and had to send it back, skips and groove distortion and an all around bad pressing. Just got my new one, much much better not the quietest vinyl I've ever gotten but, considerably better. Soundstage was great about the return and made it easy...

WINDIANRECORDS's picture

First copy was bought from Amazon, there was very audible noise during all the quiet parts (prime example the beginning of "Hello"), didn't have any skips but that was enough to have me set up a return to Amazon.

Second one ordered from ElusiveDisc as they claim its an RTI one, oddly there is no difference in the deadwax, but this one is super super quiet at the beginning.

I had made a recording of the original (which, when listening back in headphones made the noise level thing unbearable), I could always make one of the beginning of Hello on the new record to compare if anyone's interested, but I bet we all know what sound we're talking about...

Lencorob's picture

I live in the Netherlands and that is where I purchased my copy. It is an XL pressing,the album is not dead quiet as some modern albums can be. I did not have the choice of 180 grs. or I would have picked that, these tend to be better. The overall recording did not impress me, although the music did. Overall I experienced the signature of this album as "shouty" a bit harsh, not like vinyl can sound but some modern modern vinyl sounds like that. Almost as if sound engineers nowadays are clueless. Most likely I bought a vinyl CD, but I stopped listening to them a year ago. Despite the noise and quality of the recording an album worth having.

Steelhead's picture

Glad I did not spring for the vinyl (whew a little hard to type) after reading the comments here. I just bought the plain vanilla cd off of Amazon and followed in Cam's vein. Saw her on Saturday Night Live and just loved her singing. Ordered the cd the next day. Great talent.

If you want to spin a fine fine piece of vinyl the rsd release of Janet Joplin and Big Brother and the Holding Company - Live at Winterland 68 is fantastic. Dead quiet, flat, and Janis is in fantastic form.

dobyblue's picture

One thing worth mentioning that doesn't happen very often with majory label releases, the vinyl was mastered separately at Sterling by Ryan Smith who has some very good work on his resume including the AAA mastering of Analogue Production's 45rpm release of "August and Everything After". If you can get a well pressed record then from most accounts the mastering is noticeably more dynamic and open than the awful digital mastering Tom Coyne's name is attached to. I'd be too embarrassed, I'd ask them to just remove the mastering credit altogether.

But hey when Ted Jensen misses entire instrumental passages when supposedly A/B'ing a remaster to his original mastering (Dave Matthews Band's 2014 Under the Table and Dreaming remaster, Jimi Thing missing entire sax AND guitar from the outro as a result of using the wrong analogue tape) it's possible to imagine Coyne just pressing the "SLAM" button and going out for a coffee.

Lencorob's picture

I fear I have Tom Coyne's handywork pressed on vinyl in my possession. Listened to 25 again today and I thought my amp was having issues. I listened a few times to 25 on an old Luxman L430 from the eighties. But during the holiday season I thought it would be fun to get my KT88 tube amplifier from the attic and do some serious listening. It sounded sooo bad, just a wall of undefined sound no space no air, no focus, almost impossible to tell what you were listening to and it sounded like a bad CD.

Shouty and harsh. But then I decided to spin some 80's vinyl, The Colour of Spring by Talk Talk and Dreamtime by The Stranglers. My amp was not having issues. These two albums sounded like real vinyl and not the crap they make us pay for nowadays.

If he is really responsible for this mix, maybe Tom Coyne could do us a favour by seeking new employment, as a hairdresser maybe? Because this mix is really "Orrible".

dobyblue's picture

Coyne mastered the digital versions, Smith mastered the vinyl.
Do you see 'RKS' in the runout area?

Lencorob's picture

Indeed I see RKS in the runout, it looks like vinyl, it smells like vinyl, but it sure as heck does not sound like vinyl, this is a CD, pressed on vinyl.
My equipment, Micro Seiki BL21 with Mission LC 774, Grado Platinum Reference, ifi Iphono pre and a heavily modified Music Angel KT 88. amp, or Luxman L430, or Hybrid mono blocks. Whatever suits my fancy

Prior to playback the record was cleaned on a Clearaudio Smart Matrix RCM and given an Ion treatment to reduce static interference.

dobyblue's picture

Have you compared it directly to the absolutely awful CD though? It is most assuredly not CD cut to vinyl, otherwise Smith wouldn't have let them put his name on it. Also Coyne isn't responsible for the mix, just the digital mastering.

It may well be that the mix was heavily compressed before being sent for mastering, but the general consensus is the vinyl still sounds better than the CD. That's not saying much, given most people still say it sounds poor, but from what I gather the CD sounds even worse.

Lencorob's picture

I have not yet compared it to the CD but will do so shortly.
Sad that in this day and age where we have "Google cars" and an abundance of turntables and carts to choose from, that such awful vinyl/recordings are being made. Some, luckily not all, new vinyl cannot hope to stand in the shade of older material. You are almost forced to hoard old vinyl, but I do like new material....

I cannot imagine what the CD must sound like if the vinyl sounds better.

Aussie0zborn's picture

So this is one cut, pressed by multiple pressing plants. The benefit is that all editions should sound the same... except as we've noticed, for the pressing quality.

Take a known record from RTI, Optimal, MPO, URP etc and compare it to your pressing. Note the contour on the face of the record, the diameter and depth of the ring around the centre hole under the label, the radius on the edge of the disc and you are more than 50% of the way to identifying the plant. If two plants use the same standard profile moulds from the same manufacturer, then it will be hard to tell. MPO is easy to identify as "MPO" is inscribed on every pressing.

Record Industry, Holland is another easy one to pick - they use a flat face 12" profile with no obvious contour visible to the naked eye - the entire face of the disc appears to be perfectly flat just like the master lacquer disc (and exactly like a 10" 78rpm shellac record). This is a perfect replica of the master lacquer which is as it should be. Check any of their pressings in their "Music On Vinyl" series. The Vinyl Factory, England also uses a flat face 12" profile.

Note that the DMM specification also included a flat face profile - not just cutting onto a copper master disc. These records are harder to press because of non-fill issues.

Hope this helps in identifying your pressing.

patony407's picture

I have the RTI pressing and who cares! It may be quit, but that only detracts from the music which is trite, compressed, and weird. The mix is crappy, weird dynamic range issues, and strange music. Side 1 has 3 awful songs to start, the last 2 are bearable. Yes, she has a very good voice. She should make sure the listener can hear it, not an excess of background crap, drum machines, and the Morman Tabernacle Choir imitating Paul Simon on Graceland.
If this is your idea of good, save your money and get ear plugs.
The best pressing in the world cannot fix crap in the groove.

timwarrior's picture

Tell Adele to seek out Bernie Grundman so her glorious voice can be produced properly. What type of equipment did Paul Epworth use to listen to this album during production? Sound is compressed and the background instruments sound like nothing I have ever heard. This should be Adele's last offering since he advisers have led her astray by thinking that this sound is any good. Tell her to listen to the Lynn Stanley albums that Bernie produced. Maybe she should start to do covers (Ronstadt, Raitt, Ian, etc.) which would benefit from her tremendous voice if properly produced. Save your money on this one. I'm sure it will show up in the cut-out bin, but avoid it then too.

X