Riders on the storm

[Groove-T]

Before applying such a hardener, the record must be cleaned perfectly, otherwise some particles will stick forever .

Record companies do not apply such a stuff because this cost some money and brings nothing for the company.

Record companies also do not apply some liquid stuff to better release the new pressed record from the pressing machine. This job is self done by the record due the different tempco of vinyl an the metal pressing platter.

Making the record harder is no good IMHO, since the record/stylus contact produces some temperature due the pressure.
EMT wrote a paper which declared that that the contact surface on each side of the tip is apx 30 square micrometers ( this is for radius 18micrometer spheric), with elliptic tips it can go down to apx 20 , Shibata up to apx. 45 .

The limit wight before vinyl begins to deform is apx 40kiloponds per square millimeter!
Thus the stylus pressure limit is apx 4,5 grams for a stereotip spheric or 8,7 for mono spheric.

So you have something to calculate and think abouth.

There are also some liquids sold to apply on the stylus and promise the stylus will holding longer. As far as i know diamond is harder than all other stuff known to me.

This remember me to James Brown, he had a song with the text: Shake the moneymaker...

[RNMarsh]

All your questions can be answered by contacting the LAST factory in Livermore, California. A slightly different forlumation has been applied to tape recorder heads with similar wear reduction. It is not a new product but since so many people still play with LP's, I think it is something all should try and use. I still have some left over before I sold all my LP's a few years ago. A life times collection. But I am not sorry i did that.

And, again, NO it isnt a coating that comes off and gums up the stylus.

It is what i said it is. YOU need to check into it and get the use of it. Its a small family operation and never had the funds to go big. But if you want to preserve your records, you need it. I am not here to convince you of anything but to inform you.

See: www.lastfactory.com

Thx - Richard

[sonidos]

I have no dog in the hunt (meaning I don't sell the stuff) but I started using Last products at about the time I started buying audiophile vinyl back in '86 when I was still in school. I used the stylus cleaner and protector, record cleaner, and record preservative. It did no harm to the records and as far as I can tell, I don't hear much wear from the records. However, if I did loan a record or two to a friend with a substandard stylus, I did hear the effects of that on my records!

[indianajo]

I don't hear much wear on my records (LP's), some of which I've had 41 years. The ones before that were played on my Mother's RCA record player with the 5 g arm and crystal cartridge, and the highs were ripped right off by one play. I've had a 1.5 g arm since 1970 with magnetic cartridges. One diamond on a Grado FTE cartridge from the late seventies did fracture, and damage a few records before I heard it.
I do wash them with tap water sometimes, and the used ones need soap sometimes to get the insect **** off. Capitols used to come from the factory with a good coating of pops, so don't use any last on those. I notice the EMI version of Abbey Road I bought 2 years ago was much quieter. I think the old Capitol pressing plant must have had open windows, big fans, and was in the mojave desert. You couldn't get Beatles or Beach Boys from anybody else (until Mobil Fidelity) but no money wasted on Capitol Classical for me, thank you.
Other low price brands were as bad, Everest and Pickwick had wood pulp filled vinyl, it sounded like. So no LAST for me.

[gpapag]

Originally Posted by RNMarsh

I am not here to convince you of anything but to inform you.
Thx - Richard

Thank you.
If you were not plainly promoting it (post #5) without providing technical justification, I wouldn’t mind.

I understand that it is not a coating that can gum the stylus. Most probably their product works on the vinyl surface by adsorption.
What I guess their product is doing, is to reduce the positive static electrical charge on the record surface, thus significantly reducing the attraction from the environment and subsequent entrapment of debris in the record grooves.
That would be a worthwhile achievement in the direction of record long term preservation, provided that the mechanism of adsorption which would be responsible for this beneficial effect does not surface harden the groove walls at the same time.
( By the way, there is no mention of surface hardening on their site).

Neverteless, hitting the tag “Record Care”, I read this:

When the pressure wave encounters a microcrack, flaws in the vinyl, or other surface imperfections, the energy builds up, forming a shock wave that can exceed the cohesive forces holding the surface together. When this happens, cracks occur in the vinyl and fragments can be blown off the groove wall. This kind of damage can occur on the very first play, and will increase exponentially as a function of both the number of plays and stylus loading.

A very frightening fairytale . How come all these years, hundreds of thousands of vinyl records in use have not been totally damaged through these “shock waves”?

Reality does not support it.

Such shock waves and/or spall cracking generation require energy levels some good orders of magnitude greater than the maximum HF acoustic or ultrasonic energy the stylus/record groove interaction can generate at the contact points.

Vinyl softened by plasticizers and record grooves spacing/geometry does not favour generated waves energy and energy from wave interaction reaching local high energy build-up. Controlled (low Q) build up of energy occurs and can show up on mechanical impedance diagrams at mid audio frequencies, where wavelengths are too long for the dimensions concerned. Thinking in focused wave mode there is unjustified.
They had better put some real numbers into this scenario (data extrapolation on experimental data from other fields of applied engineering can lead to erroneous conclusions).

It is my opinion that it would be for the benefit of a manufacturer if he would provide enough technical documentation for to support the specifications or claimed functionality of his product(s).
It is for the benefit of each individual –potential customer- to test the rigorousness of the manufacturers documentation.
In any case, the onus of proof is on the manufacturer/claimer and not on me or anyone else here.
Besides I don’t fancy hunting ghosts or questioning commercial products.
I am only interested (and willing to participate) in discussing technical issues

George

[SY]

A few points:

1. Vinyl records do use a mold release- sometimes it's internal to the vinyl formulation, sometimes it's sprayed on. Vinyl compounds tend to be a bit sticky to metal, so you can't rely on the cooling shrinkage. If the release is internal, no amount of cleaning will get rid of it, it will continue blooming to the surface.

2. LAST may or may not work, but the description is nonsense.

3. If it's still being made and anyone wants to send me some, I'll deformulate and post the results.

4. The once-popular wet-playing system from Lenco will absolutely destroy discs.

5. Lubricant sprays (e.g., Gruv Glide) can work nicely, but are amazingly efficient at coating the stylus.

6. I have seen conchoidal fractures in grooves, but no good evidence that it's from the sort of spalling George quoted.

[Groove-T]

@SY

Those videos i have seen, there was no external mold release used, but hardly i have seen everything.

Last Stylus treatment shall be applied before listening a record, so i wonder what it does or how it should work, it can not be as hars as a diamond.

The description of Last record preserve says, that the record must be cleaned absolute properly befor using.
This explains why the pic with the treated groove did not have dirt or dust

I know from experience that Lencoclena killed the records, but why? What happens?
I just know, that there is a cooling effect with the liquid and i assume the diamond is not in proper contact with the groove due the waterfilm..?

[sonidos]

Always great to have SY weigh in! SY, about the blooming, I'm assuming it's quite visible. I have some discs that appear splotchy. Could that be the mold release?

[SY]

Groove, or the release may be internal. Vinyl formulations can contain a fatty ester for this purpose.

Sonidos, the splotches are more likely mold growth (the fatty esters are good bug food) or something nastier- the mold release is a very thin layer and usually transparent. When you come up to visit, bring one along and we'll put it under the microscope.

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by SY

A few points:


2. LAST may or may not work, but the description is nonsense.

3. If it's still being made and anyone wants to send me some, I'll deformulate and post the results.

4. The once-popular wet-playing system from Lenco will absolutely destroy discs.

If no one else steps up I think I have a circa 1981 bottle somewhere. I did a one side LAST one side no LAST and was careful to always play both sides over almost 20yr. It was inconclusive since the LAST side seemed less noisey but sounded thinner.

I have a friend who makes sure all his TT and carts are waterproof and just pours it on.