Playing wet records was it ever popular

[Paul-H]

HI all

My Thorens TD-160 from I understand the mid 70's has 4 options on the Anti Skate 2 for conical and elliptical stylus played dry and 2 for conical and elliptical stylus played wet.

This got me wondering

How popular was playing records wet for a maker like thorens to introduce a settings option as standard.

Anyone try it or still do it. How do you stop the liquid spinning off through centrifugal force.

What where your findings.

Thanks for any input on this.

Paul

[Barry]

If I recall it was a rather extreme measure to combat static problems. IMO it is a poor idea - how do you stop the fluid migrating into the cartridge?, as well as having to dry the record before you play the second side, and then dry it agin before returning it to its sleeve.

[Infinitely Baffled]

Yes, I did this! Way back in the mid-70s I put together my first hi-fi which comprised a Connoisseur BD1 turntable with an Acos "Lustre" arm, an Ortofon VMS20E cartridge all played via a JVC JA-S310 amp into little bookshelf-sized Leak 2020 loudspeakers. It was a very decent little system, and saw me through to about 1983 when I bought (almost inevitably) a Rega Planar 3 turntable.

Anyway, back to the plot. So taken was I with becoming the owner of a "stereo" for the first time that I was determined to go the whole hog (well, as far as was practicable for a student) and acquire whatever extra gadgets I could afford. One of these was a wet playing system that was new on the market at the time, called a "Lenco" arm. This consisted of a hollow perspex tube, about 5 or 6 inches long, with a big reservoir at its back end and a brush (or more accurately, a sort of pad) at its front end. This arm arrangement was mounted atop a thin chrome spindle let into the deck alongside the platter, and on which it pivoted. With the reservoir full of Lenco's proprietary (and, for me, costly) cleaning fluid, the natural balance of the arm would ensure the distribution pad at the front sat on the record and "painted" a band of fluid, maybe 6 or 7 mm wide on the surface of the record as it went round. With the record turning, the pad moved inwards towards the turntable spindle at the same rate as the arm, thus ensuring the needle always sat within the "painted" band throughout the entire side.

How did it work? Well, fine - for a while. One problem was that, for some reason I never worked out, it was not consistent in how much fluid it deposited on the surface of the record. Sometimes there would just be a thin film (which I liked - it meant my bottle of fluid lasted longer) and sometimes it would flood the record surface with a Mississippi-like surfeit. Either way, it certainly banished static and any ticks and tacks from dust or other contaminants. Playback was very silent indeed. Unfortunately, what I found was that once you had used it on a record, you had to continue to use it. There was no going back to dry play after that - it sounded like a bowlful of Rice Krispies. So you were locked into this increasingly expensive and messy requirement to be forever squeezing Lenco fluid into the arm reservoir and watching it needlessly flood your records only to evaporate away (eventually) leaving what must have been quite a crusty residue behind, if the sound was anything to go by. After an aborted attempt to cease using it, I reluctantly bought another bottle of fluid and resumed - only to find that it now sounded crackly with or without fluid! Hell's bells! What was going on? I never found out. I eventually cut my losses. I had relatively few records at the time, so I replaced the records that were worst affected and put up with it on the others. I suppose the effect must have diminished over time, since I never notice it now, and I must still have a few records in my collection from those early days. Some of the records were hard to replace, though : it took 25 years to replace my beautiful recording of Bach's violin Sonatas and Partitas on Supraphon. It cost me three pounds and nine pence from Templar records for the three-disc set. The replacements I got in the early 2000s off Ebay cost thirty times that amount - second hand. What can you do?

Anyway, a lesson to be learned: keep records clean, but don't arse around with extravagant gadgets. These days I use a Nagaoka tacky roller to keep them dust free. And that seems to work fine.
IB

[JohnMcC]

There used to be a good second hand record shop at the bottom of Church Street, Brighton in the '60s and '70s. As a skint student I bought lots of LPs there, some of which were like new, but most of which were very "pre-loved". I used to play the worst ones wet, with a thin film of some proprietary record cleaning fluid. Until one day when the tip fell off my Goldring G800 stylus! Never again. :doh:

[struth]

Yes, I did this! Way back in the mid-70s I put together my first hi-fi which comprised a Connoisseur BD1 turntable with an Acos "Lustre" arm, an Ortofon VMS20E cartridge all played via a JVC JA-S310 amp into little bookshelf-sized Leak 2020 loudspeakers. It was a very decent little system, and saw me through to about 1983 when I bought (almost inevitably) a Rega Planar 3 turntable.

Anyway, back to the plot. So taken was I with becoming the owner of a "stereo" for the first time that I was determined to go the whole hog (well, as far as was practicable for a student) and acquire whatever extra gadgets I could afford. One of these was a wet playing system that was new on the market at the time, called a "Lenco" arm. This consisted of a hollow perspex tube, about 5 or 6 inches long, with a big reservoir at its back end and a brush (or more accurately, a sort of pad) at its front end. This arm arrangement was mounted atop a thin chrome spindle let into the deck alongside the platter, and on which it pivoted. With the reservoir full of Lenco's proprietary (and, for me, costly) cleaning fluid, the natural balance of the arm would ensure the distribution pad at the front sat on the record and "painted" a band of fluid, maybe 6 or 7 mm wide on the surface of the record as it went round. With the record turning, the pad moved inwards towards the turntable spindle at the same rate as the arm, thus ensuring the needle always sat within the "painted" band throughout the entire side.

How did it work? Well, fine - for a while. One problem was that, for some reason I never worked out, it was not consistent in how much fluid it deposited on the surface of the record. Sometimes there would just be a thin film (which I liked - it meant my bottle of fluid lasted longer) and sometimes it would flood the record surface with a Mississippi-like surfeit. Either way, it certainly banished static and any ticks and tacks from dust or other contaminants. Playback was very silent indeed. Unfortunately, what I found was that once you had used it on a record, you had to continue to use it. There was no going back to dry play after that - it sounded like a bowlful of Rice Krispies. So you were locked into this increasingly expensive and messy requirement to be forever squeezing Lenco fluid into the arm reservoir and watching it needlessly flood your records only to evaporate away (eventually) leaving what must have been quite a crusty residue behind, if the sound was anything to go by. After an aborted attempt to cease using it, I reluctantly bought another bottle of fluid and resumed - only to find that it now sounded crackly with or without fluid! Hell's bells! What was going on? I never found out. I eventually cut my losses. I had relatively few records at the time, so I replaced the records that were worst affected and put up with it on the others. I suppose the effect must have diminished over time, since I never notice it now, and I must still have a few records in my collection from those early days. Some of the records were hard to replace, though : it took 25 years to replace my beautiful recording of Bach's violin Sonatas and Partitas on Supraphon. It cost me three pounds and nine pence from Templar records for the three-disc set. The replacements I got in the early 2000s off Ebay cost thirty times that amount - second hand. What can you do?

Anyway, a lesson to be learned: keep records clean, but don't arse around with extravagant gadgets. These days I use a Nagaoka tacky roller to keep them dust free. And that seems to work fine.
IB

Interesting story Gary. Have to say i dont remember the system you used, and it sounds like a lot of hassle. I guess it was temporarily fixing a problem but making it worse long term.

[Barry]

Yes, I remember the Lenco wet-playing arm. I should have mentioned it in my post.

http://snvinyl.co.uk/Analogis-Wet-Type-LENCO-CLEAN-Arm-art-5930

Interesting recollection Gary; one which confirms my scepticism of the whole process.

[walpurgis]

Yes, I remember the Lenco wet-playing arm.

So do I.

I wonder if it would have made the dreadful sapphire styli that were about last any longer? :)

[shane]

Horrendous things. As you found, once you'd used it once you were stuck with it, because the dust which could have been removed with a brush was now glued to the surface of the record. This was bad for your records and cartridge, but brilliant for sakes of LencoClean fluid! Now I know this is probably a bit late, but you didn't need to replace the LPs. The accumulated crud would come off easily with a pass through a decent RCM. If any of your records are still affected, give it a try!

[Infinitely Baffled]

Interesting story Gary. Have to say i dont remember the system you used, and it sounds like a lot of hassle. I guess it was temporarily fixing a problem but making it worse long term.

That's it absolutely, Grant! The things we do in our youth ...

I was fascinated (and a bit spooked to tell the truth) to see in Barry's post that you can still buy the darned thing (though now it's black - back in the day it was moulded out of white plastic). As you can imagine, I won't be lashing out on one any time soon, and if you take my advice ...

Sounds like you had the same experience, Shane, though possibly emerged less damaged by it if you managed to get your records clean again. I did actually try that. There was a place in Hampstead Village (shades of Jethro Tull there!) which had a Keith Monks RCM - a quid an LP I think in 1977 - and I took some along, but they were still not right afterwards. Could be their machine or operative was not up to snuff at the time. (Thinking back on it, how did I ever become aware of that place without the use of the internet?)
IB