The vagaries of vinyl

[WESTLOWER]

great call, its in my basket for next time. ive got a copy of Blue Rose(Rosemary Clooney and Duke Ellington) on its way from them at moment

[da2222]

Pure pleasure records ltd, s site is very good. They are a label who also do Speakers corner but sell too.

http://www.purepleasurerecords.com/p...tegory=6792756

Ideal, thanks!

[Crackles]

Pure pleasure records ltd, s site is very good. They are a label who also do Speakers corner but sell too.

http://www.purepleasurerecords.com/p...tegory=6792756

Can't believe I've never heard of this site before. Thanks for sharing

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[magiccarpetride]

Hi

The last few weeks of my (re) introduction to vinyl have been very interesting and not without their twists and turns. One of which is the wide variation in the quality of pressings. In many ways this was expected but certain surprises have also been thrown up. For example, I have two- mint to the eye- 1st UK pressings of Don McClean's 'American Pie', identical issue numbers etc and while one is clear, dynamic and well balanced the other is veiled, dull and very one- dimensional. Both have been carefully cleaned and are visibly immaculate. The same goes for a mint 1st pressing of the Smith's 'Strangeways Here We Come'- playing, it sounds like a blanket has been thrown over the speakers, while another tattier version of the same recording is much more listenable. Why such variation? Given they are second-hand and relatively 'old' perhaps they've been cleaned with bleach or god knows what, but could it be the pressings themselves?

Furthermore, there is the lottery of the secondhand market. 'Mint' advertised copies may appear so to the eye but many I've purchased come with assorted clicks and pops that would suggest otherwise. That's the chance we take of course but I'm beginning to think I'd be better investing in new copies that are recognised as being high quality pressings. Is anyone aware of decent sites online specialising in quality pressings and re-releases? Scott Nagle's site is one but any other suggestions would be appreciated...

I prefer to buy used vinyl locally. All the record stores I frequent have turntables where you can give it a spin and listen to the LPs to assess their condition. The downside of course is unpredictable selection, but sometimes that's a positive thing, as I discover some nice records that otherwise I'd never consider purchasing.

[guy]

Just wondering whether dull sounding copies could have been owned by a smoker?
I don't think that standard record cleaning (very small amount of surfactant) would remove any tar if it had been in a smokey environment.

You could check out my theory by wiping one of the bad ones with a cotton bud soaked in IPA or similar? (or sniff the covers!)

I raise this point as I used to smoke - many years ago - and I was surprised/disgusted by the thin layer of tar that I kept on finding on various household items even years later.

[alphaGT]

Just wondering whether dull sounding copies could have been owned by a smoker?
I don't think that standard record cleaning (very small amount of surfactant) would remove any tar if it had been in a smokey environment.

You could check out my theory by wiping one of the bad ones with a cotton bud soaked in IPA or similar? (or sniff the covers!)

I raise this point as I used to smoke - many years ago - and I was surprised/disgusted by the thin layer of tar that I kept on finding on various household items even years later.

I’ve had much success removing nicotine from old records. And it’s probably one of the most common forms of pollution on your records. Certain ones that were excessively dirty, I’ll also give it a good cleaning with my Enzyme formula cleaner, and the waste water shows about the color of tea, apparently the nicotine coloring the water. And of course the proof is in the playback! A badly soiled record can take 3 cleanings or more before the waste water looks clean. I use plain old MoFi brand fluids in my Pro-Ject RCM, so far the only thing it won’t remove are scratches.

It’s true that old records that were played on a child’s record player, or record players from before the 1950’s, can be worn out by the needle. But modern record players that use a tracking force of less than 2grams, I don’t think you could ever wear a record out with it? As records I’ve owned for near 40 years and had literally hundreds of plays can be cleaned up to sound like new!

Russell

[da2222]

Just wondering whether dull sounding copies could have been owned by a smoker?
I don't think that standard record cleaning (very small amount of surfactant) would remove any tar if it had been in a smokey environment.

You could check out my theory by wiping one of the bad ones with a cotton bud soaked in IPA or similar? (or sniff the covers!)

I raise this point as I used to smoke - many years ago - and I was surprised/disgusted by the thin layer of tar that I kept on finding on various household items even years later.

They record's are pristine, with no tar residue, yet dull s dishwater sounding...

[struth]

Could be bad stamps fro.m end of a stampers life

[Primalsea]

Could be bad stamps fro.m end of a stampers life

I think sometimes it's also the quality or properties of the vinyl used as well. Some newer records, even heavyweight seem like the surface is not as hard as some of the older and much more flimsy records that I have that sound great.

[struth]

I think sometimes it's also the quality or properties of the vinyl used as well. Some newer records, even heavyweight seem like the surface is not as hard as some of the older and much more flimsy records that I have that sound great.

Been saying for years 50/60's vinyl was harder and less likely to scratch deep