Hello Dan_ed,
I'm not so sure that is "entirely correct, as I'll bring up one point, LAST LP Preservative certainly isn't an "inexpensive" product, that's for sure!
I'm sure, just like cleaning debates, this one can have as many opinions, as posters-users of the product.
I've used it for a number of years, still have some on stash in fact, and to me, the product didn't seem to muffle-dull anything. But perhaps my system had enough of the mids, and highs regardless, to not be of much detrimental consequence? And I usually never did a before-after A-B test, so my opinons don;t count for much, as it was applied to fresh from the Jacket, mostly on fresh Mo-Fi's, and DCC's.
Some are close to 20 years old, and still look, and sound fantastic, just like the day I bought them. How they would've sounded untreated, I cannot truthfully say? And some have been recently re-cleaned with a full AIVS Process, and VPI 16.5, and still sound basically the same, no changes one way, or the other to my ears.
I can of course fully understand, and as well mostly agree with the purist's point of view, in that nothing should come between the Stylus-Groove interface, and that adding anything, could perhaps be recognized, and heard as just another "contaminant" added to the surface?
The purpose of the product was as its name implies, to "preserve", and most of us don't have the resources to accurately say just how well an "untreated" LP held up, and its sonic qualities compare, versus an exact same LP copy, that was LAST treated, after 70, or so plays. This is where the LAST product may have its advantage?
I'm not actually a proponent for, or against LAST, but I will say that this does seem to be a unique product, unlike virtually all other LP treatments that I've ever used. Mark
I'm not so sure that is "entirely correct, as I'll bring up one point, LAST LP Preservative certainly isn't an "inexpensive" product, that's for sure!
I'm sure, just like cleaning debates, this one can have as many opinions, as posters-users of the product.
I've used it for a number of years, still have some on stash in fact, and to me, the product didn't seem to muffle-dull anything. But perhaps my system had enough of the mids, and highs regardless, to not be of much detrimental consequence? And I usually never did a before-after A-B test, so my opinons don;t count for much, as it was applied to fresh from the Jacket, mostly on fresh Mo-Fi's, and DCC's.
Some are close to 20 years old, and still look, and sound fantastic, just like the day I bought them. How they would've sounded untreated, I cannot truthfully say? And some have been recently re-cleaned with a full AIVS Process, and VPI 16.5, and still sound basically the same, no changes one way, or the other to my ears.
I can of course fully understand, and as well mostly agree with the purist's point of view, in that nothing should come between the Stylus-Groove interface, and that adding anything, could perhaps be recognized, and heard as just another "contaminant" added to the surface?
The purpose of the product was as its name implies, to "preserve", and most of us don't have the resources to accurately say just how well an "untreated" LP held up, and its sonic qualities compare, versus an exact same LP copy, that was LAST treated, after 70, or so plays. This is where the LAST product may have its advantage?
I'm not actually a proponent for, or against LAST, but I will say that this does seem to be a unique product, unlike virtually all other LP treatments that I've ever used. Mark