MRA : Myth or Menace?


New Vinyl : MRA : Myth or Menace?

This is an exercise to see how far I could get playing brand new LPs, UNCLEANED, before MRA toxicity became a problem.
I must forewarn you that for digital audio enthusiasts, the following notes will seem as productive as watching paint dry… ;^)

In an earlier A’Gon thread which lamented the number of warped examples of new vinyl on release I posted the beginnings of the experiment. Quote :

“Here's a heartening story for the OP : I often accumulate new LPs but don't play them with the intention of getting them cleaned first. Yesterday I took a chance and played one that had been stored, uncleaned from new since 2013. Opening it for the first time, it was "ruler flat", no discernible warps. Hole and label registration were very good. The LP played as if it had just been scrupulously cleaned. Noise floor was inky black. Transient peaks tracked perfectly and cleanly throughout the entire record. This 180g was a triumph of LP manufacture that harked back to the halcyon days of the 70s & 80s when no one had even heard of MRA and uncleaned LPs bought new still sound perfect today."

“Emboldened by my own experience (above) I've started playing new LPs without cleaning them. After warming up the stylus on a 2nd-hand LP, the next two that I tried were "For Your Pleasure" (Roxy Music), 1x180g LP, and "The Raven That Refused To Sing" (Steve Wilson), 2x180g LPs.
To my pleasant surprise all three of them gave the same result as above. Each had a nice glossy black patina with no staining or “marbling”.
(It’s possible that coffee coloured staining/marbling may be an indication that someone needs a new chemistry set and that the formula may be compromised in some way but I can’t be sure about this…) :^D

I paid particular attention to the quiet/silent passages on the Steve Wilson because it had a bit more dynamic contrast than the other album.
Even though I listen at levels of 85db or so - measured at a distance of 5-6m there were no clicks or pops just inky blackness. As a double-check I stepped into the near field during quiet sections and got the same result.
The run-ins and run-outs were also smooth and untroubled.”

After those listening experiences I sensed the beginning of a grand experiment to see how many new, uncleaned, LPs I could play while still obtaining such gratifying results before I crashed-and-burned on a severely MRA-riven one… ;^)

So, the experiment continued….
In addition to the ones previously posted (above), and as before, this is a description of their physical and behavioural properties for the purposes of checking where we are in terms of meeting acceptable standards of LP manufacture :

Norah Jones, “The Fall” (single album).
Anti-static poly lined sleeve supplied with enough room to slide the LP out unlike those that are paper only and so tight you end up destroying the sleeve to get the LP out!
Very slight spindle hole mis-registration. Again, not as bad as the HFN/RR test disc.
Disc was as flat and unwarped as you would have liked it to be.
In terms of surface noise this was silent throughout.
Run-in and track transitions were silent also.
The runout on Side A was silent despite having a piece of fluff caked on the end of the stylus!!
(I noticed this LP was one of those rare ones more inclined to become statically charged, despite the diligent application of a Zerostat)
Doesn’t get any better than that if you are looking for a result. SQ was excellent.
Another winner?!?!???

(Please note : for the next set of reviews none of them were static “chargers” i.e. the stylus was perfectly clean at the end of each side (not, perhaps, under a microscope but visibly clean when viewed with the naked eye – the stylus was cleaned, once per LP, btw..). There were also no signs of discolouration or blotchiness on any of the discs mentioned.)

Edwin Astley, “Randall & Hopkirk Deceased” (single album) sourced by Network-on-Air.
Quote : “Featuring new transfers from original analogue tape elements, mastering/vinyl cutting by Ray Staff (one of the best audio engineers in the world) and high quality pressing by the renowned Pallas pressing plant in Germany, this range of audiophile-level albums is presented on 180g virgin vinyl…”
Like the NJ, provided with an anti-static poly lined sleeve with plenty of room to reach in and grab the LP.
The manufacturers do seem to be getting their act together. Even the few that only have paper sleeves at least enjoy a decent sized one.
This was an album released to celebrate RSD but whenever I tried to get a copy in the shops I struck out.
I ended up ordering it on-line from the creators…
This was a terrific test of surface noise in fact it was a bit of a revelation. There were plenty of long silences on this collection of incidental orchestral music. (Rather like listening to a work such as Mussorgsky’s “Pictures at an Exhibition” only twice as long!)
Inky blackness prevailed during those silences. Track transitions and run-ins/runouts also silent. SQ superb. Slight 1960’s “colouration” to the recording – more so than you’d experience on e.g. John Barry Collections, but still the best rendition of this music I’ve ever heard (and I’ve got some BD recordings featuring it).
Again this disc sounded so good you’d think it had been cleaned. Excellent dynamics and recording depth.
If only BDs sounded like this, audience involvement would be off the scale!
So, a triumph! There are others available from Network. Given the quality of this offering I’m going to have to collect them all now… 
(Update : I’ve made a start and ordered a few already….)

Hawkwind, “Electric Tepee” (double album, red vinyl Limited Edition)
These played perfectly with a perfect noise floor (or at least as far as I could tell given that it was a hard-Rock album). Track transitions were silent and run-ins/outs also silent until the very end.
Nicely finished product. No rough edges or rags.
Textbook stuff! 
My only objection was that it, disappointingly, had been supplied with paper sleeves with circular cutouts and no poly liner 
They were loose enough to get the discs out easily so no problems.

The Enid, “Invicta” (double album)
The first LP needed the spindle hole to be reamed slightly (loose core) nothing too involved. Second one fitted ok.
The first LP was clearly “dished” even though it wasn’t easily visible. (The reason I know this is because I have a spirit level bolted to the bearing housing on my tonearm ;^)
It started off with a strongly “negative” VTA i.e. “tail down” then the arm progressed “downhill” towards the inner grooves where VTA levelled out.
The reverse situation applied to Side B. (I didn’t bother adjusting VTA to average it)
Apart from slight “dishing” there was a single pinch-warp on the first disc but not severe.
Basically it looked good – even to a perfectionist.
Grooves were not very deeply cut and the runouts were excessively long (1.5” typically). They could have used the available space better.
Perhaps attributable to the dishing, noise performance slightly less than perfect on occasions with both discs but commendable as it was low-level and wasn’t intrusive.
SQ was faultless otherwise.
Verdict : less than perfect (physically) but still excellent.

The Beach Boys “Pet Sounds” 180g single album.
No defects in drilling or labelling. Not warped in any way.
Poly lined sleeve plus detailed inner sleeve.
Very low-level noise only during the occasional track transition, no audible noise during the music itself.
SQ was first class. Very lifelike and alive. Sounded like it was recorded yesterday.
Excellent pressing.

Led Zeppelin “Led Zeppelin” 180g single album.
Needed the spindle hole to be reamed out. Again, not warped in any way.
Poly lined inner sleeve similar to the Goldring type.
Back to 100% inky black background silences with this one. Run ins completely silent as were the track transitions.
SQ beyond reproach. This album will leave you dazed & confused…

Based on these most recent experiences I’m inclined to buy MORE new vinyl rather than less.
I’d had one bad experience with MRA and this had put me off playing new vinyl – tending to save them until an opportunity to get them cleaned arose – but as you can see, some of these new albums have been different class while all have been eminently playable.

With no problematic issues after about 16 LPs (4 of them not yet described here) you can see the percentage failure rate is still zero. This gives a good percentage indication of success and I have to say the signs are good but the most important observation is that cleaning was not essential to get good results (especially in terms of surface noise & tracking on peaks)and that is what the experiment was really about. ;^)
This may not be "your" experience but if not we’re still interested in your comments if you've tried the experiment already ;^)

I still have large amounts of new vinyl still sealed in its packaging so I’ll keep going… but effectively the notes end here as I feel the exercise has been worthwhile ;^)
moonglum

Showing 18 responses by moonglum

Hi Lowrider,
No I didn't inspect it with a magnifying glass only eyeballed it but I did clean it regularly enough.

There are those who maintain that MRA does not exist. I recall an old thread on another Forum which specifically mentions the addition of MRA to the vinyl formula. (Dated 1976). I'm just wondering what happened before 1976! ;^)

Over the years I've heard the occasional "bad disc" whose faults, I believe, could only be attributable to MRA. It may be that the material predominantly collects in the deepest grooves during highly modulated passages or the cartridge only noticeably objects to it when it tries to track the difficult peaks?

Since, in theory, MRA continues to be exuded by the vinyl for years after manufacture (assuming it really does exist), one wonders if cleaning is indeed a permanent solution...?
Dear Mo-fi,
In the 60s, 70s & 80s it wasn't as fashionable to clean new LPs as it is now. The general attitude was, "What can be cleaner than a brand new LP?"
These days the average vinyl enthusiast is much more sophisticated and knows that there is more to this than meets the eye, or rather the ear...

Cheers,
Dear Mo-fi,
You must remember that 70s & 80s were dominated by Linn's philosophy and they advocated using the stylus to clean records then brushing it off with stylus cleaner after it had collected! ;^)

I must confess to some scepticism about fingerprints causing extreme damage to a stylus though? Any fingerprint won't likely penetrate beyond the outermost groove surface and the domain of the stylus lies within the deeper part of the groove? Small bits of paper get deflected without even being noticed (although I think it's best to dust them off first). The acid test would be whether there is any accompanying sound of impact from the fingerprint(??).

By contrast, a carbon fibre brush when applied to the stylus will scare the proverbials out of you if the volume is even within 10db of your normal listening level, so if anything I'd be more concerned about the rigorous nature of the brush rather than any mild contaminants?

One of the great things about hifi is that we can celebrate our different approaches to each and every problem and it's always interesting to hear others experiences.
Kind regards,
Dear Mo-Fi,
I think I got off lightly there ;^)
After repeating Linn's original philosophy I expected to see, "Well, it seems nothing has changed these days then!". :)
I would have walked right into that one. ;^)

As you've probably guessed, this was never intended as an assault on the right to clean. Just to say that if buyers do opt to play them straight out of the bag, they won't die. ;^)

Whart,
I think you've summed up the situation extremely well.
Second-hand records, different proposition. Like you said, you've no idea of the history of these things, so it makes sense to always clean. For me, cigarette tar would be the main worry. The 2 bosses : Boss No1 and Boss no2 (wife & daughter) know better than to cook while the 'Stats are charged up ;^)
I am not inconsiderate, however. I'll power down if they want to cook :)
Davt....good to hear that you always wear "protection". Don't mention Hollywood film stars... ;^) :D
Many thanks BPoletti & Wntrmute2.
I made an earlier reference to a 1976 vinyl LP patent whose description featured MRA in the composition but I've no idea whether that actually became a production reality...
Indeed, BDP24, it is possible that retailers recycle returned goods back onto the shelves (not necessarily with the shrink-wrap attached - as a friend of mine recently testified).
It's not something I've done more than two or 3 times in my lifetime although there's the rare "roller-coaster" warped disc that I probably could have returned had it not been 35 yrs ago ;^)
The retailer is long since gone, sadly. :(

Pinchwarps are the ones I find most annoying (i.e. with the wrong cartridge).

Is there any evidence that online retailers are guilty of the same thing?
Dear Doug,
You offer an interesting alternative viewpoint on the outcome of record cleaning by saying that cleaning will make records noisier(?)

Let me throw in a few wildcards :
- Countless RCM owners will have waxed lyrical in their assessments about how quiet LPs are after thorough cleaning.
- Check out MF's review of the ADS (scroll down to "so how well does it work?"). Quietness, post-cleaning, is the first comment.

http://www.analogplanet.com/content/worlds-best-record-cleaning-machine#g7I3uVfs2AWgERKf.97

- The stylus, almost as soon as it makes contact, develops a film, an "interference layer" if you will, which may negate those results as playing progresses?
- As above, because the stylus causes the groove to melt and reflow behind it, it throws into question whether a clean groove should be "noisier" or not, given that the most intimate thermal contact is obtainable when clean?

I'm not being critical of you, Doug, as I'm certain your routines are far more thorough than is possible from any automatic RCM. Anyone who dedicates themselves to that level of perfection deserves cleaner records than everyone else ;^)
Dear Geoff,
That was one of the 2 classic arguments when record cleaning initially became a subject of debate. People were torn as to whether it was a good idea to clean the MRA/MRC off, by facilitating the passage of the stylus through the groove ("lubrication"), despite the claims that MRA renewed itself i.e. the vinyl "sweated"/exuded MRA for years after manufacture
(or at least it did so to a reducing degree?).

Unfortunately we're still no closer to knowing, for sure, whether MRC actually exists in vinyl manufacture. (Whart's commendable research says no.)
If that's the case we should have a reasonably clean groove after manufacture provided the Alchemists didn't make it on a Friday. ;^)
Dear Whart,
That was possibly the most thought provoking post I've read on the subject. I can almost feel myself veering back towards cleaning new vinyl.

I suppose we must remember that vinyl is, broadly speaking, a piece of plastic material. Different forms of plastic material are notorious for "out-gassing" even at room temperature. Vinyl doesn't seem to be as "chemical-smelling" as bin liners, cables etc so I guess we should be thankful that we're not inhaling cyanide on a day-to-day basis ;^)

The results were undeniable though, and the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Perhaps the conclusion should be "clean if required" and leave it to individual choice.
Dear Doug,
Many thanks for responding.
I found your reply equally interesting. It got me thinking after your reference to the nature of the film on the stylus, that rather than (my) assumption that it was simply molten vinyl (i.e. prompted by folks commenting that their Zerodusts, Magic Erasers etc, by no mean coincidence, remove "black" stuff from the stylus) perhaps the stylus is, additionally, mimicking the conditions under which "MRA" type contaminants are released...?
If such were indeed the case then cleaning "MRA" could become an exercise in futility(!) ;^)
Not that I necessarily believe this to be the case ;^)

As to the other content, yes, I appreciate your feelings on the nature of noise. My comment was merely to point out that the trend of increased cleaning efficiency points towards progressive noise reduction?
For many others adopting or living with the vinyl medium, noise could be something of a deal-breaker? If noise were above a certain threshold and occurred at inopportune times e.g. peak noise was greater than a low level signal during a classical piece, then I could understand some listeners getting "itchy feet" and resenting the format. So for me, it's a blessing if noise is well suppressed and it is something I would expect/demand from a turntable design.

Getting close to the degree of fine detail that you describe requires the ultimate attention to detail in terms of setup & cleaning even on a per disc instance basis (VTA/Azimuth etc). Not many will do this (I know that you are meticulous to that degree and have reaped the rewards)
Best regards,

Dear Doug,

I think I've stepped into a parallel universe.

I'm responding to a comment that was never published ;^)

 

We are currently looking at v1 (version1) of post no 48 rather than v2. V2 existed for at least 24, possibly 48 hrs before disappearing completely. It did not include the final paragraph about Azimuth as I realised immediately that this was open to misinterpretation! In fact I was one step ahead of you so V1 existed for only a couple of minutes!!!

 V2 was published before 5 or 6am (US time) so, realistically, no one ever saw V1…

 

Somehow the Administrator revamped the system and managed to pull back a legacy or archived copy of the post i.e. v1, instead of the “final draft”. For V2  I may have added other comments but I can't recall what I said so unless Admin can restore it we're stuck with the poorly written v1 :(

In the short term just take the last para as a compliment and everything will be fine.  ;^)

"..Wanna see somethin' really scary....?"

I don't mind straying off-subject in this instance. Does anyone else find John's azimuth research mildly alarming?


http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=vinyl&n=974192&highlight=&search_url=


Not that I'm advocating that folk should stop setting azimuth "by ear" to obtain a satisfactory result. It does cast measured readings in a different light, however...


Dear Timothy,

Many thanks for that extremely enlightening contribution. I guess, to an extent, I’ve been trying to establish a relationship between low “quiescent” noise and the acceptable cleanliness/playability of the groove. Also at the opposite end of the scale, establish MRAs effects on trackability, since the stylus is more likely to disconnect altogether during the more “energetic” sections of the programme if there is harmful interference. One would think that if you “aced” both of these it would be Happy Hour(!) however, summarising what we’ve seen so far, Doug has cautioned that celebrating low noise performance may be a naïve view with his assertion that noise is lowered progressively with less imperfect cleaning that rears its ugly head again at the “quantum” level when one has achieved a cleaning regime with the highest possible degree of perfection.

For those who see cleaning as a “non-negotiable” option, we seem to have adopted the mindset or perception that MRA is “alien” to the vinyl and should be removed at all costs (and that “once it’s gone it’s gone”) even though we’ve firmly established it as a component which (most likely) makes an appearance whenever the vinyl is heated i.e. I’ve been inviting conjecture as to whether this could also apply to the effect of the stylus itself when it melts the groove during the playback process. No one has responded to that prospect yet ;^).

 

Let’s theorise for a moment and assume that Occam’s Razor isn’t as straightforward as it appears (extreme cleaning = fresh low-level noise =end of story). Suppose the vinyl is not melting and reforming during replay but the MRA itself is and this MRA acts as a thermal interface and a thermal barrier to the vinyl.

Therefore it’s possible Doug has succeeded in ultimately cleaning the groove only to find that the groove goes through a partial regeneration of MRA on the first play – because this time the stylus is in contact with the vinyl and not the MRA, which creates noise as a by-product from more “intimate” clean groove contact rather than the LP “enjoying” existing MRA as an interface and not feeling the need to create much additional MRA…

But what happens then?

Doug puts the album back on the shelf content in the knowledge that the first play was satisfactory (but slightly noisy) until the second play finds the MRA partially restored to its former glory….?

I’ve never cleaned new records to the depth that Doug has so I can’t say how that second replay would pan out.... ;^)

 

Of course this is an aside to the rumoured possibility that MRA is continuously exuded for years afterwards! (But did they consider that the stylus temperature might be the reason if MRA isn’t as much of a barrier as I’ve just suggested???)

 

So, in the end, it’s not so much the inevitability of MRA existing but whether cleaning can help in situations where there is, perish the thought, too much of it or the chemistry of the LP is flawed i.e. to the extent that such material interferes with peak level tracking? My suspicion is that there can occasionally be too much of it (bad chemistry) and the answer to that may be yes but I’m not hearing any examples in the current batches as yet.

Enter your text ...

The curse of the Twilight Zone has struck again....JTA wrote a response (Post no 56) which I thought was rather good and now it's disappeared..... :(

Even though it is no longer visible I will briefly reach into that alternate Dimension and formulate an answer. ;^)

Post no 57 : Exactly, couldn't have put it better! I fully subscribe to the "Ellington Axiom" i.e. if it sounds good it is good. :)

All the best and a Merry Christmas to all (...and please try not to think too much about MRA as it only causes indigestion ;^)

Time for a top-up.  I’m only publishing this due to a sense of elation at nabbing a bargain.;^)

My wife pointed out the bargain in our local “Walmart” (Asda) when she spotted Miles Davis “Kind of Blue” in 180g for only £4-99! It only took me all of a millisecond to grab a copy. It’s part of a series called “Jazz On 33 & 1/3” which features a magazine plus LP. The next in the series will be one of Miles’s stablemates John Coltrane offered at the still bargain price of £9-99.

I don’t own brand new vinyl issues of any of these classics so for me it was something of a no-brainer. Even if the album turned out to be a dud and it had to be replaced or refunded at least I’d have the comfort of knowing the LP wouldn’t be re-shrink wrapped and put on display again as they are in some dedicated music shops. (Which might account for some of the claims of dirt & fingerprints so often lamented…?)

So what did I get for my 4-99 loss-leader and how does it add to the tally of non-problematic discs?

Well it featured a fairly thin single cardboard sleeve but the inner sleeve was superior : thick paper, poly lined. There were no dents or scarring of the external packaging because it was pretty well packed in a bumper “envelope” but I inspected the disc for them just in case. The LP itself was examined under a filament lamp and revealed no dirt, dust, fingerprints, dents or scratches at all. Pristine(!), contrary to the common complaint of poor handling.

The only comment I would make is that there was what I would call an “MRA stain” covering about 20% of the playing surface. In practice this proved to be completely inaudible. One of the helpful things about jazz albums like this is that the high frequency percussives are a constant and clearly audible at all times. I detected no change in their behaviour throughout the stained portion.

As with the other successes SQ was beyond reproach for new vinyl. Silent backgrounds accompanied by clear transients & peak-level tracking from beginning to end. The instruments on this recording have considerable peak-level “bite” and often fast rise-times so if there is going to be a problem it will eventually be revealed. What surprised me was that given a store’s lack of consideration for storage and display, the LP was commendably ruler flat. I won’t mention the spindle hole drilling concentricity because that showed the same problem as every other LP in existence but the drill hole and LP edges were perfectly clean and burr-free. It was a quality product.

The Miles inner sleeve quality was starkly contrasted by a Lana Del Rey double album my daughter speculatively bought me for Christmas. Considering that she paid top-dollar for it, the manufacturer supplied only drilled paper sleeves which tend to cause scuffing of the disc. Not that this necessarily has an adverse effect on noise levels but it’s possible it could aggravate certain styli. (BTW, Lana was played during the same session and the LPs were as perfect those described above).

I’m afraid Lana is perhaps too “pop-music” oriented for my tastes but her music coming from a turntable was still too good to ignore. Fact is I’ll listen to anything apart from Opera and Reggae but a turntable can even make these genres attractive ;^)

As someone who, like many of my contemporaries on A’gon, has been buying LPs for over 45 years, one can’t help feeling that vinyl replay is as complicated as we want it to be, especially given the unproblematic nature of the previous reviews.

When it comes to playing new LPs, due diligence is as much as they’re going to get from me, although I accept that “due diligence” may take a more severe form for other people….  ;^)

As mentioned earlier, John Coltrane's "Blue Train" 180g now in circulation from "Jazz on 33 &1/3".

 £9-99 in total. (I've got mine and it looks every bit as good as the Miles Davis)

Price comparison :-

SNVinyl = £49-99

Elusivedisc.com = $59-99

Amazon = £16-16 (free postage) marketplace £12 min (incl postage)

Grab them while they're hot in your local supermarket. ;^)