Moon- I buy mostly old copies, so whether to clean isn't a question for me. As to new records, and I buy some, my experience varies- some copies, often the ones that aren't from the fancy reissue houses, are pretty dirty right out of the sleeve. Visible sleeve lint, the occasional fingerprint or smear from handling, etc. The reason I clean new vinyl is that in playing for the first time, I don't want to grind that stuff into the grooves. Then there's the stuff you can't see.... Perhaps it is out of an excess of caution in those cases, but my cleaning processes aren't harming the record, and are adjusted to meet the apparent issues of a given record. I'm not dogmatic about any of this- do what you think is appropriate- i have records I cleaned and resleeved back in the '80s that I've pulled out and played for the first time in decades and they were fine.
As to mold release, I think the issue is overblown.
The first proper cleaning machine I saw was a Monks, at Opus One in Pittsburgh in the early '70s. RCMs really didn't become common until VPI and Nitty Gritty (at least in the States, dunno about elsewhere) started marketing machines that were more reasonably priced. And there was very little choice for fluids- that market seemed to really explode after the Death of Vinyl (tm), I got my first RCM (a VPI) in the early '80s. But my attention to methods and results really didn't snap into focus until far more recently, when I started to seriously collect good pressings (used for the most part) and cull through the thousands and thousands of records that I had accumulated with a vengeance starting in the mid-'80s. Once I started to explore this more seriously, I realized that a casual run through a machine did not necessarily = a clean record. This became more apparent with old records from the late '60s and early '70s that I bought in the last several years. Whether it was bad past cleaning (which left water, cleaning fluid or other contaminants bonded to the surface), cigarette smoke or cooking fumes, or just handling from 40 plus years, some of these records really needed more than a fast once over in an RCM. That's when I started to look at this more closely, to try and figure out what methods worked most effectively. Answer: it depends. :) |
Low- re your question about pinch warps, I think (and admit this is speculation on my part) it is the way the record has been stored over the years; i've read some anecdotal stuff suggesting that the record was pulled off the press too soon, but I question that for at least two reasons- I don't remember those kind of warp problems back in the late '60s and '70s when those records were new, and even if you are skeptical of record plant QC, I would hope not all of them made it out the door that way. I am very reluctant to buy a 'sealed' pressing of an old record for precisely the reason that you cannot get the seller to verify condition; one of the key questions I ask is whether the record is flat when spinning on a turntable. I am ready to buy a serious flattener at this point, the warps seem common, even on brand new stuff (not the MoFi or Chad stuff- I buy very little of that- more standard pressing current issue) that I suspect is warped due to storage in non-climates controlled warehouses. I think Amazon US has cleaned up its act, not so sure about Amazon from EU. |
|
BP- I can contribute a little. Someone above (apologies, I didn't go back to see who) mentioned a patent that described one such process. Here is a link: http://www.google.com/patents/US3960790 As you will see, this was at attempt to deal with the challenges of 4 channel audio on vinyl. My recollection is that the old Mo-Fi "Super Vinyl" was similarly developed for discrete 4 channel vinyl records. The patent suggests that an excess of the agent can leave a deposit on the surface of the record. Other, older papers I've read about vinyl compounds talk about lubricants- which presumably aid flow of the molten compound, but don't seem to address "mold release" as such. One of the difficulties in getting to the bottom of this seems to be that the exact composition of vinyl compounds currently being used is probably proprietary- in discussions I had with someone knowledgeable in that field, he claimed that the whole concept of mold release was foreign to him, but I cannot quote or provide any external reference. The other source of information is likely the pressing plants themselves; I doubt they add anything to the compound, but who knows? I've been trying to get to the bottom of this myself. The makers of commercial fluids- some of whom I respect, seem to believe that mold release agents are a problem. But, I have yet to be convinced that any compound being supplied to pressing plants causes some adverse effect in the pressing of a record that requires cleaning. Whether other variables, like the temperature/duration of heat, cooling, operation of the press, stampers, etc. contribute to the problem, beyond the compound itself, one can only guess. I've certainly had badly manufactured records that suffered from no-fill, stitching or the like (all symptoms of a failure to properly impress the information onto the plastic), but those defects cannot be remedied by cleaning. Hardly the last word, but at least gives a little more insight? |
I have a decent pile of old white papers that were published by the AES; you can access them cheapest by paying a one time fee for a year of access or pay a tariff per download. Among the things I found were various papers on the subject of wear, static and the like, along with various patents that are part of the public record (you need no AES access to obtain these) addressing surface noise, and again, static. I found very little to no discussion of "mold release" compound or agent as such. One paper, by S.K. Khanna, from RCA circa 1977 did address vinyl compounds in some depth, including the chemistry of PVC, polymerization processes, general characteristics of PVC resin as used for records, and then contained a discussion of various formulation variables, including the resins themselves, stabilizers (for heat and lubrication during compounding), colorant (which the author noted was used to "hide" plate out problems); fillers to change the visco-elastic properties of the compound and to reduce noise. Khanna also made note of certain "special additives" including lubricants, modifiers, plasticizers and anti-static agents, all of which have an impact on "flow". The author observed that the compounding process was complex, more "art than science' and at that time- during the height of vinyl as a medium, urged that basic research needed to be conducted into materials science to address the needs of "quality-conscious" persons. What this tells me is that even during the "golden age" the medium didn't follow one practice.
A couple other things to note: remember the oil crisis? It led to a lot of shoddy vinyl. I don't think that's when recycling started, but it probably become more widespread; Albert P noted in another thread that he has found debris embedded into vinyl; i have, as I'm sure others have too. One last thought- again speculation on my part. If the mix is made up of different (recycled) materials, each with their own chemical and heat/flow/etc characteristics, this could make manufacture far more problematic. I don't know, but I suspect one advantage of "virgin" vinyl, isn't that it is "pure" but it is probably more consistent. I offer this for what it is worth, not as an answer. As Miller said in Repo Man, I think about this stuff on the bus. |
Based on some of my reading, which is by no means definitive, we may be speaking at cross-purposes. From what I gather, various fatty acids are used in the PVC compound used to make vinyl records. These serve to help control the mixture and the point at which the ingredients melt, i.e. thermal stability. In this, they are sometimes referred to as "lubricants" but not in the sense that we might commonly think of a lubricant. At the same time, to add to the confusion, these materials can also be used as a 'release agent' in molding. Such materials, which include stearic acid, can apparently migrate to the surface- this is, I think, what people are referring to when they talk about the need to clean off "mold release agent." So, there may in fact be artifacts from manufacture that need to be cleaned off of the surface of a new record. And, if you read some of the messaging from the cleaning fluid folks, they talk about removing the bad stuff, but not doing damage to plastics or their properties; in this sense I think the term "lubricant" is used in a more common form. But, is that stuff really there to "lubricate" the surface or as part of the chemical composition of the compound to make manufacture more consistent? (And, to what degree is there any consideration given to the ease with which the just pressed record can be removed from the stampers?). Perhaps I'm just restating the question, but you see how these terms can be used, e.g. "lubricant" in different contexts.
I'm not sure if you asked a materials scientist if he or she is including a "mold release agent" in the vinyl compound, they would consider this the primary purpose of adding this material to the mix. So, the folks selling fluids may be correct, and the folks involved in making the vinyl compound and pressing the records may also be correct. I'm not a plastics scientist, I am just reading papers, patents and trying to work my way through a practical understanding of how all this adds up. That's my reading at this point in time, which could change, based on further information. But, it is consistent with everything I've learned, and somewhat conveniently, also reconciles the different views on the subject.
Glad to be corrected. |
Thanks, Moon. I think -- and base this only on rough knowledge, not my pseudo-scientific background-- that outgassing is more common when plasticizers are involved. I'm not sure there is much in a vinyl record, since it is meant to be stiff, not pliable. The problem encountered with those heavy PVC type outer jacket protectors reacting to vinyl records is due, I think, to the plasticizers in the record jacket protector (which is soft and pliable due to plasticizers), leaching or chemically interacting with the record (potentially, even through the cardboard jacket). I don't know that records themselves are really out-gassing, but I'll defer to somebody who has plastics/science background. In the meantime, maybe more questions than answers, but you (and others here) stimulated my thinking; this is one of several issues I've been casually looking into- trying to get answers is a whole other thing, so I'm open to other views. Glad to contribute where I can. Good holiday, if you celebrate. |
