Trying to understand the turntable/vinyl world...

[dlaloum]

Record cleaning - 2 things I would suggest ...

1) Treatment with armor-all ... (this cleans, lubricates, and contains a replasticiser... which is critical for longer life of vinyl records.... do NOT use on non-vinyl, older formats such as 78's, that are not made from Vinyl)
In addition to cleaning, and lubricating the surface, it will tend to loosen dirt from quite deep in the groove, as the lubricant migrates along the vinyl over a period of time...

2) Ultrasonic cleaning - this will get deeper into the groove than almost anything else... I have not determined whether treating with Armor-All is best before or after ultrasonic cleaning.... but best results are achieved by using both.

Note: Armor-All is very very similar to audiophile treatments such as "Last" - and like those treatments, a very small amount goes a long way (and it is a heck of a lot cheaper)

Once the above have been done a regular run over with an appropriate basic cleaning routine is fine - I have an old vacuum record cleaning machine.... and my now many decades old Discwasher brush

 

[Chrispy]

Some people have never seen a quality TT & have no idea of what it takes. (Or a quality CD player either, for that matter). A $39.95 CD player doesn't cut it either.

Some of us have had a quality tt for over 50 years and still don't get the fuss over it now.

 

[dlaloum]

For those who want to get into the why's and wherefore's of various cleaning/treatment fluids for records.... here is a vintage thread which still has substantial relevance:

https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=31958

 

[DSJR]

The deck currently in my avatar (Collaro Conquest from the late 50's) was the deck I grew up with (this one having the later over-arm style which didn't fit over the main spindle). Fascinating way of 'measuring' the size of the records stacked on it pyramid style (vids on Youtube). Descendants of this model became Magnaxox models in the US.

That cheap generic deck from Crosley style portable players could be so much better. The platter main bearing is a steel spindle, a washer at the bottom and some grease, that's all. A moulded record spindle at the top and captive ball inside and acting on the top of a shortened steel spindle would last longer and have less drag with modern lubricants. The ceramic pickup's smooth toned enough and a version of this with half inch fixings used to be recommended for restoring old 60's record players where the crystal original has decayed away.

A friend of mine has dabbled back into a cheap used not old player, a ProJect Elemental for around a hundred quid. Slim slab of a plinth, mdf? player, cork mat on his and as the Ortofon stylus was a bad third party copy, it was replaced by a VM95C. he's delighted with it but it's an odd looking thing.

 

[EJ3]

Never seen that. But may explain why I heard the term "Maggot Box" used when referring to Magnavox. My first CD player was a Magnavox/Phillips. It was much better than the later Sony that I got. I am still very sorry that I had given away the Magnavox to a friend that was going through a hard time. I think that I played 5 discs through the Sony unit & after some years of not using it threw it away so as not to inflict it on others. The only thing I ever had Sony after that was a 32 inch 1080 TV/Monitor that I had on a ship.

 

[dlaloum]

Never seen that. But may explain why I heard the term "Maggot Box" used when referring to Magnavox. My first CD player was a Magnavox/Phillips. It was much better than the later Sony that I got. I am still very sorry that I had given away the Magnavox to a friend that was going through a hard time. I think that I played 5 discs through the Sony unit & after some years of not using it threw it away so as not to inflict it on others. The only thing I ever had Sony after that was a 32 inch 1080 TV/Monitor that I had on a ship.

The early Philips were absolutely a bargain - and great sounding units... (we never had Magnavox in Australia, but chances are it was the same Philips rebadged for the USA) - I used to sell the Philips CD104 at the dawn of the digital age....(and it's Marantz clone CD44... at the time Marantz was owned by philips... the only difference was the colour - Marantz was Gold)

 

[sq225917]

I have records that are 65 years old, never needed any armourall or anything else on them.

 

[sergeauckland]

I have records that are 65 years old, never needed any armourall or anything else on them.

Indeed. Just a good clean with a vacuum RCM, and a new inner liner. As long as the records weren't played on an old blunderbuss, they are perfectly OK, at least, as far as vinyl is ever OK.

Even 78s from 100 years ago are playable, the main problem is finding any that haven't been badly worn. 8oz tracking weights and a worn stylus don't make for longevity.

S

 

[Leiker535]

Wait a minute, you mean that younger people are actually playing their records?
https://www.whathifi.com/news/48-people-who-buy-vinyl-dont-listen-to-records
I figure that Crosley-type portables are probably fine if you fit them with a proper diamond stylus, and perfectly OK for people who don't want a full-blown hifi system. Hifi turntables are kind of a pain in the butt: Ever tried to store a Linn Sondek sideways when you weren't using it?

I have a couple of friends that actually buy records without having a TT, so yeah...

About the crosleys, it depends if they support say a VM95e or not. The red chinese cartridge that comes with them is definitely a record torture test. What bugs me though is that for that use-case Spotify and Apple music will sound a lot better (hell, they sound better than my sl1200 on a lot of records). I know people are trend minded rather than hi-fi minded, liking that old vinyl "charm" of lots of static and clicks, but still...

 

[egellings]

With line contact styli, vertical tracing angle becomes an important thing to get right.

 

[JeffS7444]

About the crosleys, it depends if they support say a VM95e or not. The red chinese cartridge that comes with them is definitely a record torture test. What bugs me though is that for that use-case Spotify and Apple music will sound a lot better (hell, they sound better than my sl1200 on a lot of records). I know people are trend minded rather than hi-fi minded, liking that old vinyl "charm" of lots of static and clicks, but still...

Jesse Dean and others offer some good bolt-in modification kits for Numark and other portable turntables, but all told you could easily wind up sinking $300 into the endeavor, while OTOH I get the sense that today's young people got $500 ambitions and maybe $50 to make them happen!

"VWestlife" and others suggest merely upgrading the stylus, or switching to another inexpensive piezo cartridge as a way to get much better stylus life and an audible sonic improvement. And I could see myself wanting to have the old-fashioned option of a double LP/78 flippable stylus in order to listen to old shellac disks which may have already been subjected to much heavier wear (steel needles, tracking forces measured in ounces, etc)

 

[dlaloum]

Indeed. Just a good clean with a vacuum RCM, and a new inner liner. As long as the records weren't played on an old blunderbuss, they are perfectly OK, at least, as far as vinyl is ever OK.

Even 78s from 100 years ago are playable, the main problem is finding any that haven't been badly worn. 8oz tracking weights and a worn stylus don't make for longevity.

S

It's the search for Vinyl perfection....

I have a vacuum RCM (Sota), a home made ultrasonic cleaner, a hand crank bath cleaner, and I have experimented with various cleaners and record treatments (Last, Groovglide, enzymatic cleaner, etc...).

The pops/clicks are not inherent unless the vinyl has been damaged - you absolutely can lower the base noise floor, and remove all (or almost all) the pops/clicks from many records. - That also means that you can increase your dynamic range on vinyl by at least 6 to 10 db.

Or you can live with it, as most of us have for decades, and accept it as an inherent part of the vinyl experience.

If the vinyl is perfectly clean and pristine (yeah doesn't happen, even fresh from the pressing factory!) - cleaning will remove some additional gunk, and lubricating treatments will lower the noise floor. Lubricating treatments will also reduce wear on both needle and record, increasing their lifetime substantially. (yes drag/friction have been measured by nerdy OCD types like myself, along with testing various treatments etc...)

For those used to the "perfection" of digital, achieving a similar outcome from vinyl becomes a holy grail.

Like everything vinyl, many things can be achieved, it just requires several orders of magnitude more effort than achieving the same results with digital.... in many ways it is part of vinyl's charm... finding the ways of overcoming its limitations.

 

[levimax]

It's the search for Vinyl perfection....

I have a vacuum RCM (Sota), a home made ultrasonic cleaner, a hand crank bath cleaner, and I have experimented with various cleaners and record treatments (Last, Groovglide, enzymatic cleaner, etc...).

The pops/clicks are not inherent unless the vinyl has been damaged - you absolutely can lower the base noise floor, and remove all (or almost all) the pops/clicks from many records. - That also means that you can increase your dynamic range on vinyl by at least 6 to 10 db.

Or you can live with it, as most of us have for decades, and accept it as an inherent part of the vinyl experience.

If the vinyl is perfectly clean and pristine (yeah doesn't happen, even fresh from the pressing factory!) - cleaning will remove some additional gunk, and lubricating treatments will lower the noise floor. Lubricating treatments will also reduce wear on both needle and record, increasing their lifetime substantially. (yes drag/friction have been measured by nerdy OCD types like myself, along with testing various treatments etc...)

For those used to the "perfection" of digital, achieving a similar outcome from vinyl becomes a holy grail.

Like everything vinyl, many things can be achieved, it just requires several orders of magnitude more effort than achieving the same results with digital.... in many ways it is part of vinyl's charm... finding the ways of overcoming its limitations.

One of the things I like about Vinyl is that it is not perfect so I don't worry too much about a little noise or other imperfections and just enjoy the music. Digital on the other hand, because it has the potential to be "perfect" (or at least very close), can be frustrating when I listen to a poorly recorded or poorly remastered recording. Digital recording has so much potential but it seldom lives up to it. Often times it is not even of equal quality to carefully made analog recordings from the late 1950's and early 1960's which is mind boggling actually.

 

[dennis h]

It's the search for Vinyl perfection....

I have a vacuum RCM (Sota), a home made ultrasonic cleaner, a hand crank bath cleaner, and I have experimented with various cleaners and record treatments (Last, Groovglide, enzymatic cleaner, etc...).

The pops/clicks are not inherent unless the vinyl has been damaged - you absolutely can lower the base noise floor, and remove all (or almost all) the pops/clicks from many records. - That also means that you can increase your dynamic range on vinyl by at least 6 to 10 db.

Or you can live with it, as most of us have for decades, and accept it as an inherent part of the vinyl experience.

If the vinyl is perfectly clean and pristine (yeah doesn't happen, even fresh from the pressing factory!) - cleaning will remove some additional gunk, and lubricating treatments will lower the noise floor. Lubricating treatments will also reduce wear on both needle and record, increasing their lifetime substantially. (yes drag/friction have been measured by nerdy OCD types like myself, along with testing various treatments etc...)

For those used to the "perfection" of digital, achieving a similar outcome from vinyl becomes a holy grail.

Like everything vinyl, many things can be achieved, it just requires several orders of magnitude more effort than achieving the same results with digital.... in many ways it is part of vinyl's charm... finding the ways of overcoming its limitations.

The OCD types that are "into vinyl" have probably read this, but just in case some of you have missed it:

https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2021/03/PAC-Vinyl-Records_2021-03-01_pdf.pdf

that and @dlaloum's posts above should be helpful

and yes it is a LOT of work

 

[dlaloum]

The OCD types that are "into vinyl" have probably read this, but just in case some of you have missed it:

https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2021/03/PAC-Vinyl-Records_2021-03-01_pdf.pdf

that and @dlaloum's posts above should be helpful

and yes it is a LOT of work

Great reference document!! - saves a lot of trawling through the various forums where this was worked through years ago!

Thank you!

 

[skymusic20]

The OCD types that are "into vinyl" have probably read this, but just in case some of you have missed it:

https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2021/03/PAC-Vinyl-Records_2021-03-01_pdf.pdf

that and @dlaloum's posts above should be helpful

and yes it is a LOT of work

Thanks!!! I had no clue about such a document!!

 

[Bob from Florida]

The OCD types that are "into vinyl" have probably read this, but just in case some of you have missed it:

https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2021/03/PAC-Vinyl-Records_2021-03-01_pdf.pdf

that and @dlaloum's posts above should be helpful

and yes it is a LOT of work

I simply use the London Jazz formula in my vacuum based record cleaning machine. Works great with no obsessing behavior.....

 

[dlaloum]

I simply use the London Jazz formula in my vacuum based record cleaning machine. Works great with no obsessing behavior.....

Usually - when "just playing" a record... I do the same....

But I have an in depth cleaning routine that I try to do for all newcomers to the collection... and for those I do a "deep clean" (ultrasonic bath, etc...) , along with a treatment (Last if they are new / pristine, or my own concoctions if they are not...)

 

[Rubbersoul2]

What in the world is your point?

Be not of this world but in this world .now it could be the other way around ? im neither .ive collected n trade records as part of lifes necesesity s like air ,and consume all formats like a machine .
as long as your enjoying your musical jorney

Thanks for the advice...

Actually, my TT lacks VTA... So I guess Im very limited as to which carts I can try... (Probably will need to play with mats...)

dont be silly

 

[Rubbersoul2]

For you, turntable may simply be a means of enjoying your legacy music collection. But others are seeking a certain emotional "something" in the things surround themselves with, which may have little to do with how well they actually perform. As I recall, once upon a time both Naim Audio and Rolls Royce were deliberately vague about the performance specification of their products, simply referring to them in terms like "Sufficient". And people loved it! because when a product's qualities can be quantified, there's the risk of it being treated as a commodity.

thats hillariouse , kinda how i behave .