Dynaflex Records

Bodyblue

Bodyblue

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
I was in Goodwill today and they actually had a bunch of interesting records. I am not usually a big Neil Diamond fan but the record jacket with a tie down flap caught my interest. When I opened it the inner sleeve it proudly proclaimed "The record you are holdin is a DYNAFLEX, it is thinner than any record you have ever owned."

And boy, they were right! This record is the floppiest thing! It sounds fine but it sure feels funny.

Did these ever really catch on?

24837619_1734576196562320_4152003685950433345_o.jpg


24796515_1734576189895654_8603875340198627681_n.jpg


24955652_1734576193228987_235762513447167208_o.jpg
 
Register to hide this ad
"The record of tomorrow, yours today" Wow, you found a record from the future!! Cool find. Hopefully someone chimes in with the history. So, being thin and floppy, the sleeve states less susceptible to warpage. True?
 
Lavane said:
"The record of tomorrow, yours today" Wow, you found a record from the future!! Cool find. Hopefully someone chimes in with the history. So, being thin and floppy, the sleeve states less susceptible to warpage. True?
Click to expand...


I guess so, if you hold it by the edges it dips about 3/4 of an inch! If you shake it it sounds like a wood saw rippling back and forth.....crazy. It has a few scratches but it sounds fine, with just a few pops and snaps after I cleaned it. The jacket is the coolest thing actually.
 
Dynaflex (RCA) Wikipedia link.

I own many ranging from outstanding to total bust. Even bought some of those ... back in the day.
Many collectors avoid Dnynaflex but I've had some outstanding Dny pressings.

The Neal Diamond records to buy are the ones on the Bang label. These were not Dynaflex .. at least not any that I ever found. They sound better than any remastered CD from that point in Neil Diamonds early career IMHO & experience.
bangny2.jpg
 
Condorsat said:
Dynaflex (RCA) Wikipedia link.

I own many ranging from outstanding to total bust. Even bought some of those ... back in the day.
Many collectors avoid Dnynaflex but I've had some outstanding Dny pressings.

The Neal Diamond records to buy are the ones on the Bang label. These were not Dynaflex .. at least not any that I ever found. They sound better than any remastered CD from that point in Neil Diamonds early career IMHO & experience.
bangny2.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks, this one sounds fine. I am not a big vinyl fan but I liked the jacket and it was $3.
 
My recollection is that Dynaflex appeared as a direct result of the oil crisis in '73-'74. This was one attempt to reduce the cost of the vinyl because the cost had increased significantly. It was marketed as an improvement but was simply an attempt to hold the line on material cost.
 
mrbruce said:
My recollection is that Dynaflex appeared as a direct result of the oil crisis in '73-'74. This was one attempt to reduce the cost of the vinyl because the cost had increased significantly. It was marketed as an improvement but was simply an attempt to hold the line on material cost.
Click to expand...
That sounds about right.
 
I've got a few of those - one or two Bowie titles and Lou Reed's Transformer. Yeah, they don't sound bad. I mean, they don't sound great, either, definitely nothing that I'd go out of my way to collect. Just...not bad.
 
bjlefebvre said:
I've got a few of those - one or two Bowie titles and Lou Reed's Transformer. Yeah, they don't sound bad. I mean, they don't sound great, either, definitely nothing that I'd go out of my way to collect. Just...not bad.
Click to expand...

Kind of they way I feel about vinyl now. I liked finding it and seeing something I have never seen before but after I played it I shrugged my shoulders and put it in the record rack. I love antiques and vintage audio and I get irritated at myself for not liking vinyl more. But I find vinyl and now even CDs a pain because Spotify has totally spoiled me.
 
Dnynaflex was a way for the record companies to start skimping and making records paper thin. Oil was starting to get very expensive and they wanted you to believe this was new technology and not them pinching pennies.
 
Last edited:
mrbruce said:
My recollection is that Dynaflex appeared as a direct result of the oil crisis in '73-'74. This was one attempt to reduce the cost of the vinyl because the cost had increased significantly. It was marketed as an improvement but was simply an attempt to hold the line on material cost.
Click to expand...

Dynaflex was indeed a response to the first Arab oil crisis. Most of the record companies addressed the material cost challenge by increasing the amount of regrind vinyl in their pressings and accepting the higher surface noise that it delivered vs. virgin vinyl. RCA stayed with 100% virgin vinyl and reduced the weight of each record from 120 g to 80 g. I have a number of Dynaflex pressings from that era and have found that they can sound great if you use a record clamp, grip, or weight to hold them securely to the platter. This reduces their tendency to act like microphone diaphragms, picking up vibrations from the speakers and feeding them back to the stylus.
 
I have a bunch of them, and while they may appear disconcertingly flimsy when you first encounter one, they sound fine. I was very familiar with them, especially since all the 70s Kinks records were on RCA Dynaflex, and I played those records to death back then.
 
The Jefferson Airplane were the first Dynaflex record I purchased. Never liked them,they had warpage issues. We used to call them Dynawarp because vendors complained that the records warped from the plastic outer sleeve shrinking and bending the record inside while sitting on storage shelves.
It's interesting that they touted them as an improvement but today they tout thicker vinyl as better. It's about the bottom line.
 
Last edited:
qdrone said:
The Jefferson Airplane were the first Dynaflex record I purchased. Never liked them,they had warpage issues. We used to call them Dynawarp because vendors complained that the records warped from the plastic outer sleeve shrinking and bending the record inside while sitting on storage shelves.
It's interesting that they touted them as an improvement but today they tout thicker vinyl as better. It's about the bottom line.
Click to expand...

Funny that is almost word for word out of the Wiki article.

"While RCA claimed that Dynaflex records would not warp as much as conventional vinyl records because of their flexibility, some record fans (particularly classical listeners) derided the new technique, calling it 'Dynawarp' because of evidence that Dynaflex records were prone to warp on dealers' shelves, just from the pressure of the shrinkwrap on the album jacket."
 
I have plenty of Dynaflex records and don't give them a second thought. They sound fine. Add to that, I do not expect superior sound quality from heavy vinyl with the exception of direct to disc recordings. Boutique remastere may also be excepted and be heavyweight vinyl but I can't afford them so therefore , they don't exist.

I also think the "180 gram craze" for newly minted records is just marketing hype.

But the worst sounding pressing I own is the 1975 Rod Stewart release - Atlantic Crossing. It's not on RCA but if I remember right, the record os thin.and flexible It has no dynamics and you have to increase amplifier volume about 30% to equal the volume of the LP preceding it.

Good thing it's a crummy album.
 
I have some RCA Dynaflex albums and they sound great. Don't know much about the technology but they are very quiet. Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars sounds fantastic!
 
Bodyblue said:
Funny that is almost word for word out of the Wiki article.

"While RCA claimed that Dynaflex records would not warp as much as conventional vinyl records because of their flexibility, some record fans (particularly classical listeners) derided the new technique, calling it 'Dynawarp' because of evidence that Dynaflex records were prone to warp on dealers' shelves, just from the pressure of the shrinkwrap on the album jacket."
Click to expand...
I was just trying to explain my experience with them since I lived through it. Another thing was I always felt I was getting ripped off because of the the paying the same but getting less consumer belly ache.
 
62vauxhall said:
I have plenty of Dynaflex records and don't give them a second thought. They sound fine. Add to that, I do not expect superior sound quality from heavy vinyl with the exception of direct to disc recordings. Boutique remastere may also be excepted and be heavyweight vinyl but I can't afford them so therefore , they don't exist.

I also think the "180 gram craze" for newly minted records is just marketing hype.

But the worst sounding pressing I own is the 1975 Rod Stewart release - Atlantic Crossing. It's not on RCA but if I remember right, the record os thin.and flexible It has no dynamics and you have to increase amplifier volume about 30% to equal the volume of the LP preceding it.

Good thing it's a crummy album.
Click to expand...

I bought a new 180G record a few months ago; Sintra/Basie and it absolutely sounds like crap. The recording level is extremely low compared to other records I have. When you have to turn up the volume there is more chance to hear surface noise. It sounds about 1000% better on Spotify. I was very disappointed by it. I also bought Miles Davis "Kind Of blue" on 180g and it sounds pretty good, until of course a piece of dust falls on it and it pops, which ruins the experience for me.

I played the Neal Diamond Dynaflex again since I made the OP and it sounds fine. It certainly is not warped and sounds as good as any other records of the same age I have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom