pmsummer
simul justus et peccator
I believe LAST has made it clear they do not use PTFE, but GrooveGuard (sp?) might have.
LAST is Amazing, Wonderful, A Miracle!!
- Thread starter Karma16
- Start date
I believe LAST has made it clear they do not use PTFE, but GrooveGuard (sp?) might have.
twitch54
Super Member
Hi Sparky,
Sorry for the confusion, I thought you were refering to the 'preservitive' application as to the stylus not the record surface, that's where your post above had me confused.
As far it's virtues, yes, I've been reading the thread as I stated in post #9 of this thread....a long time user as well !
BTW, you're right about the CLS's I think they are even more of a Cult speaker now that the CLX's are out !
Doug G.
Lunatic Member
Wait a minute Sparky. Mark wasn't saying that LAST claims record repair in any way. He was responding to d to the g who seemed to think that it was meant for that. Reread the posts.
Doug
HI Doug,
Yes, you are right. I'm going to make it right.
Mark, I first want to apologize. You may not know what this about if you have not seen my post. I was confused and in a hurry. Don't worry. What I said was not terrible, only confusing and wrong. I want to go on record that I'm going to edit my above post (#41 above) to remove all references to you. If I leave it as is, it is guaranteed to confuse. This is the official record of the edit. I hate doing it this way but it's a matter of choosing the least confusing fix.
Sparky
Last edited:
nailer
audionerd
Stylast used on an untreated record has the same effect as on a Last treated record. Used Last when it first came out, then got lazy and stopped. Have been contemplating using it again.
HI Nailer,
You are not helping much. That's because I hear nothing from the use of Stylast. But then, I don't play any record that is not treated with the Preservative and a stylus brushed with Stylast. So, comparisons are difficult. I use Stylast strictly for the system effects with the Preservative for increasing stylus life. Stylast certainly works for that end.
Thus, I don't know what you are talking about. Could you be more explicit?
Sparky
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
Thanks Doug for helping with the clarification.
Yes, that was my intention with my last post, making a clarification to poster "D to the G", that LAST was intended as its name implies, a preservative, not a fix-all product, that will somehow "magically" transform unplayable vinyl, perhaps cleaned with sandpaper, into rare, killer "Blue Note" Treasures! lol
No prob Sparky, apology accepted, and I'm sorry as well, perhaps for creating any confusion, or not personally addressing "mr D of the G" about what LAST Record Preservative was intended for.
I'd like further saying that many of my (pristine till this day) Mo-Fi Vinyl was cleaned-treated before Stylus ever touched down on it. I liked-trusted this product enough in the past to use it on these expensive, and pretty much now irreplaceable records.
But what I didn't do, was try a before, and after test with my own system, and this is something I'd like trying soon, with some minty thrift shop finds, and see if I hear any sonic improvements?
I think the test is worth the time to try, and if I trusted this product on LPs that cost $30-$35 10-12 years ago, then why shouldn't I trust this "test" to a few very nice $1-$2-$3 thrift finds?
I hope to try this soon, and for what it's worth,I will try to report here in the future soon, perhaps with another little LAST thread on my own findings.
Mark
Yes, that was my intention with my last post, making a clarification to poster "D to the G", that LAST was intended as its name implies, a preservative, not a fix-all product, that will somehow "magically" transform unplayable vinyl, perhaps cleaned with sandpaper, into rare, killer "Blue Note" Treasures! lol
No prob Sparky, apology accepted, and I'm sorry as well, perhaps for creating any confusion, or not personally addressing "mr D of the G" about what LAST Record Preservative was intended for.
I'd like further saying that many of my (pristine till this day) Mo-Fi Vinyl was cleaned-treated before Stylus ever touched down on it. I liked-trusted this product enough in the past to use it on these expensive, and pretty much now irreplaceable records.
But what I didn't do, was try a before, and after test with my own system, and this is something I'd like trying soon, with some minty thrift shop finds, and see if I hear any sonic improvements?
I think the test is worth the time to try, and if I trusted this product on LPs that cost $30-$35 10-12 years ago, then why shouldn't I trust this "test" to a few very nice $1-$2-$3 thrift finds?
I hope to try this soon, and for what it's worth,I will try to report here in the future soon, perhaps with another little LAST thread on my own findings.
Mark
Scuzzer
Fixed Bias
I think you guys have misinterpreted the "unplayable" part of D of the G's comment. I think he said that because he was going to be doing destructive testing of the vinyl surface and didn't want to use a record that someone might want to use again, not because he thought it restored the groove.
If LAST does increase the surface hardness and reduce friction why doesn't the manufacturer publish the data? Also, do I want my vinyl surface harder?
melofelo
Addicted Member
i thought the whole point of pressing records into vinyl was the fact it flexes slightly then attempts to regain its shape ?
doesn't adding any layer or film between the profile of the groove and the diamond itself result in a change in the surface character of that groove and hence is a form of distortion anyway ?
or does this stuff work at an audibly insignificant molecular level ?
i always thought the best way to preserve a record was to keep all particles, contaminants, lubricants and chemicals away from the surface ?
what effect does the temperature of the diamond have on this lubricant...and how exactly do you 'reinforce' a vinyl groove without changing its shape ?
would love to know more...
Last edited:
ejman
Super Member
I've trying to follow the thread as to whether it makes sense or not to use the record preservative on "highly loved LP's" i.e. my usual garage sale and Goodwill 50 cent - dollar finds and am still highly confused - not unusual for me. I always use stylast on my stylus and can vouch with certaintity that it does extend stylus life substantially (2000+ hours on my AT440mla and still sounds great). But the preservative on used records? does anybody actually do that?
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
Yes, you might be possibly right Scuzzer.
People, including myself at times, evidently leave themselves open for "suggestion", or mis-interpretation, as I have in this thread.
LAST has done this. they are basically the ones, who brought much initial,important info to us end users with thier reseach (at least as far as I know), about the intense pressures involved, with a 2g Stylus riding over the grooves, which equates to about 11 tons, or so, of weight per square inch.
I only quit using such a product over the last few years over perhaps hyperbole, over becoming anal about additives, clean records, treatments, record cleaning machines, and on, and on.
Have you tried this product? I welcome you to try it, then come back, and tell us what you think of it?
Mark
melofelo
Addicted Member
a diamond can travel as much as a mile on one side of an lp....diamond itself is relatively inert and formed by strong bonds between carbon atoms under intense heat and pressure..(covalent bonding if my memory serves correctly)
..i'd like to know what chemical can adhere to a diamond's surface that makes contact the groove walls travelling at 33 1/3 rpm for a distance of approximately one mile in the harsh abrasive waveform of a vinyl groove...and still serve any lubricating purpose..beyond the first few seconds of play..:scratch2:
..i'd like to know what chemical can adhere to a diamond's surface that makes contact the groove walls travelling at 33 1/3 rpm for a distance of approximately one mile in the harsh abrasive waveform of a vinyl groove...and still serve any lubricating purpose..beyond the first few seconds of play..:scratch2:
Last edited:
markd51
Nyuk Nyuk
I'd bet my Benz Gilder had way more than 2000 hours on it after 10-11 years of use, and maybe only 1/3 of its life, was it treated with Stylast. I of course paid good attention to VTF, tracking at 1.9g, and antiskate, for many years, with fantasic trackability, and sound. Mark
Scuzzer
Fixed Bias
No, I haven't tried this product and please don't take my comments as saying that no one should. There are many things I know will improve my record playback (better RCM, turntable isolation, upgraded plinth, better cartridge) that I need to do first.
This product makes specific claims that should be fairly easy to test but provides no backing data. I've never heard of "shock wave" damage to vinyl before I looked at their site after reading this thread. I'm just curious if that damage is real and if making the vinyl surface harder is the appropriate solution.
I'm glad you guys like this product and I would be happy to purchase records that have been treated with LAST because it's quite likely that the previous owner has taken the time to properly care for them.
HI,
Probably half of my 4000+ record collection was bought used. I use Last on the used records without thinking twice. Why Not? If the record is worth having, it is worth preserving. If the record is in such bad shape (or I don't like it) then I give it to a local thrift store.
It goes without saying that all my records have been washed on my VPI 17 RCM. That is essential.
Sparky
HI,
You folks who are claiming huge number of hours on your styli are making claims that not even the cartridge manufacturers would support. Either your styli are worn beyond belief or your esitmate of the number of hours is extremely incorrect.
To learn something about this subject, check out the thread called Stylus Microscopes in this forum. You should do this because you may be (almost certainly are) damaging your records.
Look, this is not magic. A diamond only has so much life in it. 1000 hours hours is normal for any cartridge, any stylus shape, before the stylus is worn to a chisel shape that starts cutting the vinyl and damaging the record.
The only exception to this wear schedule is obtained by using Last and Stylast. These products can definitely extend stylus life.
Sparky
You folks who are claiming huge number of hours on your styli are making claims that not even the cartridge manufacturers would support. Either your styli are worn beyond belief or your esitmate of the number of hours is extremely incorrect.
To learn something about this subject, check out the thread called Stylus Microscopes in this forum. You should do this because you may be (almost certainly are) damaging your records.
Look, this is not magic. A diamond only has so much life in it. 1000 hours hours is normal for any cartridge, any stylus shape, before the stylus is worn to a chisel shape that starts cutting the vinyl and damaging the record.
The only exception to this wear schedule is obtained by using Last and Stylast. These products can definitely extend stylus life.
Sparky
One of the reasons why I use these products. Damn carts are expensive if you ask me. Although I don't use the preservative on every single LP, I do use stylast as directed.
If life is extended, I wonder by how much (> 1000 hours), or more importantly, how to tell? I also wonder if the suspension will be close to worn out by 1000 hours anyhow?
nailer
audionerd
That would be due to my beginning use 25+ years ago, having slept many times since and not fully trusting my memory. In addition, back then had golden ears and now just have regular old ones. Have kept using for benefits to stylus and suspension life.
IIRC the sonic benefits of Stylast were extremely subtle - lower noise floor and smoother sound. An easy way to determine it's actual effect would be to play a few records untreated with Stylast and/or Last. YMMV of course.