• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

RCA dynaflex vinyl

I recall at the time RCA touting Dynaflex a way to continue using the same quality vinyl while other manufactures used more and more fillers.

Although I don't particularly care for thin LPs, I don't recall ever having problems with one warping and none stand out as bad sounding.
 
As an example of RCA's wonkiness, I have two different Dynaflex titles, both with 1S stampers.

One is Nilsson's "Pussy Cats". It sounds phenomenal.

The other is Cass Elliot's "The Road Is No Place For A Lady" (with the 'two years before disco' disco-sounding AC hit "(If You're Gonna) Break Another Heart"- sorry, had to plug it). It sounds ficking horrid. Way way overbright, harsh highs, treble distortion like no other. And this is the same on three 1S pressings. Maybe it's the way it was engineered? And this is one of her best albums- great material, great voice (when it's not lost in ssssibilacccesssss.)

I also found an Elvis LP with a Dynaflex label... but the disc is a standard pre-Dynaflex weight. Odd. I also love how quite a few of his CD4 "Aloha From Hawaii" LP were pressed on Dynaflex vinyl with no mention of it on the label! :thumbsdn:

Here's the funny thing- RCA's 8 tracks from the same era sounded great (or great by comparison of other labels).
 
I always thought they were more susceptible to scratching (like most thin records) and that added poor sound quality, thus making a lot of people not like them.
 
I was wanting to get the Muswell Hillbillies by the Kinks for a long time and it seemed that it was only on the dynaflex discs. That always kept me from buying it. Now its been rereleased on 180 gram. I had to buy it.:music:
 
op135 said:
I always thought they were more susceptible to scratching (like most thin records) and that added poor sound quality, thus making a lot of people not like them.
Click to expand...

Why would a thin record be more susceptible to scratching? It's still vinyl.

There is really nothing better or worse with Dynaflex.

Doug
 
Celt said:
Dynaflex came out in the early 70's. RCA tried to market it as an improvement, but it was nothing more than a way to skimp. I used to refer to them as "Evatone Soundsheets". (The old timers will know to what I'm refering to.) ;)
Click to expand...

pmsummer.jpg
 
ha1156w said:
I've heard Dynaflex referred to as "Dynawarp" because of the tendancy to warp in a warm room. Those outside of the southern edge of the US may not quite understand what a 105 degree day will do to things during summer. Even then, the practice was to close off parts of the house so the AC could keep up with the excessive heat. If your collection happened to be in one of those parts......
Click to expand...

I seem to recall listening to music through headphones in the summer of '69, sitting in front of the window AC, with a blanket draped over the vents and me. Personal air conditioning. :yes:
 
wianieq said:
I was wanting to get the Muswell Hillbillies by the Kinks for a long time and it seemed that it was only on the dynaflex discs. That always kept me from buying it. Now its been rereleased on 180 gram. I had to buy it.:music:
Click to expand...

I've got that Dynaflex MH record, it's not bad at all. I also have the originals of all the new Kinks reissues (MH, Soap Opera, Misfits, etc.) Considering I bought them in Junior High, and used at that, I doubt I paid more than $5 apiece. Much better value than the new reissues in my book.

TB
 
Doug G. said:
Why would a thin record be more susceptible to scratching? It's still vinyl.

There is really nothing better or worse with Dynaflex.

Doug
Click to expand...


I used a poor choice in words, my mistake. I didn't mean they were "more susceptible to scratching," I meant a stylus would detect scratches on Dynaflex more than a normal record. I always thought the grooves were not as deep as a normal record, and that would increase the chances of a stylus producing noise from a scratch. I say that because a deep-grooved LP is obvious to my eye, and those records, in my experience, have a greater chance of not producing an audible noise from a scratch than Dynaflex, which I have noticed to have "shallow grooves."
 
op135 said:
I used a poor choice in words, my mistake. I didn't mean they were "more susceptible to scratching," I meant a stylus would detect scratches on Dynaflex more than a normal record. I always thought the grooves were not as deep as a normal record, and that would increase the chances of a stylus producing noise from a scratch. I say that because a deep-grooved LP is obvious to my eye, and those records, in my experience, have a greater chance of not producing an audible noise from a scratch than Dynaflex, which I have noticed to have "shallow grooves."
Click to expand...

That's been my experience as well.

If they're not scratched, Dynaflex discs can sound quite good.
 
I seriously doubt that Dynaflex records have any shallower grooves than any other typical record.

After all, they would have been made to standards meant to assure satisfactory tracking just the same as ordinary discs.

Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom