Page 2 of 3

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:48 am
by Swing Band Heaven
gregbogantz wrote:All record production was vinyl until around 1983 when we shifted the 7 inch 45rpm records to injection-molded styrene.
ummm, I bet that wasn't because the new material offered better chracteristics and great longevity on standing up to wear!

But seriously is there a significant downside to the use of styrene as opposed to "traditional" vinyl?

Very interesting video by the way. And Brad likewise the destruction of all those masters (if that is what happened) is criminal

S-B-H 8-)

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:44 pm
by gregbogantz
You are correct, Richard. Switching to styrene from vinyl for 7 inch production had NOTHING to do with quality improvement. It had EVERYTHING to do with cost. Styrene is actually a terrible material from which to make records. In its fairly pure form, styrene is very brittle which makes it easily broken as well as easily abraded. Try bending and marking the transparent lids of your CD jewel boxes to see how easily damaged styrene can be. There was only one supplier (Richardson) of the modified styrene material that US record makers used. They supplied the material in pelletized form, ready to be loaded into the extruders of the presses. Styrene flows like water when heated sufficiently, so it lends itself to injection molding. Vinyl never gets this liquid (without burning up) and it must be compression molded. The Richardson compound was highly modified to work (just barely) as a record material. Although improved somewhat, the innate problems of brittleness and easy abrasion remained. The compound was actually slightly more expensive than vinyl, but it could be used in completely automated injection presses which operated in a very much faster cycle than compression presses. Injection presses also don't need steam to operate, and they require only a small amount of cooling water. This netted out to a noticeable cost savings overall in the manufacturing process.

But styrene records NEVER molded quite correctly - every manufacturer was constantly fighting the problem of incomplete mold filling. Properly controlled, this wasn't usually an audible problem because the unmolded area was at the very top of the groove where the stylus didn't usually touch. But when the process got a little out of control, the unmolded area became larger than usual, the part of the groove touched by the stylus would be improperly formed, and this resulted in all kinds of distortion on playback.

Styrene is much smoother than vinyl in its surface microstructure, so a well-molded styrene record will sound absolutely silent on first play - NO surface noise. The problem is the abrasion of the stylus. Styrene has miserable wear properties compared with vinyl, and a SINGLE play with a 5-gram tracking force will cause visible abrasion and scoring of the groove walls. The only proper way to deal with a styrene record is record it to tape or digital storage the FIRST time you play it. Because it will get noisier with each successive playing.

Today, I try to shy away from buying 45s containing 1980s music because they are likely made of styrene. The wear problem was a HUGE bugaboo for jukebox operators and for radio station DJs (remember, there was no digital audio in the late 1970s - DJs actually played records). Record companies were getting inundated with field complaints about worn out 45s from these markets. The solution was to run parallel production of vinyl 45s for these markets only! How the hell this saved the record companies money, only a stupidly overpaid executive can figure out. Yes, for every new release of a single, TWO orders were put out - one for styrene commercial production and one for vinyl DJ and juke production. RCA no longer had any 7 inch vinyl production capacity, so we had to farm out those orders to small independent pressing plants.

So far as I know, only the USA manufacturers used styrene for 7 inch production. RCA Records was the last of the major US pressing plants to switch to styrene around 1983 (can't remember exactly). The other major factories had been using styrene for up to 5 years or so earlier. So many of the commercially sold 45s from the late 1970s on, and MOST of the 45s from 1983 onward in the USA were made of styrene. So if I want original pressings of circa 1980s music, I try to find either DJ copies or the 45s that were made in Canada - no styrene production up there, eh. Canadian eBay to the rescue.

You can easily tell a styrene 45 from a vinyl one. Styrene records have their outer edge molded rather than cut as with vinyl. Looking closely, you will see the mold parting line running just at the center of the molded edge of a styrene record. Vinyl was usually colored black with the inclusion of carbon black which makes the records opaque. There are some exceptions to this, especially in today's 45s which, interestingly, are ALL made of vinyl. Again. Styrene is always colored with a dye which makes the black records slightly translucent when you hold them up to bright light. Also, vinyl records have the paper label actually molded into the vinyl, just as is done with the LPs. Styrene records are molded without the label, then the label is either directly printed onto the record or a paper label is pasted on. You can feel the edge of a pasted-on label whereas a molded-in label has the edge buried down into the vinyl. A few euro pressing plants (notably Philips) experimented for a while with directly printed labels on vinyl, but these records also generally have the artwork also embossed in relief in the label area. Similar to the way the early Edison DDs were embossed - how's that for returning this topic to antique audio :D

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:12 pm
by srqwebguy
Swing Band Heaven wrote:
gregbogantz wrote:All record production was vinyl until around 1983 when we shifted the 7 inch 45rpm records to injection-molded styrene.
ummm, I bet that wasn't because the new material offered better chracteristics and great longevity on standing up to wear!

But seriously is there a significant downside to the use of styrene as opposed to "traditional" vinyl?

Very interesting video by the way. And Brad likewise the destruction of all those masters (if that is what happened) is criminal

S-B-H 8-)
I HOPE that he was talking about the stamping equipment, not the actual masters. While still a tremendous loss, the loss of the masters would be unthinkable. RCA still exists in some pitiful form. Surely they would protect that intellectual property!

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:40 pm
by gregbogantz
There seems to be some misinformation flying around the internet about how RCA "destroyed all" the metal matrix parts that were once at the Camden record plant. I presume that some of the metal was scrapped (probably stampers), but also some of it (masters and mothers) was transferred to the several "vault" locations maintained by RCA in subsequent years. During the 1980s, the largest repository vault was in Indianapolis. I know that we had a number of 78rpm metal parts there as well as in a vault in New York. Many of the reissues of acoustic and early electric recordings that were being done when CDs first made the scene were transcribed from vinyl pressings made from the stored metal matrices in the RCA vaults. So not "all" of it was destroyed as has been claimed. The Indy vault has since been relocated to an underground secure location in the Washington, DC area, so far as I can determine. The New York studios probably don't maintain their vault anymore since little or no mastering is done there anymore. So I suspect that whatever valuable metal parts that were there are now combined with the Indy material at the new location. Since Columbia and RCA are now merged under the Sony/BMG umbrella, I presume that the Columbia material is now also stored with the RCA masters.

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:15 pm
by transformingArt
[youtubehq]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTfNMgrcnZU[/youtubehq]

For comparison, this is a 1957 RCA Victor promotional film which shows vinyls being made.
It was only about 15 years, but surely, things were changed quite a bit during that time.

By the way, Do any of you know any information about 'Vinylite' pressings - that so-called "Non-Breakable" material? I have several records (mostly Popular songs from 40s and 50s, but some Historical Material as well) made of this material and always wondered what kind of stuffs they used for pressing these records. They are much harder compared with Modern day vinyls - I can play these records on Acoustic Phonographs - but it is definitely not shellac.

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2010 8:42 pm
by Brad
gregbogantz wrote:There seems to be some misinformation flying around the internet about how RCA "destroyed all" the metal matrix parts that were once at the Camden record plant. I presume that some of the metal was scrapped (probably stampers), but also some of it (masters and mothers) was transferred to the several "vault" locations maintained by RCA in subsequent years. During the 1980s, the largest repository vault was in Indianapolis. I know that we had a number of 78rpm metal parts there as well as in a vault in New York. Many of the reissues of acoustic and early electric recordings that were being done when CDs first made the scene were transcribed from vinyl pressings made from the stored metal matrices in the RCA vaults. So not "all" of it was destroyed as has been claimed. The Indy vault has since been relocated to an underground secure location in the Washington, DC area, so far as I can determine. The New York studios probably don't maintain their vault anymore since little or no mastering is done there anymore. So I suspect that whatever valuable metal parts that were there are now combined with the Indy material at the new location. Since Columbia and RCA are now merged under the Sony/BMG umbrella, I presume that the Columbia material is now also stored with the RCA masters.
Greg,

Thank you for the clarification. When I first heard it, I thought it couldn't be possible, but I work for Corporate America so I know all to well how stupid things are done on a daily basis :o

If the stamping masters still exist, I wonder if it would be possible to identify a rare or special recording (i.e. NOT Cal Stewart :lol: ) and have a limited edition pressed for the collector community. It might be a fun project.

Thanks again.

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2010 11:58 pm
by wjw
I have an LP jazz reissue somewhere with liner notes explaining that many of the Victor masters have been lost to corrosion as the result of poor storage conditions.

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:51 pm
by Lenoirstreetguy
The 1957 film is as interesting as the one from the forties. That's John Pfeiffer with the glasses directing the recording engineers, I believe. Charles Munch is one of my idols. I love his recordings with the Boston Symphony, and in terms of pleasing orchestral sound, the best of RCA Victor recordings from this era are still extraordinary. Some of the last mono sessions are remarkable, but the best of Living Stereo sides are wonderful. Too bad RCA kind of went off the rails when they introduced the Dynagroove process.
Greg will be able to tell more about that, but the glory that was Living Stereo didn't make the transition to Dynagroove if you ask me.
Jim

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:23 pm
by Swing Band Heaven
Living stereo and dynagroove....please explain in more detail. I've never heard of either of these terms or know why dynagroove is different / not as good. Can someone please eleborate?

S-B-H 8-)

Re: Command Performance - 1942 (shows 78s being made)

Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:44 pm
by Lenoirstreetguy
Living Stereo was the trade name for RCA Victor's stereophonic process. The sound was very fine and in the 90's RCA...or...BMI or whoever owned them then...did a series of CD reissues using the original tapes as source. They are good but I like the vinyl a lot. Dynagroove was the process that RCA introduced in 1963. The signal to the cutter was computer modified..( or distorted depending on your point of view)..so as to compensate for inner groove distortion. But the thing was, they were compensating for the distortion in playback which resulted from the use of a conical stylus in the pickup. Just about this time the cartridge manufacturers introduced the elliptical stylus which eliminated most of the raison d'etre for Dynagroove. RCA went on and on and ON in the ads at that time ( which I am old enough to remember ..ahem ) about how the records were brilliant with outstanding presence and low surface noise. The process was never well received by audiophiles, because the better your system the worse the records sounded..I always felt the earlier issues had way too much treble boost. I think they modified it greatly as time went on and then quietly dumped the whole process at some point in the 70's.

Jim