[78-L] Wax!

[Robert M. Bratcher Jr.]

At 01:00 AM 12/4/2009, you wrote:
>Robert M. Bratcher Jr. wrote:
> > Why was the wax blank so thick? Stability with an inch thickness
> > maybe? Did a thinner wax blank not hold up well or something?
> >
>
>They shaved and reused them many, many times.  And yes, a thin wax disc
>is quite liable to crack.

I thought it would be.


>But there was a thin type of wax disc that was developed by Western
>Electric first for their Wide Range Vertical Recording because a wax for
>a 16-inch disc was very, very heavy, but also because shaving brought
>out internal stresses which might cause lateral movement in the groove
>when processed.  Victor also started using it, and others might have
>also.  It is called the "flow coat" and is shown in the video about how
>World ETs are made with Rubinoff.  A metal disc was put on a hot plate
>and a wedge of wax is melted on it.  They were made about a half hour
>before recording, giving it time to cool down and solidify but not
>become cold.  In the Victor ledgers there is a WAX column.  If they used
>a flow coat it says "Flowed" but if they used a thick wax blank they put
>the number of the wax in the column.  Each wax was numbered and kept the
>number every time it was shaved and reused.  There are also notations in
>that column for lacquers and optical film.
>
>Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com

Where is that video? I'd like to see it.