[78-L] PLAYING DISCS WET, was Re: Removing hiss - yet another idea

[Doug Pomeroy]

Hi Y'all,

This topic has indeed come up several times in the past.
In my experience, wet playing of shellac discs will cause
permanent damage if it is done more than once!

Why do it even once?  Well, there does seem to be
a slight reduction in surface noise when a worn 78
is played wet  -  for various possible reasons: the
water probably cools the tip and may also provide a
slight lubricating effect, allowing it to "slide" more smoothly
over the rough groove walls (NOTE I track quite heavy, so
I'm pretty sure it's not a case of the water causing the stylus
to lift out of the groove, even a little bit).  I cannot really explain
why it seems to produce a less noisy transfer, altho I have thought
about this  a lot.  I have never found it to make any difference with
shellac discs in E++ condition. There is surely more to be learned
about this apparent phenomenon...

NOTE, I always add a small amount of surfactant (Kodak Photo-Flo,
or a few drops of liquid detergent) to the water to help it wet the  
groove
totally (prevent "beading"), and I use a sable paint brush to spread the
water in the grooves in front of the stylus while playing the disc  
(and yes,
of course I always rinse the disc with distilled water when I'm done).

The very greatest noise reduction is found when playing
worn lacquers ("acetates") wet, and I believe it was probably
broadcast engineers who first discovered this trick.  But
again, the deterioration accelerates with each pass, so
so try not to do it more than a couple times, at most.

But NOT with SHELLAC!

Doug (who learned this lesson the hard way)

===================================================

> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:57:10 -0500
> From: Michael Biel <mbiel at mbiel.com>
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Removing hiss - yet another idea
> To: 78-L Mail List <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Message-ID: <4B71DA36.90009 at mbiel.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> DAVID BURNHAM wrote:
>
>
>> You might want to look at a posting I sent yesterday, (Feb 8),  
>> under the subject, "Removing hiss, a new approach", where I  
>> discuss this very procedure.  It's a little technical but I don't  
>> think it goes as far as "gobbledygook", however it didn't inspire  
>> any discussion.
>>
>> db
>>
>>
>
>
> Actually it did.  John had responded to your posting but had  
> changed the
> title to this one.  Look back to the first posting on this title  
> and you
> will see yours there.  And Joe Salerno had mentioned your concept  
> in his
> response to to John's retitled posting.
>
> Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com
>
> neechevoneeznayou at gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Here's another thought. How similar do the two different copies  
>> have to
>> be for this to work? What if one is worn a little or in a little
>> different way than the other?
>>
>> joe salerno
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> John Wright wrote:
>>>
>>> The idea I described uses the sound off TWO different 78s where the
>>> noise is going to be different all the way through because it's
>>> different shellac. If a program can extract sound common on both 78s
>>> (mainly the music) then that should be a good noise reduction.

Doug Pomeroy
Audio Restoration & Mastering Services
Transfers of metal masters, lacquers,
shellac and vinyl discs & tapes.
193 Baltic St
Brooklyn, NY 11201-6173
(718) 855-2650
pomeroyaudio at att.net

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long  
plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die  
like dogs. There's also a negative side."
      - Hunter S. Thompson