Features

From GZ's website. I seem to recall as similar opinion from some of the press material from Analog Productions. "After cutting the audio grooves on the lacquer substrate in the mastering studio, it is necessary to send the lacquer for further processing as soon as possible to avoid the loss of high frequencies in the grooves due to the delicate characteristics of the lacquer layer as well as damaging environmental effects." http://www.gzvinyl.com/Manufacturing/Metal-Work/Lacquers-processing.aspx

Now that the Tommy lacquer is worn out to dust, can I pick it up from your garbage when you discard it, PLEASE. I've heard of this lacquer making the rounds at shows and wow a standing ovation is deserved, so glad to finally listen to it, wish the remaining songs were possible. My English teacher was at Woodstock and played the Who cuts for a assignment and the lacquer cut reminded me of hearing it for the first time and being blown away!
I've been to many Who concerts since 12/14/1975 and own all the Classic Records reissues, originals upon release and have never heard the John, Rog, and Pete harmonies as this lacquer reproduces levels where you can distinctly identify each one. I always questioned how the in groove always slanted his review (opinion) as to what he could sell and how this lacquer video he was protecting and looking out for us but selling MFSL's on his site for absorbent prices and hoarding mono Beatles until they increase further. They turned me off while doing a video and mocked how a special needs person reacts when they show joy and happiness. Big spender on record collections and great Mattress salesman.

I have several Capitol Record lacquers that are 60 years old of William Steinberg, Felix Slatkin and Erich Leinsdorf with cutting instructions and they sound fabulous, live, better than the same vinyl issued LPs. Too bad I don't more than a half dozen.

In case you hadn't noticed, the In Groove YT on the lacquers that 'turn to dust" has been taken down from their site and you see a message "This video isn't available anymore".

I'm thinking MoFi, Acoustic Sounds, etc will now start offering their Lacquers for super high prices as well. It's just another niche in the audiophile world. As with any other hobby (FLAOBT), people will purchase things that are limited in quantity. Just like with MQA, reviewers will toot the horn of the next big thing. It's what they do.

the whole matter doesn’t seem to be clear, instead at least controversial, as also mastering folks like Steve Hoffman (in his forum) blow the same horn as “The in groove”.

Not wholly about the longevity of lacquers but how many times they could be played before they no longer sound good? The whole concept is ridiculous to me. Why would anyone want an unused lacquer just to hide away and never play? At least a rare book or painting can be read and admired. What can you do with a lacquer? If the point is just to sell it sometime in the future, there are much better ways to make money.

Hey Michael, I hate to be a contrarian here in the comments of your blog, but let’s get into it. Why do you feel that it’s a different conversation that lacquers should be plated quickly if intended for production?

The same chemical and physical breakdown of the lacquer occurs whether it ends up in a nickel bath or on some collector’s shelf/turntable. We can’t ignore the facts here. A lacquer simply does not hold up over time, played frequently or otherwise. The high frequencies - that vinyl does so well and CD does not! - are the first thing to go. This may not be so apparent to many listeners particularly if their hearing has diminished with age, but it is a reality of life.

There is a reason why lacquers intended for production are NEVER played, not even with the most meticulously set up tonearm/cartridge, not even briefly. You won’t find a single mastering room in the world that does this. And there is a reason they are typically rushed into the plating room as quickly as possible. For my own releases I’ve gone to great lengths and additional expense to have my lacquers plated much more rapidly than even the “standard” or typical production pipeline would suggest.

Let’s not forget that they are much more delicate and sensitive to proper storage techniques as well. Not only to care for the lacquer coating but the metal substrate itself.

Best case scenario, let’s assume you were hypothetically able to play it thousands of times without any wear whatsoever, didn’t bend or warp the metal core due to uneven storage, etc… what happens over the years? The nitrocellulose lacquer coating contracts. It begins to peel and flake off the disc, taking your precious recording with it. If the surface forms fractures, ripples or distorts in any way, it is unplayable. And even assuming none of this happens? It WILL begin to sweat palmitic acid, a white waxy coating will begin growing from the disc’s surface.

Add in the difficulties studios have had sourcing lacquers after the 2020 Apollo fire, and mastering rates basically tripling over the past few years, and that is reason enough for me to have my own personal objections to what Supersense is doing. On top of all that, I can’t imagine why anybody would want a record cut from substandard tape copies, pressed OR cut directly. I have no objection to the price, in fact I think a product like this should probably cost more than it does, considering what goes into their production. I just don’t think it’s a sensible product, and I certainly don’t think it’s an audiophile product. My 2¢, for whatever that’s worth.

I have no horse in this race, it is just a cool topic to discuss.

The ‘legend’ of lacquers, to my recollection, has been that longevity is not something I would expect!

Devialet has released some lacquers and their initial pitch was that these are a ‘one and done’ product. Now we have 60 year old lacquers that seem to obviously contradict that notion.

From Devialet via What Hi Fi…

https://www.whathifi.com/amp/features/devialet-and-art-impermanence

From Devialet:

“Usually when a record is made, the lacquers are used for production rather than for listening because its softness means the grooves are worn off as it’s played. Which adds that fleeting quality that makes it, philosophically speaking, as similar as a recording can be to a live performance.”

So, here’s someone who makes records talking about the ephemeral nature of lacquers; is he wrong?

I dunno! More to learn!

Sadly, for me, your version recorded and sent by YouTube sounded better than my copy played at home. My LSO version is almost too spacious, but I have always enjoyed it.

My 2 cents. It seems that the key is care in playing and storage.

From an interview/article about the Devialet lacquers…

“Created from aluminium, coated with nitrocellulose lacquer and spanning 14” with a blue edge, there have been a limited number of lacquers of each album produced for sale. Limited to 30 sets for each title release with multiple lacquers forming the entire album, the Vaughan, Peterson and Brubeck sets (of four discs in each) will cost you £6,300 per set. The Evans (of just two discs) will cost £4,500. This is a lacquer, though, which means that the sound quality will be far superior even to the released limited edition vinyl but – and here’s the kick – the surface is very soft. Play it once, just once, and the stylus will distort the medium. It will never sound that good ever again yet, because it is the lacquer, this is the best way to hear this LP. You’re looking at a one hit experience, though.”

Link:

https://theaudiophileman.com/devialet-fond/

Interestingly, there are several lacquer types. Maybe some are tougher?

From Master Disk…

https://masterdisk.com/blog/2018/1/2/the-process-and-jargon-of-vinyl

“Lacquers cut as reference lacquers are sometimes referred to acetates. In either case, they can be played by normal turntables. Lacquers cut as masters should not be played. They are soft and even a careful needle drop will cause a very loud pop on every copy of the record.“

I think maybe we are talking about different ‘lacquers.’

Some made to play and some not?

“Maybe I am wrong but my understanding is that the chemical makeup has actually remained remarkably unchanged over the decades.“

No, this wasn’t even true within one manufacturer’s product lineup, let alone in comparison to another manufacturer’s lineup. At one point in time there were several different brands and grades of blanks available. In more recent years, there was only Apollo/Transco and MDC. And now, only MDC. Any mastering engineer will tell you the Apollo and MDC blanks were very different beasts. Not only do they cut differently and sound different from eachother, but they plate differently too. The exact formulas are probably a closely guarded secret.

“I am not going to buy any attempt to argue that such chemical compounds are going to radically change in nature from batch to batch without some verifiable evidence.”

As I demonstrated via the anecdote in my previous comment, batch to batch variation was the nature of the beast. You may be able to contact other industry professionals if you seek any further evidence or statements on the matter.

For that matter, you can have pretty much any mastering engineer you want make you a test cut with any prepared source material or tones of your choosing. Perhaps for not much more than one of these Supersense lacquers may cost. Feel free to do this to gain whatever evidence you deem necessary. Make recordings of repeated plays so you can monitor the gradual degradation of the audio. See how the disc ages. Then do it again in a year or two to see if the latest batch of discs behave any differently. This may be the best way to judge the merits of releasing an album on lacquers. There is no substitute for personal experience :)

Michael, do you still have that Art Blakey & the Jazz Messengers "A Night in Tunisia" lacquer? You played it at an event at Innovative Audio. It sounded amazing.

If I may quote Artie, from 2015:

"Ledermann would also have you know that, because of its incomparably low moving mass and its freedom from the mechanical compression that bedevils electromagnetic cartridges, the Soundsmith Strain Gauge cartridge is an incomparably good tracker. Indeed, he says, the Strain Gauge is kinder than most cartridges to one's records, a claim he illustrated by playing for me a record that not only had lots of bass, treble, and sheer juice, but that exhibited not a single tick or pop. Except it wasn't a record—it was a half-speed–mastered lacquer. While a typical lacquer can't be played more than a few times before audible groove damage sets in, Ledermann said that this lacquer had been played approximately 150 times—but only with a Soundsmith Strain Gauge."

from New Zealand. The polycarbonate records were limited edition artist pressings. Check them out on the link below.
http://peterkinglathecutrecords.co.nz/history.htm

I’m not sure the In Groove video or its owner deserves quite this level of tongue lashing. Even though incorrect, he was simply trying to provide information to his viewers. He is also a small record store owner, so deserves support. His channel is also excellent. Subscribe if you haven’t already.

"... bullshit is bullshit. Even when the guy shoveling it is a sympathetic character."
This phrase should be taught in every school.

If you actually sat there and watched his videos claiming you will get two plays and then the lacquer will implode (literally what he claimed) while he was holding a pristine lacquer in his hands from 1988 that was improperly stored no less and believed him even after watching Fremer's demo with other vintage lacquers then there is no help for you. You are a true believer in his cult. Also if you don't see the utter irony of somebody who makes their living off of buying and selling records accusing someone else of being dishonest because they have a vested financial interest in the buying and selling of records I can only quote Ron White. "you can't fix stupid."

Lacquers as they are called are different from acetates. Do lacquers last as long as PVC (vinyl records)? No, but they can last a good couple of decades or more with proper care. I have heard portions of the arguments here about vinyl records as well. To me it is just people making arguments for the sake of arguing. Anyone with a 6th grade education in chemistry can figure it out.
Lacquers and especially acetates require more special care than vinyl records, but with such care they will last a while. All three, lacquers, acetates and vinyl records will always outlast master tapes, cassette tapes and reel to reel. It is simply natural due to the materials. Lacquers are brittle, but can be cleaned ultrasonically at the right frequency and time duration. Acetates however, are very delicate and even under good care don't hold up over time.
I have never seen a lacquer disintegrate in front of me, nor a vinyl record or even an acetate. I have seen tapes do that though after 20 years.
I don't know of any sonic superiority to lacquers or what have you, I doubt there is.
So this fight is a hundred years old rehash in my opinion.

Saw your informative and cordial video yesterday. Great job to all. I have to say that the lacquer issue is an odd one. How to you judge ones personal listening experience? I take the family out for dinner at a nice place and it costs me 300$. Did I throw that $$ away? Would I do it all the time...nope. Would I buy a lacquer for 500$..nope. But some would not do dinner either...right? Going out to the movies with the family is about 150$ or so. Can I keep the movie..nope. I go to a concert with my spouse and it costs me 500$ between seats tshirts programs beverages etc. If my thing is being able to hear the most beautiful and realistic version of my favorite recording...then to each his or her own. IMO.