[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] shellac and acidity



I have had the same (albeit more limited) experience. Nevertheless, it is
nice to have sleeves that will presumably last longer than acidic ones,
regardless of damage to the record...

marcos sueiro bal
audio engineer
2807 newtown, astoria NY 11102
718.626.8528
mailto:tierecords@xxxxxxxxxxx


From: Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
<ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] shellac and acidity
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 17:02:54 -0400

This reflects my own experience as well.

Convincing archivists fresh out of school, paper trained, is another
matter.

Steve Smolian
=========================
Steven Smolian    301-694-5134
Smolian Sound Studios
---------------------------------------------------
CDs made from old recordings,
Five or one or lifetime hoardings,
Made at home or concert hall,
Text and pics explain it all.
at www.soundsaver.com
=========================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt Nauck" <nauck@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] shellac and acidity


> I have inspected hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of records over > the last 20 years. > > I cannot identify a single instance where shellac was negatively affected > by acid content in sleeves. > > Off-gassing by inks, yes. Mold growth and/or graininess from dampness in > the paper, yes. Brittle sleeves crumbling to dust, yes. Acid damage to > records, no. > > In fact, I haven't even seen what I would call acid damage to record > labels. (With the possible exception of labels on certain instantaneous > discs.) > > In my experience, vintage disc recordings seem to be impervious to the > effects of acid contained within paper. In fact, I have very often > witnessed the situation that Alain Carou describes: sleeves or newspaper > used to separate records can be totally disintegrated around the edges, but > the paper pressed between the records is intact and much less brittle. Not > only does the paper protect the discs, the records protect the paper - a > symbiotic relationship, it would seem! > > This is why - in my opinion - spending 3-4 times as much for acid-free > sleeves is a waste of archival funds, and why I decided not to sell > Disc-O-Files made from acid-free stock. If a record can survive unscathed > for 70 years in a cheap paper sleeve in a barn, attic or basement, then > that same record will do just fine in a new, not completely acid-free > sleeve on a shelf in an archive or music room. > > In my opinion, the real problem with old sleeves is two-fold: > > 1) Dirt and mold (which is why we do not store clean records in old sleeves). > 2) Paper porosity. Sleeves with high rag content (am I using this term > correctly?) will trap moisture, and moisture is definitely detrimental to > shellac. The old green stock sleeves are good examples of this. Stored > indoors in a dry environment, no problem. But left exposed to high > humidity, porous sleeves tend to hold water, causing mildew and graininess. > > I am open to opposing opinions, and invite comment. > > Kurt & Diane Nauck > > c/o Nauck's Vintage Records > 22004 Sherrod Ln. > Spring, TX 77389 > > Website: www.78rpm.com > E-Mail: nauck@xxxxxxxxx > > Phone: (281) 288-7826 > Fax: (425) 930-6862

_________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]