Quote:
For years I've used both LAST + Gruv Glide: the former followed by the latter. I spoke with both companies to make sure the chemistries were compatible -- they are. Some folks think LAST veils LP sonics. IAC, Gruv Glide (by itself) yields better sonics. Not surprising, I guess, as LAST's main purpose seems to be preservation and archiving. I also use Stylast.

What's your experience with these products, especially WRT their synergistic effect vs. stand-alone?

I used LAST for quite a while, but this was before I heard records played wet. Then LAST was immediately replaced by playing records wet using the Audio Technica red velvet roller and a mixture of distilled water and a lubricant like Armorall. The next step was peeling off all of those LAST stickers. I also used Stylast for a while until I discovered the chemical that cleans the stylus tip, the name of which escapes me.

I've been using LAST No. 2 Preservative for over 20 years, and utterly, unquestionably SWEAR by it. It reduces friction, and does it well. I don't know about Gruv Glide, but if it does the same thing, what would be the advantage in that?

LAST 2 does just an amazing job at reducing wear, and I won't EVEN PLAY a new lp without it. It does improve sound by keeping the noise floor low, as a new LP has/does.. It stays that way, despite dust sometimes adhering over/around it at later plays over the years. The core good sound is there always, and I can't imagine ANY audiophile not wanting it's advantages over very quickly-worn lps after a 10 plays (no matter how well the cart and table are set up). I find that the dust and likelihood of damage is greatly reduced.

Stylast is the other absolute must have.. there hasnt been a SINGLE LP I have played without it, again for over 20 years. I am still using a Monster Cable AG 1000-2 for the last 15 years, and with at least 2000 hours on it, it has minor wear. Indespensible. Period.

Veiling and other talk... utter bullshit! I think there are way too many variables to cast speculation on LAST's products, such as equipment changes over the years, magnetized cartridges, set up issues/changes, etc... I have never noticed ANY deletrious effects, ever.

All too often obsessive audiophiles (obviously) have speculated harm, and to me, I usually lump them in with the flat-earthers that decry too many accessories in audio are bullshit.

Don't let anyone's unfounded fears dominate new approaches to better sound. To use both though? Seems a bit overkill. Too expensive and time consuming over the long haul- for me. Then again, I haven't tried the above, so I DON'T know!

Quote:

Quote:
For years I've used both LAST + Gruv Glide: the former followed by the latter. I spoke with both companies to make sure the chemistries were compatible -- they are. Some folks think LAST veils LP sonics. IAC, Gruv Glide (by itself) yields better sonics. Not surprising, I guess, as LAST's main purpose seems to be preservation and archiving. I also use Stylast.

What's your experience with these products, especially WRT their synergistic effect vs. stand-alone?

I used LAST for quite a while, but this was before I heard records played wet. Then LAST was immediately replaced by playing records wet using the Audio Technica red velvet roller and a mixture of distilled water and a lubricant like Armorall. The next step was peeling off all of those LAST stickers. I also used Stylast for a while until I discovered the chemical that cleans the stylus tip, the name of which escapes me.

How did playing records wet alter surface noise for you?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
For years I've used both LAST + Gruv Glide: the former followed by the latter. I spoke with both companies to make sure the chemistries were compatible -- they are. Some folks think LAST veils LP sonics. IAC, Gruv Glide (by itself) yields better sonics. Not surprising, I guess, as LAST's main purpose seems to be preservation and archiving. I also use Stylast.

What's your experience with these products, especially WRT their synergistic effect vs. stand-alone?

I used LAST for quite a while, but this was before I heard records played wet. Then LAST was immediately replaced by playing records wet using the Audio Technica red velvet roller and a mixture of distilled water and a lubricant like Armorall. The next step was peeling off all of those LAST stickers. I also used Stylast for a while until I discovered the chemical that cleans the stylus tip, the name of which escapes me.

How did playing records wet alter surface noise for you?

It eliminates surface noise pretty much entirely. Makes the LP sound like a CD, only, you know, musical. Didn't think anyone was ever going to ask.

Doesn't playing records wet mean you have to keep on doing that forever? I've heard that if you stop, the surface noise is even worse with playing them dry.

Quote:
Doesn't playing records wet mean you have to keep on doing that forever? I've heard that if you stop, the surface noise is even worse with playing them dry.

Once you hear records played wet you will never return to playing them dry. Distilled water with 10% Armorall or similar lubricant is what I used. The (pivoted) Audio Technica brush I mentioned is rather important since it assures the thin film of liquid is evenly distributed as the cartridge tracks the grooves.

Nice, but it didn't answer my question!

Quote:
Nice, but it didn't answer my question!

Oh, I guess that's true. What I should have said is I don't know, since I never played records dry after I first tried playing them wet. I imagine the real answer to your question depends on the purity of the H2O solution. I've seen people cautioning against playing records wet over the years, sometimes quite strenuously, but I had only good results myself.

I thought so! Well, let me give you a piece of advice: Don't EVER play your records dry again, they will sound horrible!

BTW, playing records wet provides a longer life for your cartridge!

Quote:
I thought so! Well, let me give you a piece of advice: Don't EVER play your records dry again, they will sound horrible!

Don't worry, I won't. I have not played a record dry since 1982. On the other hand, I haven't played a record dry or wet since 1999.

Quote:

What?! You don't play records any longer? Why are you bring this up in the forums then? It would seem that the practice is OCD-ish, and probably the main reason for not listening to vinyl now anyway.

But to the point First, it would seem like a LOT of work to keep the record wet (and clean) before and after. What I am saying is that you don't need to invest the time into doing all this for the same effect of of what one treatment of LAST does, dry.

Other than using an Audioquest brush for dry sweeping, there is no upkeep on new records, ever.

Quote:
What?! You don't play records any longer? Why are you bring this up in the forums then? It would seem that the practice is OCD-ish, and probably the main reason for not listening to vinyl now anyway.

But to the point First, it would seem like a LOT of work to keep the record wet (and clean) before and after. What I am saying is that you don't need to invest the time into doing all this for the same effect of of what one treatment of LAST does, dry.

Other than using an Audioquest brush for dry sweeping, there is no upkeep on new records, ever.

Now, see, that's where I got you. Speaking from experience with both, wet playing is light years ahead of LAST in terms of sound quality. Furthermore it's not much work at all. I mean, unless you can no longer muster enough strength to get up from the Barcalounger.

Do you first give the LPs a good cleaning before the first wet play?

Quote:
Do you first give the LPs a good cleaning before the first wet play?

I did have a record cleaner. Sometimes I did, sometimes I didn't.

Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

Quote:
Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

No particular reason. Same sort of thing as freezing LPs, I suspect. I know it will improve the sound but sometimes I'm not in the mood or just plain lazy.

Fair enough.

I have to try playing an LP as you suggest. I had totally forgotten about this and have no recollection of whether I tried it before or not.

Quote:
Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

I agree. Outside of a quick carbon-fiber brush sweep, and a dash of Stylast on the tip, I don't do any laborious cleaning on records that simply don't need it.

LP care doesn't have to be a ritual or a pain. I think sometimes the ritual of 'having' to do a record a certain way is silliness after awhile, but I do think some type of simple system be used for daily use.

Again, my current Monster AG1000-2 cart is still sounding like it's in its first year of use. It may be worn a bit in 10 plus years of moderate use, but nowhere near the same wear would be apparent without Last 2 and Sylast working. I like the stuff so much, I am very reluctant to play even a clean LP without Last 2 applied first, for fear of unnecessary wear on those plays, no matter how well the cart is set up or what cart one may use. That means frequently NOT listening to new lps I really want to. But this means that I am just very convinced of the very real wear that occurs with every listen, without the treatment (not that I have a hang up about over-anal record care.) Simply both are indispensible. Dry brushes pretty much forever after that, if a good dustcover and sleeves are used.

Over the decades, you can see what works and what's too much or bs. Elk has a very sound approach to cleaning and care thereafter.

Quote:

Quote:
Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

No particular reason. Same sort of thing as freezing LPs, I suspect. I know it will improve the sound but sometimes I'm not in the mood or just plain lazy.

I guess the next question to ask is why aren't you playing vinyl for over a decade? For fear of sounding like looking a someone gored at a bullfight, is vinyl just not worth the hassle for you?

I mean whether or not your solution is better sounding lp's (wet vs. dry), what was the last straw on getting out of vinyl?

Quote:

Quote:
Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

I agree. Outside of a quick carbon-fiber brush sweep, and a dash of Stylast on the tip, I don't do any laborious cleaning on records that simply don't need it.

LP care doesn't have to be a ritual or a pain. I think sometimes the ritual of 'having' to do a record a certain way is silliness after awhile, but I do think some type of simple system be used for daily use.

Again, my current Monster AG1000-2 cart is still sounding like it's in its first year of use. It may be worn a bit in 10 plus years of moderate use, but nowhere near the same wear would be apparent without Last 2 and Sylast working. I like the stuff so much, I am very reluctant to play even a clean LP without Last 2 applied first, for fear of unnecessary wear on those plays, no matter how well the cart is set up or what cart one may use. That means frequently NOT listening to new lps I really want to. But this means that I am just very convinced of the very real wear that occurs with every listen, without the treatment (not that I have a hang up about over-anal record care.) Simply both are indispensible. Dry brushes pretty much forever after that, if a good dustcover and sleeves are used.

Over the decades, you can see what works and what's too much or bs. Elk has a very sound approach to cleaning and care thereafter.

Great post, Glotz!

I like that cartridge, as well!

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Any particular reason?

I assume from your response you didn't find it made any difference, true?

My experience has been that one good cleaning when the record is new generally takes care of it. After this I simply store my LP's carefully, keep the open end of the dust cover inside the jacket and play them as desired. It's pretty rare for me to give them an additional cleaning.

No particular reason. Same sort of thing as freezing LPs, I suspect. I know it will improve the sound but sometimes I'm not in the mood or just plain lazy.

I guess the next question to ask is why aren't you playing vinyl for over a decade? For fear of sounding like looking a someone gored at a bullfight, is vinyl just not worth the hassle for you?

I mean whether or not your solution is better sounding lp's (wet vs. dry), what was the last straw on getting out of vinyl?

I felt that digital had more potential than vinyl. So I focused my efforts there. I dismantled a system that included a special Maplenoll TT w/ 50 lb platter on 0.5 Hertz isolation stand, 500 feet of air tubing, naked Quad 57s, regulated power supplies for everything, etc. I never looked back.

Freako wrote:

I thought so! Well, let me give you a piece of advice: Don't EVER play your records dry again, they will sound horrible!

BTW, playing records wet provides a longer life for your cartridge!

I know this is old, but for any like me looking into Last and Gruv Glide and finding their way here:

Please, for the love of god, DO NOT WET PLAY YOUR VINYL if you care at all about your equipment.

This has been discussed extensively on various boards (especially audiokarma and stevehoffman), and various cartridge rebuilders have commented and confirmed on the biggest issue, which is: No, wet playing will NOT extend your cartridge's life, but quite the opposite. The moisture will make its way through the stylus and cantilever, undoing the glue as well as introducing corrosive elements inside the cartridge itself. Wet-playing your record is about as bad as it gets for your cartridge, and a proper cleaning routine, preferably one involving an RCM, as well as a simple brush before and after each play, is going to remove all the dust and particles necessary to provide longevity.

Now, if you don't care much about your cartridge for whatever reason, and are simply after sound quality... wet-playing might just be for you, but ONLY IF what you are after is a quieter record with no concern for actual sonics and sound quality. Indeed, wet playing will reduce surface noise, as well as some clicks and pops, as the water is acting (similar to Last) as a kind of lubricant -- like oil to an engine -- and that reduction in friction will help lower the noise floor and reduce surface noise. If your ears aren't particularly refined, this will absolutely sound like a big improvement in sound quality. But to those with any extensive experience in audio production, or simply used to listening to better masters, or higher quality vinyl on audiophile equipment, wet playing your records will, while reducing surface noise, also reduce clarity, you'll notice treble reduction, and a general dulling, muffling or flattening of the sound.

These results are easy to find (but I don't recommend trying for yourself, less it be on a record you don't care about, on a table/cart you don't care about). The forums are littered with comments confirming this, but furthermore, plenty have been gracious enough to record and upload needledrops online where you can do A/B comparisons of the same vinyl, recorded first w/ a dry play, and then with a wet play. Import these into something like Audacity (free) or any similar software you may own, and do your own analysis.... you will even visually see what I am talking about.

But if you don't mind replacing your stylus and/or cartridge after inevitable damage from water occurs, can't hear the dulling sound, and are simply after some less noise, than by all means go for it... spray your records down before each play.

For the rest of us, just invest in the proper equipment and products to achieve better results. Much of it is snakeoil, but more often than not, these cheap DIY solutions are just as much snakeoil, and often come along with genuine risks (without a company to go after for damaging your beloved records and equipment). This isn't a cheap hobby; do it right

I recently purchased a Record Doctor V. I had previously treated most of my LPs with Gruv Glide. My question is, will the RDV remove the Gruv Glide? In other words, will I have to apply Gruv Glide again after cleaning with the RDV if I want to keep the Gruv Glide effect?

I thought so! Well, let me give you a piece of advice: Don't EVER play your records dry again, they will sound horrible!

The difference is I actually have experience whereas you read about it on some second rate web site.