At Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:23:52 -0500,
David Lennick wrote:
> For starters, the only 78s that are truly unbreakable are the ones made
> for mood music libraries (Chappell, Boosey & Hawkes et al) in the 50s
> and Capitol's "Superflex" kids records in the 40s. Everything else can be
> cracked by putting your thumbnails together and pushing up..
> experimenting this way on unwanted discs is a good way to learn which
> ones will and which ones won't. Even Decca LPs from the mid 50s to
> the early 60s will fail this test.
> Other than that, it may be a matter of what country you're in.
> Canadian plants kept 78s into 1960 and all but Quality used shellac,
> while Quality's vinyl was easily cracked.
At Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:27:09 EST,
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> I've seen some postings suggesting styrene rather than vinyl.
> More brittle, I believe.
Hmmm, so there is a strong possibility that
early "non-breakable under normal use" 78rpms are not made of
vinyl but other materials like styrene?
I have also seen somewhere such 78rpms are made either of styrene,
or of vinyl whose percentages of materials are different from
that of later flexible vinyl 78rpms/LPs.
Anyway, is it possible that the "non-breakable" 78rpms (not
thin and flexible 78rpms) uses the same materials as early thick
There are several "non-breakable" 78rpms which comes up in my mind -
"MERCO PLASTIC" by Mercury, "METROLITE" by MGM, "SAV-O-FLEX" by Savoy
(and there should be some others - do you know other examples?)
all of which are not flexible and rather thick, but which seems to
be different from good old shellac.
MATSUBAYASHI, 'Shaolin' Kohji [log in to unmask]
GPG Fingerprint: 981C 4171 3044 DC45 6024 EA00 A413 F44D 8FB7 5B97