MFSL inner sleeves leaving marks on my vinyl...ever encounter this problem?

Hum, I just checked and there is no mention of these being on BO. I didn't actually place an order but I did put a couple of packs in my shopping cart.
http://www.sleevecityusa.com/diskeeper-ultimate-audiophile-inner-sleeve-p/312nlps.htm

 

If you buy directly from MusicDirect/MoFi, they should be the "new" formula sleeves. Third party retailers could still have the defective sleeves in stock, and of course, for any sealed MoFi vinyl from the "SleeveGate" timeframe has a chance of having them.

 

I buy (many time ago) the affected on MusicDirect, later I ask and they know the problem... they sent me a replacement pack... those new replacement are good! so yes MusicDirect now sell "new" NON affected sleeves.

 

My Mofi Four and More also had the affected sleeve. Obviously it was made and shipped during the time period they had problems. Newer sleeves packs are fine. It is potluck if you purchase a Mofi lp - you might wind up with one from that time period.

 

Thanks deadcoldfish, good to know

 

I just received some records direct from MoFi, and my copy of R.E.M. - Document has the residue. I thought it was some sort of release agent along with fingerprints on the vinyl, so I did a search for Mobile Fidelity and 'residue' and discovered this thread. I haven't checked the other records too closely (yet) under direct light, but two of the remaining three are significantly warped.

 

Has anybody figured out a replacement sleeve? I saw some residue on my mofi sleeve records and may just scrap them, go through my collection , clean and rebag.

 

Current run MOFI sleeves do not have this issue.

 

It's amazing that almost three years later, this "residue" problem still affects Mobile Fidelity's product. I just opened a brand new copy of Frank Sinatra - No One Cares, MoFi limited edition #2527. When pulling out the inner sleeve from the jacket, I could already feel the dusty powdery texture on the sleeve. The vinyl itself was covered by the milky residue, described numerous times in this thread. This particular copy must have been pressed in 2013 or so, when the bad inner sleeves were being used.

This record was a little more resistant to come clean than the ones with residue I dealt with a couple years ago. Even after two rounds on the VPI vacuum machine, traces of "residue" were still visible in the deadwax. A tiny amount of isopropyl alcohol did remove the remaining schmutz, however.

Kind of a bummer to have to resort to alcohol cleaning on a brand-new, premium grade record. Fortunately, the record is playing fine, after all that cleaning.

I wonder if the residue will cause more serious problems over time. How will all those sealed MoFi LP's with the defective inner sleeves fare, say, ten years from now?

 

I'm still finding records in my collection with this mess from MOFI sleeves. Glad I switched to Disckeepers.

 

A reason I don't like to buy older sealed, out of print remasters.

 

Agreed, I've been using Diskeeper sleeves, and probably will never go back to using the MoFi ones.

I imagine that MoFi is aware of which pressings of theirs are likely to have the defective inner sleeves. Especially the numbered copies. Certainly, some sort of recall would be the highest quality response. But the cost could be devastating, so the company leaves it up to the consumer to identify the defective product, and deal with it. Or, perhaps they figure a lot of customers won't even notice the "residue". (fat chance, though. These customers are mostly finicky audiophiles )

Thinking about it, they could at least set up some sort of inner sleeve exchange program.

 

Yes, older sealed records can be very disappointing. I'm reminded of the reaction that some 1970s Decca London poly lined inner sleeves have with vinyl. Left in contact with the vinyl long enough, and they will bond to the record surfaces. The resulting static is impossible to remove, in my experience. I've opened many new old stock London classical LPs (pressed in England) that were essentially ruined from being stored for decades in their original inner sleeves.

 

Yep, I'm pretty sure the EMI ASD series used a PVC inner for a time too. I haven't been working on those much yet, but the ones I've found in my collection (and I have quite a few) have a suspicious quality about them. (None of the records seem to have been damaged, based on a visual inspection, but I'm trying to clean stuff and resleeve it whether or not I have time to listen to all of it.)

 

Okay...so I have recently bought some very valuable, top copies of Beatles UK 1st pressings. I have read through this forum and am a little frightened because I have been using MoFi sleeves to store them, though they were purchased new from a local record shop recently. It sounds like this problem has been resolved with the residue and I certainly haven't noticed any issues with the ones I have been using. They obviously fixed the problem and these sleeves should be fine...however is there any way that they might over time remove the "glossy" shine that my top copies have? That is the biggest concern for me. I am considering just using regular thick paper sleeves but am a little concerned about "sleeve trails" left by inserting and removing them - though I do very little of that with them. Suggestions? Thank you so much!

 

The new Mofis have no problems. I have recently switched back to them from the Disckeepers as the Mofis have thinner plastic and cause slightly less sleeve burn if accidentally pressed against the record.
Even the old defective MoFis would not destroy the record sheen permanently. A distilled rinse removed the residue completely.
If you pull a record out out of a Mofi sleeve and it is spotless, then the sleeve is fine. The effect was not subtle and you'd know if you had the bad ones.

 

These sleeves have been perfect for many thousands in my collection: http://www.sleevecityusa.com/diskeeper-ultimate-audiophile-inner-sleeve-p/312nlps.htm I wouldn't hesitate to use the MoFi's but if you are concerned, these are just great. I personally have never seen "sleeve burn" on any of the albums I store in a Diskeeper or MoFi sleeve. Don't over think a problem that occurred years ago.

 

You'll be fine as you are. The problem was resolved, and even when it was present, it just added a chalky residue that washed off easily without taking any shine off.

 

This is a picture of sleeve burn caused by a very staticky Diskeeper inner sleeve. The plastic on some batches of those is rough and if the sleeve isn't opened before inserting the record, this can happen to a NM record.

 

Nice picture. I think it's not just the roughness of the sleeve, it's also the firmer plastic has a tendency to drag sand-like granules of dust across the vinyl surface and contribute to the creation of the hairlines. The older Diskeepers were not terribly staticky, but the last batch I got was so horrible that it got me to go back to the Mofis.

 

Same here with the Diskeepers, the most recent batch are extremely staticky. The older batches were ok. If anyone is looking to save money, I do not suggest these, better to pay more for the audiophile sleeve.

 

How old are the batches from Sleeve City you guys have been having trouble with?
I got 150 in July and none had problems. Seems like a pain to switch back and forth between sleeve brands, feels like it shouldn't be this much of an issue.

 

I have countless records that look like this after being in MOFI sleeves for a few years.

 

I spend way too much time and trouble getting my records "super-clean" to be dealing with this! I did use one batch of Mofi sleeves, however I am not seeing any problems. (fingers crossed) I use these inner sleeves now and really like them. They are pretty expensive, but I live in a very humid climate and these are the only ones I know of that "breathe". They are made from a soft fiber-mesh like material. They do "bunch up' a little sometimes when putting them back in the jackets---however after getting used to them---reinsertion is not a problem. Great inner sleeves!!!--Wish they were a little cheaper.

 

so far it seems i skipped this problem...but i'm going to go through everything today...