Your Thoughts And Experience With Last Record Preservative.

I would be careful about using any silicone around the stereo. It has a tendency to migrate (flow) in extremely fine layers over all adjacent surfaces and gets on your fingers. It is also very difficult to remove. It is particularly a problem on jacks and plugs because it interferes with conductance.

 

I used a product called Permastat on my records in the late seventies. Probably similar formula. Applied with a pump spray bottle atomizer then buffed with a felt pad, like a Hunt brush sans bristles. No negative affects after forty years.

 

I don't think putting anything on vinyl is a good idea. Clean is what you want.

 

I agree...do i want to give up a little noise for loss of original sound? I assume if it works its because it has altered the record in a way that is perceived between the needle and groove....i will buy a cd if i cant take a little campfire crackle...i suppose i might try it on my first issue uk pink floyd animals which is a tad to noisy for my liking....but it would be stuck in my mind that there was an artificial buffer changing the original sound....decisions, decisions.....

 

It does not change the shape of the groove or gunk up the groove. You can contact Last for a technical explanation. It does not reduce noise directly. It bonds chemically with the vinyl to reduce the friction coefficient. When a stylus goes through a groove it can chip tiny pieces out, which keep getting enlarged with successive plays. The Last 2 just keeps the stylus moving more freely through the groove and less likely to catch at the tiny gouges. That increased ease of movement makes the sound seem a bit more "liquid" i.e. notes seem to flow more smoothly together. But if you don't play a record much (more than 20 times) you probably don't need it.

 

Thank you for your clarification. I had never heard of last and am usually weary of such treatments. This sounds legitimate and might be worth the investment for my audiophile pressings.

 

Slather a coating of "anything" on my delicate, valued vinyl grooves? Nope, no way, nada.

 

Thats my first instinct too...but the reviews have been pretty positive....the only question sticking in the back of my mind is the long term effect....does it cause any undesirable changes over the years? Also it claims to leave no residue...but if thats the case, what makes the stylus glide over the chips in the grooves thaf used to cause more chipping? There has to be something "added" that causes the new and improved needle glide....

 

I do completely understand the logic. This product is different. LAST is the only treatment in existence that actually works IME. Never Have I purchased a used record displaying the LAST sticker on the cover, that was noisy or worn, even those with a spindle trail or two on the label. The trails indicate play history on a stationary spindle, a record changer, which normally subjects the groove to damage on each and every play. The LAST preservative protects records from even that. I am duly impressed.

Also too, these used records have been around for decades, the time test that this product in no way has any adverse chemical reaction with the vinyl.

It is my understanding that LAST is not a coating. The preservative bonds at a molecular level with the upper layer of PVC molecules on the record. There is no residue, nothing to collect on the stylus.

 

I get it and will probably try it. I operate a small vinyl cleaning business here in N.H. and since reading these posts about last, I have been pondering whether or not i might offer a "last treatment" at an additional cost to my customers. Personally i will try it kn some of my non valuable records to see for myself. Im not anti progress and if a product is available that will provide a level of protection to vinyl lp's with no adverse effects then why not. Can anyone tell me if adding last will protect new or used records from paper sleeve scuffs and hairline scratches that may occur in handling or does it just provide preservation to records that already have some use related groove chipping.

 

The Last protects from friction damage from the stylus in a groove. But remember that the tonearm/cartridge is set at 2 grams of force. Most damage of the kind you describe is from far greater force than that and laterally across the grooves. Also I would guess that gravity forces most of the liquid into the groove rather than leave it on the groove ridgetop.

 

Some claim it strips the high end or air and makes records sound deader, others claim it makes them sound better- taking on a smooth character. I only used Last Power cleaner and also the preservative (It was a step process as I remember- each had a number on the bottle) until I got my Nitty Gritty. Since I started with Nitty Gritty I did'nt use power cleaner or Preservative, I figured if I clean it on a Nitty is'nt it going to strip the preservative away anyhow? My logic was to do the preserving part before each play with the stylus preservative- which they claimed lowered wear on both stylus and record. So where's that leave last stylus preservative? I never had a problem but some manufacturers stated not to use any liquid on the stylus. So now usually I just do Nitty on record, plus brush and Magic eraser on needle.

 

I agree with Mr. Bass's description.

I have used LAST on thousands of records, starting more than 20 years ago. After having played some of these records hundreds of times, I feel confident that wear was reduced or eliminated with the use of LAST. I cannot prove it, but still, I would rather risk adding a tiny bit of noise (which I have never noticed) in the interest of preserving the high frequencies and transients on my beloved records.

Also, the elimination of static charge on the record is definitely an advantage I have noticed. Specs of dust do not appear on my LAST treated records, like they do on untreated records. Even though I sweep off dust with every play, I feel strongly that elimination of this static attraction makes cleanliness easier to maintain, and therefore keeps record noise lower in the long run.

 

I wonder why it isn't a factory inclusion on some Audiophile records, if it truly does what is advertised?

I have never compared a pressing with, and a pressing without to make any kind of pseudoscientific evaluation. Have several (bought used) records that were treated with Last, they play OK, but not stellar, and of course that doesn't prove anything.

I'm leery

 

Can you post a pic of the stickers you guys are referring to? Why would anyone put a LAST sticker on a record?

 

WHY do YOU capitalize THE first LETTER of EVERY word. It's annoYing.

Sorry, man. But it is...

 

The obvious answer is so that I know I've used LAST on it. The stuff is too expensive to put on all my records. I'm selective on its application.

As stated upthread I used to apply the stickers to the label like this. I don't anymore. I apply it to the replacement inner sleeve I use with a record after it has been well cleaned and LAST-ed.

I hope this discussion of stickers doesn't overshadow the fact that 30 years of experience has proven to me that LAST really works.

 

The sticker does devalue a collectible record, most definitely. The LAST sticker is unobtrusive, and in a way its silvery sphere looks kinda nice.

 

I think Brian he just has a fancy way of writing!

 

Good point about the audiophile labels, I think LAST owns patents on their formula? The record labels would have to pay a royalty on that. Some labels did treat their products with a treatment, such as Living Static (I mean Stereo) with their proprietary 317x anti-static treatment. The irony of that, I have not found one, not even one RCA with the factory 317x sticker applied, that plays cleanly. Every record plays horribly, massive distortion, and static worse than an electrical storm on an AM radio. What is it about the letter "x" that suggests something darkly enigmatic about a product? (the miraculous hair tonic 317X grows new hair in 14 days) The later red seal RCA's from the late 60's through the 80's are actually very quiet, and great sounding, comparable to Philips, and DGG.

Parlophone (EMI) advertised Emitex treatment. I have no idea what its slippery agent was, maybe silicone, or teflon?

 

Because the record industry has made money getting us to buy the same titles again, again, and again.

That copy of Europe '72 above is a mid 1980's one and is not collectable. It is probably the fourth or fifth one I've purchased. All the others got worn out along the way and needed to be replaced. Why should Warners LAST a record when they can make money selling me a new copy?

 

I don't think I have ever seen a LAST sticker in my decades of record bin rumaging. But if I ever do, I will pay extra for that record. It would indicate to me that an audiophile owned the record, his cartridge was probabaly high quality and adjusted correctly, he most likely preened his record before each play, and therefore it is going to be in excellent sonic condition.

 

Well this thread got the better of me ,so I just ordered a bottle.
"Hmmm, I can eek out 2% more from my records?? Must resist .."
This place sucks sometimes.

 

So it basically prevents wear from stylus after repeated play (lengthens life of record) and no protection from non stylus related pressure. I know they have the stickers but if there is no sticker, is there any observable changes in the vinyl such as higher gloss or discoloration?

 

Is this like Sound Guard?