Quantcast

Sound Guard and CD-4 discs

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

kfbkfb

300 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
370
Location
Midwest USA

Doug G.

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
1,639
Location
Rochester, Minnesota
Back when I was treating records with Sound Guard (seventies), I didn't have any CD-4 records but the regular two channel records to which I applied Sound Guard are still fine.

Sound Guard was (is?) a dry lubricant suspended in a fluorocarbon liquid carrier and it seems it could do nothing but improve tracking of the ultrasonic carrier engravings.

Doug
 

par4ken

701 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
787
Location
NW Ontario
I used "Lifesaver" from Audio Technica, for years as well as similar product from Radio Shack and Last Record Preservative. They all had the same smell to them so I assume that they were all the same chemical and the same as Sound Guard. I remember reading about Sound Guard damaging records, but don't see how that could happed unless maybe applied to a really dirty record. The benefit that I found was that the treated records didn't attract dust the same as untreated records. I haven't bothered with record preservatives lately as I usually rip my vinyl to the hard drive so no longer play an album over multiple times so don't worry about record wear anymore.
 

kfbkfb

300 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
370
Location
Midwest USA
^^^
CD-4 records treated as above also showed
no audible change except that there appeared
to be less noise in the rear channels.


^^^
The output at 40 kHz was within 1 dB of that
observed for the "mint condition" disc!


Unusual that the 1976-04 Audio statement
contradicts the statement by the JVC Cutting
Center about Sound Guard.


Kirk Bayne
 
Last edited:

Sonik Wiz

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,680
Location
Kansas City
I used "Lifesaver" from Audio Technica, for years as well as similar product from Radio Shack and Last Record Preservative. They all had the same smell to them so I assume that they were all the same chemical and the same as Sound Guard. I remember reading about Sound Guard damaging records, but don't see how that could happed unless maybe applied to a really dirty record. The benefit that I found was that the treated records didn't attract dust the same as untreated records. I haven't bothered with record preservatives lately as I usually rip my vinyl to the hard drive so no longer play an album over multiple times so don't worry about record wear anymore.
I used Last record preservative also. I agree that similar products had similar formulations, but who knows what the real differences are? The Last record care kit came with little stickers to label the records that have been treated. Re-visiting many of my LP's when I got the Surround Master, I can say the treated ones are definitely lower noise & in better shape. I think this is for 2 main reasons. One is that group of records was not my 1st early purchases & so might have a little less wear on them. Also I think there is some real benefit to the treatment. For example I have the BBC Quadrafile test record that came along later in the line of purchases. By then Last was hard to find so never treated. It has shown more noise & clicks than other treated older records with about the same playing.

I made it a point to treat all my CD-4 records with this stuff & maybe that's one reason I've had less trouble with CD-4 than others have. I also used the Stylast stylus treatment.

 

quadjoe

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
260
Location
Panama City, Florida
I've used LAST products for years, and am happy with the results. I do use Stylast on my stylus on a regular basis, however, I had read that JVC didn't recommend the use of record preservatives for CD-4, so I've avoided it on most of my CD-4 discs, but maybe I should give it a try, given your results.
 
Top