Here is a related aside. An interesting little factoid for your mental archive. I’ve maintained this viewpoint for decades and I’ve never seen an "official" confirmation until now but, even today, many folk are still surprised when it is mentioned. The only difference here is that received wisdom indicated the recovery time was 24 hours but this source indicates that the LP could be played 50 times in succession without severe/audible effect and that it might take hundreds of plays (or more) before you start to hear a difference. Please bear in mind it is the writer’s opinion so stay safe! Quote :-
"Records are made from a polyvinyl chloride/polyvinyl acetate copolymer at 90/10 mix roughly and its melting point is between 110 and 120 degrees centigrade. I was a record production and development chemist at EMI for 6 years and mucked around with various record mixtures. The stylus does indeed ’melt’ the plastic at a macro level, the plastic immediately resetting itself back to where it was: there would be no noticeable degradation of the record in the short term but repeated playing, especially the heavy modulated grooves of the record, will over thousands of playing, eventually give a degradation that is discernable. Nowt to worry about in the short term though: dust is probably a greater enemy as is plasticiser migration from record inner sleeves."
Oh no! Now we have to worry about anti-static sleeves. Aaaaaarghhhh!!!
A final note : This report had me wondering how they could tell the difference between "thermal wear" and "physical wear" i.e. measure the heat at the interface? Then it dawned on me....thermal camera trained on the "hotspot" (?????)
