2. analog
  3. 192567-1647

Some thoughts on dust covers

Over the course of time there have been many discussions concerning the subject of dust covers.  They tend to revolve around the central question:  Should the dust cover be down or up while playing records?  Some of these discussions have been nasty, consequently I have refrained from participation.  It is hoped that I can provide some common sense that was given to me by someone of unquestioned authority many years ago.  During college and after, from 1970 to ~1980 I worked in HiFi retail, selling high end lines of audio equipment.  One of these lines was Thorens.  Sometime around 1977 or 1978, if memory serves, Thorens introduced their new TD126, as a top of the line TT with their own arm and I sold the first one at our store to very good customer.  He came back very unhappy after the first night of frustration with it.  The problem was that with the dust cover closed some of his favorite records were hitting tangentally on the very back were the platter came closest to the dust cover when it was in the closed position.  I called the manufacturer's rep and he set up a three cornered phone call with himself, the Chief Engineer of Thorens at the time, and me.  I don't recall the man's name, but it doesn't matter, it is what he said that matters, then and now.  The Chief Engineer explained that the problem was caused because the hole in the offending records was slightly off center so there was an eccentricity as such a record rotates about the spindle.  The solution was simplicity itself, the dust cover should be removed always when playing records.  That the intent of the cover is to protect the turntable when not in use.  I pointed out that we lived in a semi-arrid environment (San Diego, CA) which is dusty to which he replied that if the environment was too dusty for records it should also be considered unhealthy for people to be breathing the air.  He recommended are filtration, not dust covers to address environmental concerns.  The rep asked about air bourne feedback from speakers and the Thorens guy laughed and said that if that was a problem in a given system, relying of the dust cover was a very flimsy and ineffective solution and that proper measures should be instituted to provide meaningful distance and isolation to ameliorate the problem.   So the often offered extremes:  a) Always play your records with the dust cover down, or b) put the dust cover away in it's box and never use it, should both be recognized for what they are are - not solutions at all.  First principles:  Identify the problem(s), seek solutions and alternatives, prioritize.

billstevenson
elliottbnewcombjr
5,521 posts
 

 

mylogic

I’ve witnessed Arlo Guthrie a few times yapping away, then he says "I know I’m supposed to be singing, but you can’t always do what you’re supposed to do’ And the stories are all related to where he started.

You would love a Buckminster Fuller lecture, in 1967 that crazy man took an entire auditorium at Pratt Institute on a meandering thought trip and at the end of the hour slammed it home, OMG, I still remember it like it was last week.

Vibrations getting to the surface are all related to the Dust Cover on/off issue, as is this fundamental question about equipment location.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/location-of-compoments?lastpage=true&page=2#2757920

Thorens, yeah, they should have had more clearance than that in that model.

 

mylogic
26 posts
 

elliottbnewcombjr

‘’Alices Restaurant’’ has all come back to memory!

Buckminster Fuller is new ground and has made me look into his history…..’’Spaceship Earth’’ and all that!

One of his theories remind me of Linn’s LP12. All the expensive tinkering over the years and upgrades to make this model better and things have not changed in 50 years.

l love his logic and this quote from him….

You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.

Why have Linn never built another turntable and try to better the LP12?

 

l wonder what Fuller would have made of this staying in the past?

 

lewm
13,160 posts
 

Not that I care much, but what do the last few posts have to do with dust covers?

mylogic
26 posts
 

lewn

So pleased you are following this very interesting thread, some call it a boring subject….you know!
 

The last few posts are relevant to dust covers, you were just not paying attention but just wanted to reciprocate.

elliottnewcombjr was just stating the obvious with ongoing engineering development. Buckminster Fuller was a renown inventor and his views are also relevant to the discussion.See his famous quote posted.

 

In an earlier post elliottbnewcombjr also stated this opinion on turntable covers….

’’Impractable TT’s (any TT) without a dust cover is an incomplete solution, an abomination, they should be ashamed of themselves’’

Fullers reasoning is the same….

‘’You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something (that can be improved) build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete’’

Elliott and myself may not agree on everything, but we do agree with Buckminster Fuller and the need for constant development.

 

lewm
13,160 posts
 

I guess that is "yourlogic".  Unfortunately or fortunately, we are not all living in Fuller's geodesic domes. Another prediction of his gone awry. But it interests me that you can read what Elliot wrote about dustcovers vis a vis turntables and in any way conform that thought with Buckminster Fuller's thoughts on anything. The only way I can see that parallel is if you take the dust cover as a modern innovation, which of course it is very much not.  Far from it. It is rather more accurate to say that progress in turntable development has included the gradual elimination of dust covers.

More to discover