2. analog
  3. 1210020397

Curse you Dynaflex

I picked up a used copy of Lou Reed's self-titled first record on vinyl last weekend--you know, the one with all the songs that were originally VU songs that was only released on CD in Germany. Anyhow it appears to be an early, if not first pressing, and it's an RCA "dynaflex" record. Here's the sales pitch from the inner sleeve:

"It is thinner than any other record you have ever owned. It is also superior in many ways to any other record you have ever owned. It is freer of imperfections--ticks, pops and blisters. It is much less susceptible to warpage. And its life wil be far longer than conventional records. It is the record of tomorrow, yours today."

That was all a load of crap. "Superior" actually equals "cheaper for RCA." And it's free of warpage because it's thin as paper--it can't hold any shape at all, much less a warped one!! This record is plagued with surface noise throughout. But I would have actually graded this visually as a VG++.

Anyhow, "dynaflex" sucks. But at least it still sounds better than the lifeless German CD issue.

Sorry for the rant.
sinisterporpoise68
rshak
419 posts
 
We called 'em "Dyna-Flaps." The "excuse" given by RCA at the time of their introduction - circa 1970 - had to do with oil prices/need to conserve oil. In addition to being flimsy, they were prone to other pressing defects, like "bubbles" which, if they could be tracked at all, sounded like a *dull thud* for 3 or 4 revolutions.

Having said all that, some actually sounded pretty decent to very good - - my favorite is ARL 2-0731, which contains both Schubert Piano Trios performed by Rubinstein/Szeryng/Fournier.
eddaytona
216 posts
 
We should all mail a letter to RCA and demand they stop making them.
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 
Anyhow, "dynaflex" sucks. But at least it still sounds better than the lifeless German CD issue.
I only have a few Dynaflex LPs, and I only had a few back in the day. Although the thinness and flexibility always seemed odd, I never had an issue with the sound.

Now that I have a higher rez LP playback system than what I had in the '70s, I can hear differences among different types of LPs and make adjustments easier. What I've found with thinner LPs in general and Dynaflex in particular, is that they sound better with a record weight or clamp on them. When I clamp my Dynaflexes, sound quality--including slam, weight, heft, bass extension--is not an issue.
johnnyb53
3,510 posts
 

05-05-08: Rshak
In addition to being flimsy, they were prone to other pressing defects, like "bubbles" which, if they could be tracked at all, sounded like a *dull thud* for 3 or 4 revolutions.
I've encountered bubbles more often on Living Stereo shaded dog pressings than Dynaflexes. Of course YMMV.

Looking at Dynaflex (and reading the original RCA ad copy), it seems like a scam, but I never had a sonic issue with a Dynaflex and some of the ones I have now sound particularly good.
schipo
1,268 posts
 
But at least it still sounds better than the lifeless German CD issue.

I just listen to the German cd reissue of "Belafonte at carnegie hall" not lifeless at all to my ears. I wish most reissue's sound this great.
More to discover