new shellac disks, anyone?

Anything goes! Inventors! Artists! Cutting edge solutions to old problems. But also non-commercial usage of record cutting. Cost- effective, cost-ineffective, nutso, brilliant, terribly fabulous and sometimes fabulously terrible ideas.

Moderators: piaptk, tragwag, Steve E., Aussie0zborn

Post Reply
User avatar
ArchaicRecords
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: USA: Lexington, KY

new shellac disks, anyone?

Post: # 18388Unread post ArchaicRecords
Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:15 am

Has anyone yet found a pressing plant that can press actual shellac discs?
This came up here a few years before, where a musician would like to have records made that can be played on handcranking gramophones and victrolas.
What would it take for a pressing plant to substitute shellac material in place of vinyl? Some of the old documentaries about how records were made in the 1940s explain the recipe for shellac. Would the melting point of this material be the same as vinyl, or would it need to be hotter? Would the metal stampers be the same material, and would the press operate at the same speed? Would shellac material need a harder pressure? Are all the ingredients of shellac still available, or did any become illegal due to EPA regulations? Or rare and obscure?
Is there material you can cut into for one-off cuts that can be played on handcrankers? Are you successful at using picnic plates for multiple plays on handcrankers, and would polycarbonate be sufficient?
archaicrecords.com

User avatar
mossboss
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 8:18 am
Location: Australia.

Post: # 18419Unread post mossboss
Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:17 pm

Phewwww Ask subcontract bob member here Cheers
Chris

User avatar
Angus McCarthy
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:22 pm
Location: Bloomsburg, PA, USA

Post: # 18434Unread post Angus McCarthy
Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:53 pm

I would assume you could still play vinyl 78s on handcrankers provided you only used fibre needles with minimum weight.

I doubt you could retrofit a fully automatic "vinyl era" press to work with shellac. Your best bet might be to track down somebody who still has an older manual press in working order.

User avatar
ArchaicRecords
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: USA: Lexington, KY

Post: # 18499Unread post ArchaicRecords
Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:03 pm

Thanks.... good suggestions. Playing back regular vinyl, lacquer, and polycarbonate discs with fibre needles sounds like the easiest way to go.
archaicrecords.com

User avatar
mossboss
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 8:18 am
Location: Australia.

Post: # 18501Unread post mossboss
Mon Mar 05, 2012 3:28 am

Yes good suggestion but I am afraid it will only remain as such
Besides a manual press he has to have the ability to cut a wider track
No big deal but not that easy
Ability to blend the material
To source the raw materials blend them up in a calendar as they are a nightmare
He needs to have a compression moulder with heated platens besides steam
The material is thermosetting rather than a thermoplastic so pre heat with steam set it with extra heat
One needs deep deep pockets for all that
It is hard enough keeping Vinyl presses alive let alone stuff which was redundant 50-60 years ago which has gone to the scrap heap long long time ago
By the way there is a u tube clip of an RCA plant back in the 40's where the process of blending Shellac as well as the equipment is clearly shown
An exercise in futility looking to press shellac records now days
Not impossible but costly beyond most remaining plants that's for sure
Good luck
Cheers
Chris

User avatar
greybeard
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:06 pm

Post: # 18511Unread post greybeard
Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:04 pm

Hi Mossy,

EMI were among the last to keep up the 78 rpm format - they did not believe in the LP in the beginning. The last 78 rpm records to be phased out were records of Royalty - that was in 1962. But of course we know that 78s were produced in India and possibly Africa into the 1960s.

So it is not surprising that it is in an EMI patent from 1957 that we find a reference to how shellac records are pressed:
"Shellac records can be satisfactorily pressed at a hydraulic pressure of 1,250 pounds per square inch and a steam pressure of 100 pounds per square inch with a moulding cycle of 25-35 seconds. The normal weight of 10" records procuded under these conditions is 6-6½ ounces with an average thickness ranging between 0.068" and 0.075"." (British Patent No. 865,702).

Shellac-based record material was not thermosetting, which is seen by the fact that the ground-up scrap they used in the mixtures did not replace part of the filler, i.e. the slate dust, but rather a percentage of the whole mix.

Alas, shellac became expensive, especially in times of war, and substitutes were found. I have no doubt that several of the shellac substitutes around did make for thermosetting products.

I would think it worthwhile for just one record press in the World to manufacture coarse-groove records out of a material that will tolerate steel needles. There are plenty of metals around, and until 2030 such records will still have represented half of our commercial recorded legacy. This is a obviously an international project, because I do not believe that sales of records will be able to keep it afloat.
Cheers, and hang on to all the 78s you have!

User avatar
mossboss
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 8:18 am
Location: Australia.

Post: # 18514Unread post mossboss
Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:28 pm

Hey George
You are quite correct of course as always Pointing out that the scrap was part of the mix is also correct
However there is a need to blend the material in a heavy duty set of rolls a calendar which of course a necessity so as to get uniformity
Where would one find that?
Any way slate dust as well as some other fillers will always remain as such in the mix
The shellac as well as gum and dope including dyes as well as carbon black would of course remain unaltered by heat However the material was preheated after blending where there need for high pressure or a greater than 100 psi steam would not be required
Not sure about this 78 trip but George I am as you know able to do them however the time as well as effort is just not warranted in my view
It was an international effort at some stage but it has all gone wrong as you are well aware
Never mind it was a damn good effort by all concerned with half way results so far May be we can complete the project some time in the future
Cheers
Chris

Post Reply