I’ve run the Relax program on 40 records now. It’s undoubtedly a significant sonic improvement. It’s not removing ticks/pops but if you have a quiet record to start with it’s now quieter. Everything jumps out of the grooves and is more alive sounding.
LP flattener
- Thread starter joeling
- Start date
That’s the tempering process. You can read about it here https://www.afi-record-flattener.com/afi_flat_duo.htm
I see the person who runs the audiocirc blog is also using one and I think he posts here. Would be interesting to get his take too.
Someone here just did me a great favour by flattening two records of mine (I asked him if he would and he agreed, but I never asked permission to give his name here so will leave that to him).
Of the two records, one had two large warps in it that, if played, would actually send my cartridge airborne followed by it bouncing hard on the cantilever, a major risk to my cartridge. The other, a Dynaflex, had one mild warp but enough to affect the sound so also not played.
The Orb owner started out very gently at the lowest settings and times, which helped but not enough. Both needed a second go at least, but the process succeeded.
The worst record is now playable with only a very slight movement up and down of my cartridge at one point on each rotation to show a minor defect, but absolutely no effect on the sound. I have seen that much movement on brand new pressings. The Dynaflex is absolutely flat with no evidence whatsoever that it was ever warped.
Orb's instructions say do not put flexidiscs into the machine (I think those paper thin records found in magazines at times?), but did not mention Dynaflex records (also fairly thin). The results with mine suggest that, with care, there should be no problem with these. The heavily warped record I should have just replaced from Discogs, however it was a from a friend who thought it Kaput so I thought if I could repair it and record it playing back for my friend?
My indirect experience with the Orb tells me it is a marvellous product that does what it says on the tin. Highly recommended.
Of the two records, one had two large warps in it that, if played, would actually send my cartridge airborne followed by it bouncing hard on the cantilever, a major risk to my cartridge. The other, a Dynaflex, had one mild warp but enough to affect the sound so also not played.
The Orb owner started out very gently at the lowest settings and times, which helped but not enough. Both needed a second go at least, but the process succeeded.
The worst record is now playable with only a very slight movement up and down of my cartridge at one point on each rotation to show a minor defect, but absolutely no effect on the sound. I have seen that much movement on brand new pressings. The Dynaflex is absolutely flat with no evidence whatsoever that it was ever warped.
Orb's instructions say do not put flexidiscs into the machine (I think those paper thin records found in magazines at times?), but did not mention Dynaflex records (also fairly thin). The results with mine suggest that, with care, there should be no problem with these. The heavily warped record I should have just replaced from Discogs, however it was a from a friend who thought it Kaput so I thought if I could repair it and record it playing back for my friend?
My indirect experience with the Orb tells me it is a marvellous product that does what it says on the tin. Highly recommended.
Both of these records presented their own challenges, and it was very satisfying to get to good results with them 
The first was really quite warped - more than I anticipated - and I was worried that while it might be possible to flatten it the warping had "stretched" the record such that it would retain physical distortions once flat and remain unplayable, which is something I’ve seen a couple of times before. The trick here is "slow and steady" - low heat, do one side, then flip and do another pass. Each pass, flattening from opposite sides, helps to gently encourage the record back to flatness.
The Dynaflex, well I was just worried I was going to melt it as it was so thin! I did a little research before starting, as I'd never attempted one before, and found some online suggestions to use much shorter heating sessions - you can manually abort the heating at any time and jump to cooling - so I started with the lowest heat setting and aborted at 15 minutes (instead of the normal two hours). The first pass flattened the edges but left some dishing in the middle. So I flipped the record and did a 30 minute pass and this time it came out pan flat. And not melted!
As soon as @Rensselaer's records were finished, my own latest arrivals were queued up for attention. Not a device I can live without these days.
The first was really quite warped - more than I anticipated - and I was worried that while it might be possible to flatten it the warping had "stretched" the record such that it would retain physical distortions once flat and remain unplayable, which is something I’ve seen a couple of times before. The trick here is "slow and steady" - low heat, do one side, then flip and do another pass. Each pass, flattening from opposite sides, helps to gently encourage the record back to flatness.
The Dynaflex, well I was just worried I was going to melt it as it was so thin! I did a little research before starting, as I'd never attempted one before, and found some online suggestions to use much shorter heating sessions - you can manually abort the heating at any time and jump to cooling - so I started with the lowest heat setting and aborted at 15 minutes (instead of the normal two hours). The first pass flattened the edges but left some dishing in the middle. So I flipped the record and did a 30 minute pass and this time it came out pan flat. And not melted!
As soon as @Rensselaer's records were finished, my own latest arrivals were queued up for attention. Not a device I can live without these days.
Last edited:
I've owned an Orb machine for a few years now and probably have a 99% success rate. The few records that don't, I usually know ahead of time what the result will be.
Indispensable machine!
Indispensable machine!
After much procrastination and spurred on by the number of new records that arrive warped both from bricks and mortar record shops and Amazon ,I purchased an ORB DF-01a+ machine in December 2023.
I must pay tribute to all the forum members who gave their detailed experiences.
First the advice to use only the low setting for coloured vinyl is spot on.
I have not had one single failure on this setting even with ridiculously warped records.
The medium setting for 120-140 g records has also been faultless .
Using the medium setting for 180g records was a bit hit and miss, sometimes requiring a second go through the cycle.
I have found the high cycle to be best for 180-200g vinyl with no casualties and a perfect result 98% of the time.Occasionally I have had to do these twice.
Buy one with confidence.
I must pay tribute to all the forum members who gave their detailed experiences.
First the advice to use only the low setting for coloured vinyl is spot on.
I have not had one single failure on this setting even with ridiculously warped records.
The medium setting for 120-140 g records has also been faultless .
Using the medium setting for 180g records was a bit hit and miss, sometimes requiring a second go through the cycle.
I have found the high cycle to be best for 180-200g vinyl with no casualties and a perfect result 98% of the time.Occasionally I have had to do these twice.
Buy one with confidence.
For those who own the ORB DF-01a (non+), have you tried any picture discs in your machines? I'm curious about potential damage due to their construction. I've flattened hundreds of regular records in my machine but this is the first picture disc.
I've got a Vinyl Flat but I'm still on the fence about it. It works, but I hear a difference in the sound after it's been used on a record. It could be my imagination but I don't think so.
I have an Orb DF-01iA from Japan which I purchased I think about two years ago. As others have said it works to mostly flatten the record (more than enough to be able to play the record without skipping or other distractions) most every time with few exceptions (it is very difficult to get a warped record perfectly flat no matter what you do). I rarely purchase a colored LP but do have records of most of the different colors and all of the various thicknesses and the Orb works/does its job on most all of them for me. For some records I do need to do a second cycle. The exception being records which are just too warped to flatten the record. I do not blame the Orb for this as it and the other record flatteners can only do so much. I have had no problems whatsoever with my Orb. It effectively does what it is designed to do. So for new records which are severely warped (some call them potato chips) which from experience I do not think I can flatten enough with the Orb to play well I send them back to the seller and either get my money back or get a new copy. I try not to buy used records which I do not think I can effectively flatten.
I can discern no degradation in sound with the records I have flattened with the Orb. I have some records where I have exact duplicate copies, i.e. same mastering, same production run and the like and to satisfy myself that the Orb is not harming the records I have compared, using very good equipment, the record which has not been run through the Orb with the record which has been run through the Orb and I could not tell which was which, i.e. no sound degradation for the record which was run through the Orb which I can hear. So from my experience, if you follow the instructions you are unlikely to harm the record by using the Orb and in most cases will be able to get the record much, much flatter and able to be played without distraction.
BUT, I have come to believe that you not only need a record flattener, but you also really need a turntable with a properly engineered and thought out vacuum system, a properly executed vacuum hold down system and a properly set up turntable (far too many turntables out there are just not set up as well as they should be set up). In fact I have come to believe that a proper vacuum hold down system is a must. The good vacuum hold down systems work not only well on flat records but also on records which were warped and which have been run through the Orb or other proper record flattener. More and more turntable manufacturers are offering models with vacuum hold down systems, so there is now good availability of turntables with vacuum hold down systems starting at under $10,000 and up and up from there. So if you are serious about vinyl and can afford to do so I urge everyone to consider a turntable with a good vacuum hold down system if you do not already own one, along with a record flattener, a very good record cleaning system and other devices/gadgets such as static removers. Given that you have a turntable and system which are up to the job, the more carefully you choose which records to buy, the flatter the record, the cleaner the record, the less static there is and what not the more you will enjoy your records. And isn't that what all of this is about, i.e. being able to enjoy the music you like in the best possible way.
Of course there are as we are dealing with physics and math where everything affects everything else, but I have come to believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.
My view is the opposite. If you have flat records, you don’t need vacuum hold down.
It’s interesting that the current #1 TT (according to Fremer), doesn’t have it.
Vacuum hold-down has one drawback: most manufacturers don’t know how to design and implement it or can’t integrate it with a huge profit. Every other “criticism” you hear is just a lie.
I think that's extreme - it's certainly not "just a lie". It's a design choice, and one which adds an additional motor and therefore sources of noise and vibration. You are also, paradoxically, decreasing the coupling between record and platter because the platter has a new surface which must have holes in it, and therefore a reduced surface area.
When we look at cost no object designs such as the Wilson Benesch GMT ONE and even the Nagra Anniversary, they explicitly chose not to use vacuum hold down.
It is not difficult to add - look at SAT's implementation - it's simple and works well.. It's one of several design choices, each one with tradeoffs. If you believe otherwise, you are simply misguided!
When we look at cost no object designs such as the Wilson Benesch GMT ONE and even the Nagra Anniversary, they explicitly chose not to use vacuum hold down.
It is not difficult to add - look at SAT's implementation - it's simple and works well.. It's one of several design choices, each one with tradeoffs. If you believe otherwise, you are simply misguided!
The problem is that record warpage is a fact of life with vinyl. There is no flattener out there which can get the record perfectly flat without harming the record and virtually no records come perfectly flat. And the better your equipment the more you notice the sound issues caused by records which are not perfectly flat. VPI uses a Periphery Ring Clamp, but that has its own issues and is why so few manufacturers take that route. So you are left with playing records which are not perfectly flat or using a vacuum hold down which gets closer than anything else to getting the record to lay flat. There is a good reason why the state of the art is headed towards vacuum hold down systems. Even Mark Dohmann has come up with a vacuum hold down system which will be available in 2026. And, given their current association with Mark Dohmann (they have worked together on arms and cartridges) it is my understanding that even Wilson-Benesch is looking into a vacuum hold down system.
I fully agree that warpage is a very common problem. About 50% of my brand new albums come warped.
However, if you find that your flattener is not cutting it, try the AFI. I had the ORB DF01 (base model) and it wasn't great. It worked for about half of the records I used. The AFI is much better and has worked in just about every case. I think it failed on 5 out of more than 200 records I have put through it. The latest model is probably even better.
However, if you find that your flattener is not cutting it, try the AFI. I had the ORB DF01 (base model) and it wasn't great. It worked for about half of the records I used. The AFI is much better and has worked in just about every case. I think it failed on 5 out of more than 200 records I have put through it. The latest model is probably even better.
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |