John Atkinson wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:

There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.

That is correct, in the early 1990s.

Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.

When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
can be polished out.

In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
still play. They do.

I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
of Stereophile.

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Howard Ferstler

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

John Atkinson wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:

There's a story going around that Stereophile pseudonomous author
Sam Tellig once wrote [an] article recommending that readers treat
their CDs with Armor-All as a tweak.

That is correct, in the early 1990s.

Supposedly, the actual results of the treatment was damaging.

When there was damage, it appeared to emante from the scratches
accidentally introduced by too rough a treatment. These scratches
can be polished out.

In 1991 I treated one of identiucal pairs of CDs with ArmorAll.
Every couple of years I get the treated discs out to see if they
still play. They do.

I am also investigating the incidence of c!/C2 errors compared
with the untreated CDs for an article to appear in a future issue
of Stereophile.

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

Stephen

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
serious, too.

Howard Ferstler

Harold the Pinhead Tweako Knucklehead Plagiarizer said:

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious.

Clearly you're drawing a correlation between frequency of publication
and degree of misguidedness, maleducatedness, and dumbness. The more
published a person is, the more he has those undesirable traits.

You've done well, Clerkie. Whoever said you can't do statistics was
clearly underrating you. ;-)

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke. Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
serious, too.

You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?

Stephen

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
serious, too.

You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined.

The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
label side of some discs.

Howard Ferstler

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

I think he was being serious, just like so many other
misguided, sub-educated, and downright dumb tweako
journalists are serious. Like John, this guy was not aware
of just how impressionable the magazine's readers were (and
remain). Remember, he had to publish a retraction that also
described how to remove the Armor All. I think he was dead
serious with both columns, and his readers were dead
serious, too.

You think the $1.25 tweak was "dead serious"?

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined.

LOL! You don't know what the "$1.25 tweak" is, do you?

The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
label side of some discs.

Joke gone bad.

Stephen

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

LOL! You don't know what the "$1.25 tweak" is, do you?

And I do not care, either.

The article basically stated that Armor All made the discs
sound better. That in itself was preposterous enough. But
then it was discovered that the substance could damage the
label side of some discs.

Joke gone bad.

You responded to my post in two minutes.

Do you have a job? You appear to be full-time welded to your
keyboard.

Howard Ferstler

Howard Ferstler said:

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined.


How many people would have done this?
Personally, I know of no one in my direct surroundings who ever tried
to color or polish their CDs with anything.

That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
around?

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander deWaal said:

That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
around?

Cheaper is better!

Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined.

How many people would have done this?

I have no idea. However, as best I can remember Tellig did
write a column that tried to undo the damage. If the problem
was minimal, why would he go to the trouble to try to fix
things with a follow-up column? Stereophile magazine has
never been in the habit of publishing "retraction" columns,
so I assume that there was quite a stink.

Personally, I know of no one in my direct surroundings who ever tried
to color or polish their CDs with anything.

You obviously hang out with a saner bunch than the group who
reacted to Tellig's column.

That CD jewel case is bad enough as it is, though.
Why haven't they found something better in those 20+ years that CD is
around?

I get lots of CDs to review, and some of them come in padded
envelopes instead of boxes. However, even with box shipping
I find cases that have the hinge tabs broken. Fortunately, I
keep a stock of spare empty boxes on hand. One big problem
with some jewel boxes is that the center gripper will often
not let go of the damned disc without applying way more pull
to the removal than I care to apply. Once I remove the disc,
I may have to file the tabs down a bit to make future
removals less traumatic.

The main thing that bugs me these days are the edge tapes we
find on the jewel cases containing the discs. Not every
company has such things, however (some of the smaller
outfits do not do this, to their credit), and I mainly find
them on DVD movies. Sometimes, all three non-hinge edges of
the DVD case will be taped over.

Howard Ferstler

Sander deWaal wrote:
Howard Ferstler said:

snipped

It is when following the obviously moronic instructions may
have resulted in many individuals having some of their CD
recordings ruined [by treating them wirh Armor All].


How many people would have done this?


Sadly, probably as many as "treated" their CDs with green pens. Both
ideas are equally absurd. Some folks probably "treated" their discs
with both a green pen *and* Armor All, just to be sure. And then, the
truly gullible will use a Bedini Clarifier just before playback. :-(

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke.

Where's the illustrated guide that helps Stereophile readers separate the
jokes from the real stuff?

Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

That's the basis of an important question - is Stereophile serious about the
RCL or is that yet another joke?

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All? At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

Now you get it: a joke.

Where's the illustrated guide that helps Stereophile readers separate the
jokes from the real stuff?

He-he-he.

Or do you think he was serious with his $1.25
tweak, too?

That's the basis of an important question - is Stereophile serious about the
RCL or is that yet another joke?

No, it's a handy marketing tool, like a car magazine's annual picks.

Stephen

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message


How could anyone with an IQ above 85 be suckered into
coating their CD recordings with Armor All?

You're asking the right question of the right guy.

At best it would
do nothing bad or good (although fooling with it would eat
up a lot of time doing the applying) and at worst it could
damage the discs.

That appears to be how it all worked out in the end.

Apparently, in some cases it did just that. I believe that
Tellig did a follow-up column later on that explained how to
remove Armor All.

What a joke.

...except to the hapless Stereophile readers who ruined parts of their CD
collection.