| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Record Cleaning
Ok... I'm gonna get a nitty gritty for my birthday (George
promised).... but I have some doubts. I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. I diligently remove surface dust with a discwasher before every playing. Anyway... I played a Classic Records copy of Sara MClachlin Surfacing without cleaning and the Dido albums with cleaning (both their latest quiex sv-p vinyl)... and IMO, surfacing is just as quiet or even quieter than the Dido albums. One of the didos is a bit noisy on the lead in. I had hoped that cleaning the records before a stylus touched them would be a significant improvement... but apparently not in this small sample. And in another rant... the heavy jacket protector they use to replace the original since it gets opened, is so tight it takes too much effort to put the album away. So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote: Ok... I'm gonna get a nitty gritty for my birthday (George promised).... but I have some doubts. I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. I diligently remove surface dust with a discwasher before every playing. Anyway... I played a Classic Records copy of Sara MClachlin Surfacing without cleaning and the Dido albums with cleaning (both their latest quiex sv-p vinyl)... and IMO, surfacing is just as quiet or even quieter than the Dido albums. One of the didos is a bit noisy on the lead in. I had hoped that cleaning the records before a stylus touched them would be a significant improvement... but apparently not in this small sample. And in another rant... the heavy jacket protector they use to replace the original since it gets opened, is so tight it takes too much effort to put the album away. So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW Check this out, Scott: http://audioenz.co.nz/2006/vinyl_noise.shtml Boon |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I'm not sure if Scott's post is the start of a serious discussion of LP care or some kind of bait. Anyway, I'll bite and hopefully won't awaken the r.a.o. howling monkeys. Since the stylus contacts the vinyl with fairly high pressure any contamination that causes audible noise is either embedded in the vinyl groove or strongly adheres. Otherwise the stylus will just sweep it out of the way or collect in a little ball where the tip and cantilever meet. At any rate any kind of dry brush or other means to collect the loose debris is not going to make a substantial difference in surface noise. In my experience that includes using the Diskwasher with the recommended 3 drops of fluid. Particles that will not yield under the high pressure of the stylus are certainly not going to budge with brush bristles. Collecting the loose dust is however is useful to prevent grunge buildup on the stylus and cantilever. A foreign particle embedded in the groove generally causes permanent damage. If it is somehow dislodged then the groove is left with a dimple which will make a less drastic "tick" so there can be some improvement. There is no hope for gritty recycled vinyl. The worst I've encountered is pressings by Atlantic Records from he 70's. Some contamination consists of material that only adhheres to the groove and can be removed by chemical means. For mild cases I run a thin stripe of fluid across the leading edge of the Diskwasher. Sweep the record a few turns wet then use the dry part of the brush to gather up the remaining liquid. I periodically clean the brush with a cotton ball and 91% isopropyl alcohol (never put alcohol on a record!). For tougher cases I prepare a dilute mixture of glycerin (in the form of "Photo-Flo" used for developing film) and distilled water. I wet the record thoroughly, wipe along the grooves with a cotton ball than rinse with distilled water. TB |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
wrote: ScottW wrote: A foreign particle embedded in the groove generally causes permanent damage. If it is somehow dislodged then the groove is left with a dimple which will make a less drastic "tick" so there can be some improvement. How about grunge noise rather than tics? I would file grunge under the adhering category, able to be washed out. So you think a cotton ball is better suited to get down in the grooves than disk doctor brushes? No, I've never tried wet brushing. I've had decent results with the cotton and I do it so rarely that I haven't felt compelled to buy other products. The only records I've had to wash come from flea markets or friends basements, so theres little financial justification. Tim |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
So you think a cotton ball is better suited to get down in the grooves than disk doctor brushes? I forgot to say that even if the cotton strands don't get down into the groove maybe they just swirl the fluid around enough to lift the adhering dirt away, with the help of the glycerin wetting agent. I'm also intrigued with the idea of playing the record wet. I have an old but not excessively worn stylus I might try one day. TB |
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. If you pay four times the price of the CD you can expect something special. Distortion, surface noise, crackles. :-) -- Eiron No good deed ever goes unpunished. |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
wrote in message ups.com... ScottW wrote: So you think a cotton ball is better suited to get down in the grooves than disk doctor brushes? I forgot to say that even if the cotton strands don't get down into the groove maybe they just swirl the fluid around enough to lift the adhering dirt away, with the help of the glycerin wetting agent. Disk doctor cleaning solutions wet well... I'm about to clean a couple of discs I just got from Sundazed and I have to say...I'm most diappointed. The packaging has no crumple zone so UPS buckled one corner which in turn crumpled a corner of the outer sleeves. The record aren't obviously scratched... but they are filthy. I mean dirty with dust and fingerprints and some stained looking areas. No way I try to play them without cleaning and if they sound like they look...they're going back. I'll accept the wrinkled sleeves but if the records are scratched or as noisy they look...I'm sending 'em back. I'm also intrigued with the idea of playing the record wet. I have an old but not excessively worn stylus I might try one day. I'd be more worried about wicking moisture up the cantilever into the cart body where the coils would most certainly not approve. ScottW |
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Eiron" wrote in message ... ScottW wrote: I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. If you pay four times the price of the CD you can expect something special. Distortion, surface noise, crackles. :-) I have 2 CD versions of Genesis SEBTP, an old Charisma (?) label LP and a Classic Records remaster. The Classic Records version is IMO, the best of all of them. Another example is Kate Bush Hounds of Love... the old CD is just awful (I don't if there is a remaster out there but there should be), and I have a Simply Vinyl release....which is far better than the CD. I have Mclachlin Solace on CD and it sounds good... very similar mix to the Classic Records Surfacing. So you never know. I have more CDs than albums and probably buy 10 CDs for every album (so much more to choose from)... but no reason I shouldn't make them all sound as good as I can. This thread isn't about CDs vs vinyl. This is about making the recordings I own and buy sound as good as they can. Only a howling monkee can't see that. ScottW |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
"Eiron" wrote in message ... ScottW wrote: I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. If you pay four times the price of the CD you can expect something special. Distortion, surface noise, crackles. :-) I have 2 CD versions of Genesis SEBTP, an old Charisma (?) label LP and a Classic Records remaster. The Classic Records version is IMO, the best of all of them. Another example is Kate Bush Hounds of Love... the old CD is just awful (I don't if there is a remaster out there but there should be), and I have a Simply Vinyl release....which is far better than the CD. I have Mclachlin Solace on CD and it sounds good... very similar mix to the Classic Records Surfacing. So you never know. I have more CDs than albums and probably buy 10 CDs for every album (so much more to choose from)... but no reason I shouldn't make them all sound as good as I can. This thread isn't about CDs vs vinyl. This is about making the recordings I own and buy sound as good as they can. Only a howling monkee can't see that. I thought it was about your Dido albums, which were recorded digitally so if you want to hear what the master sounded like, keep your vinyl pristine and unplayed, and listen to the CD. Of course you may prefer compression, distortion, speed variation, surface noise and crackles. The best version of a thirty-odd year old LP is a different matter. -- Eiron No good deed ever goes unpunished. |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"ScottW" wrote in message
oups.com So you think a cotton ball is better suited to get down in the grooves than disk doctor brushes? Hey...I'll give it a shot...I've got a couple albums that have nothing to lose  .I'm at least as skeptical of cotton balls as you are, Scott. I use several layers of velvet cloth wrapped around a rounded piece of wood. |
|
#13
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Eiron" wrote in message ... ScottW wrote: This thread isn't about CDs vs vinyl. This is about making the recordings I own and buy sound as good as they can. Only a howling monkee can't see that. I thought it was about your Dido albums, which were recorded digitally Maybe that explains why I'm not very impressed with the mix. so if you want to hear what the master sounded like, keep your vinyl pristine and unplayed, and listen to the CD. Of course you may prefer compression, None evident on surfacing... I think that while vinyl may not have the same dynamic range capability of CD...when done right it is sufficient for my preferred listening level (which isn't all that loud). On a good record, the noise floor is below my hearing threshold (is there a need for it to be lower?) and the loudest passages are as loud I want them to be (is there a need to be louder?) distortion, This new cart is amazingly clear..... speed variation, surface noise and crackles. Thanks for demonstrating that you really haven't made much effort to quality vinyl playback. Speed variation is an argument Mckelvy makes and it wasn't an audible issue on my BSR changer of '69 nor any other TT since. BTW, Do you have any albums you'd like to give me? The best version of a thirty-odd year old LP is a different matter. I don't know about best versions but I have a few OOP LPs that were never released on CD AFAICT. I won't argue that there is just a bit more satisfaction to spinning up a record and getting highly satisfying musical reproduction than there is to playing a CD. I takes some effort..but IMO it is worth it. CDs are so easy....even the howling monkees can do it. ScottW |
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
Thanks for demonstrating that you really haven't made much effort to quality vinyl playback. Speed variation is an argument Mckelvy makes and it wasn't an audible issue on my BSR changer of '69 nor any other TT since. BTW, Do you have any albums you'd like to give me? Your turntable may be perfect but how many of your albums have an offset hole? Wow of 1% at the end of a side is not uncommon. When I give up listening to vinyl you can bid for it on ebay. -- Eiron No good deed ever goes unpunished. |
|
#15
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
Eiron said:
ScottW wrote: Thanks for demonstrating that you really haven't made much effort to quality vinyl playback. Speed variation is an argument Mckelvy makes and it wasn't an audible issue on my BSR changer of '69 nor any other TT since. BTW, Do you have any albums you'd like to give me? Your turntable may be perfect but how many of your albums have an offset hole? Wow of 1% at the end of a side is not uncommon. When I give up listening to vinyl you can bid for it on ebay. You expect people to *pay* for your crackling, popping, wowling and noisy dust-and-fingertips-ridden records? ;-) -- - Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. - |
|
#16
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article N%hgg.39914$fG3.31417@dukeread09,
"ScottW" wrote: "Eiron" wrote in message ... ScottW wrote: This thread isn't about CDs vs vinyl. This is about making the recordings I own and buy sound as good as they can. Only a howling monkee can't see that. I thought it was about your Dido albums, which were recorded digitally Maybe that explains why I'm not very impressed with the mix. I've encountered digital pop recordings that sounded better on lp, but that's rare. so if you want to hear what the master sounded like, keep your vinyl pristine and unplayed, and listen to the CD. Unless the cd version is over-compressed and digitally clipped like the Santana of several years ago. A more recent comparison would be the new Chili Peppers cd vs the Steve Hoffman-mastered lp. Stephen |
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote: Ok... I'm gonna get a nitty gritty for my birthday (George promised).... but I have some doubts. I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. I diligently remove surface dust with a discwasher before every playing. Anyway... I played a Classic Records copy of Sara MClachlin Surfacing without cleaning and the Dido albums with cleaning (both their latest quiex sv-p vinyl)... and IMO, surfacing is just as quiet or even quieter than the Dido albums. One of the didos is a bit noisy on the lead in. I had hoped that cleaning the records before a stylus touched them would be a significant improvement... but apparently not in this small sample. And in another rant... the heavy jacket protector they use to replace the original since it gets opened, is so tight it takes too much effort to put the album away. So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol |
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article ,
MINe 109 wrote: In article N%hgg.39914$fG3.31417@dukeread09, "ScottW" wrote: "Eiron" wrote in message ... ScottW wrote: This thread isn't about CDs vs vinyl. This is about making the recordings I own and buy sound as good as they can. Only a howling monkee can't see that. I thought it was about your Dido albums, which were recorded digitally Maybe that explains why I'm not very impressed with the mix. I've encountered digital pop recordings that sounded better on lp, but that's rare. so if you want to hear what the master sounded like, keep your vinyl pristine and unplayed, and listen to the CD. Unless the cd version is over-compressed and digitally clipped like the Santana of several years ago. A more recent comparison would be the new Chili Peppers cd vs the Steve Hoffman-mastered lp. Stephen At the Stereophile show yesterday, Fremer stated that in Europe, for new recordings that are released on both CD and LP, LP is outselling CD. This is because so many people are downloading rather than buying the CD. Interesting. |
|
#19
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
Jenn said: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Clicks and pops are irrelevant. Hearing damage is irrelevant. You will be assimilated. -- A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic. |
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW |
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article . com,
"ScottW" wrote: Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW The MBL room happened to be the first one I heard. Very wonderful sound, IMO. Certainly among the best I've ever heard. |
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . com, "ScottW" wrote: Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW The MBL room happened to be the first one I heard. Very wonderful sound, IMO. Certainly among the best I've ever heard. Could you describe the setup? Did you hear the 101 E's? Come on give it up, don't hold back. ScottW |
|
#23
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article fhmgg.40221$fG3.25098@dukeread09,
"ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . com, "ScottW" wrote: Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW The MBL room happened to be the first one I heard. Very wonderful sound, IMO. Certainly among the best I've ever heard. Could you describe the setup? Did you hear the 101 E's? Come on give it up, don't hold back. ScottW Yep, the 101 E, and MBL's top of the line electronics, including their new transport. Also playing was an SME turntable with SME arm and Lyra cartridge. The sound was truly amazing. Big, ballsy, while at the same time delicate and detailed. I heard stuff on the famous Reiner "Night on Bald Mountain" RCA recording that I had never heard before. The bass rocks your socks. The timbres were the most true of any system that I can recall. I won't say what was the "best system" at the show, because all of the rooms are different, etc. But I was most impressed by this system. |
|
#24
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article fhmgg.40221$fG3.25098@dukeread09, "ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . com, "ScottW" wrote: Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW The MBL room happened to be the first one I heard. Very wonderful sound, IMO. Certainly among the best I've ever heard. Could you describe the setup? Did you hear the 101 E's? Come on give it up, don't hold back. ScottW Yep, the 101 E, and MBL's top of the line electronics, including their new transport. Also playing was an SME turntable with SME arm and Lyra cartridge. The sound was truly amazing. Big, ballsy, while at the same time delicate and detailed. I heard stuff on the famous Reiner "Night on Bald Mountain" RCA recording that I had never heard before. Was this Stereo? I've heard they do multichannel setups as well. The bass rocks your socks. How big is the room? IME speakers that can rock a big room in a show often don't work that well at all at home. The timbres were the most true of any system that I can recall. We're you able to get a feel for their imaging? That 360 radiation is unique and I wonder if they image well or create a more uniform sound field in the room. I won't say what was the "best system" at the show, because all of the rooms are different, etc. But I was most impressed by this system. Thanks for your comments. ScottW |
|
#25
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article
, Jenn wrote: In article , MINe 109 wrote: "Eiron" wrote in message so if you want to hear what the master sounded like, keep your vinyl pristine and unplayed, and listen to the CD. Unless the cd version is over-compressed and digitally clipped like the Santana of several years ago. A more recent comparison would be the new Chili Peppers cd vs the Steve Hoffman-mastered lp. At the Stereophile show yesterday, Fremer stated that in Europe, for new recordings that are released on both CD and LP, LP is outselling CD. This is because so many people are downloading rather than buying the CD. Interesting. Indeed. Maybe there's a change in collecting in which the end result is how many gigs one can accumulate and copying someone's tunes is as good as saying hello. A cd would be just an unnecessary step. On the plus side, transferring mp3 doesn't require handiwipes the way shopping for old records does. Stephen |
|
#26
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article aVmgg.40223$fG3.36251@dukeread09,
"ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article fhmgg.40221$fG3.25098@dukeread09, "ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article . com, "ScottW" wrote: Jenn wrote: By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol Did you make it to the MBL room? I was planning to go but have to prep the house for company next week end. ScottW The MBL room happened to be the first one I heard. Very wonderful sound, IMO. Certainly among the best I've ever heard. Could you describe the setup? Did you hear the 101 E's? Come on give it up, don't hold back. ScottW Yep, the 101 E, and MBL's top of the line electronics, including their new transport. Also playing was an SME turntable with SME arm and Lyra cartridge. The sound was truly amazing. Big, ballsy, while at the same time delicate and detailed. I heard stuff on the famous Reiner "Night on Bald Mountain" RCA recording that I had never heard before. Was this Stereo? I've heard they do multichannel setups as well. Yes, stereo. The bass rocks your socks. How big is the room? IME speakers that can rock a big room in a show often don't work that well at all at home. Rough guess, of course: about 30' x 50' The timbres were the most true of any system that I can recall. We're you able to get a feel for their imaging? That 360 radiation is unique and I wonder if they image well or create a more uniform sound field in the room. I wouldn't say that what I heard had that "pinpoint imaging" that some people strive for, but it was quite concert-hall like in its image presentation. I won't say what was the "best system" at the show, because all of the rooms are different, etc. But I was most impressed by this system. Thanks for your comments. ScottW My pleasure. I had a great time. If you squint real hard, you can make me out in a picture at the SP website. lol |
|
#27
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
|
|
#28
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
Jenn wrote: In article .com, "ScottW" wrote: Ok... I'm gonna get a nitty gritty for my birthday (George promised).... but I have some doubts. I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. I diligently remove surface dust with a discwasher before every playing. Anyway... I played a Classic Records copy of Sara MClachlin Surfacing without cleaning and the Dido albums with cleaning (both their latest quiex sv-p vinyl)... and IMO, surfacing is just as quiet or even quieter than the Dido albums. One of the didos is a bit noisy on the lead in. I had hoped that cleaning the records before a stylus touched them would be a significant improvement... but apparently not in this small sample. And in another rant... the heavy jacket protector they use to replace the original since it gets opened, is so tight it takes too much effort to put the album away. So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol -------------------------------------------------------- There are several things about vinyl cleaning that I don't understand and would appreciate expert help. Firstly how can one tell dirt from faulty pressing? I had some brand new LPS straight out of the jacket which had and still have lots of clicks and pops. Some had Nitty Gritty- no better. Secondly, is it research-proven that alcohol bad for vinyl? I've been using it to remove grease and noted benefit only. Without being or -why not?- being paranoid, could it be just a legend that helps to sell the proprietary concotions which surely have detergent chemicals of their own. Or else how would theirs work? I saw no research work to back up Disk Doctor and other mixtures. I agree that a good arm and a good turntable seem to improve things considerably Ludovic Mirabel |
|
#29
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
wrote:
There are several things about vinyl cleaning that I don't understand and would appreciate expert help. Firstly how can one tell dirt from faulty pressing? I had some brand new LPS straight out of the jacket which had and still have lots of clicks and pops. Some had Nitty Gritty- no better. I think the answer is in your statement. Unless they rub the records in a pigpen at the factory noise on a new record is probably there to stay. Secondly, is it research-proven that alcohol bad for vinyl? The problem is alcohol (especially methanol) is a moderately agressive solvent. It will leach out the plasticizers, which function as a preservative. Without plasticizers the vinyl will become brittle. The effect won't be immediate. It may only effect a thin layer on the surface so the record won't feel any different in the hands. However, playing wear will be greatly increased. could it be just a legend that helps to sell the proprietary concotions which surely have detergent chemicals of their own. There's a big difference between a detergent and a solvent. Try pouring a little gasoline in a styrofoam cup. You don't have to buy expensive proprietary fluids. Kodak sells "Photo-Flo" which is basically glycerin. Glycerin is a pure wetting agent that works like a mild soap and leaves no soap scum. I'd guess it's a main component in those record cleaners. Photo-Flo is used as a last step drying agent when developing B&W negatives. A 16oz bottle is $7: http://tinyurl.com/8zx27 You dilute it perhaps 100:1 to clean a record so a bottle goes a long way. TB |
|
#30
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
wrote: wrote: There are several things about vinyl cleaning that I don't understand and would appreciate expert help. Firstly how can one tell dirt from faulty pressing? I had some brand new LPS straight out of the jacket which had and still have lots of clicks and pops. Some had Nitty Gritty- no better. I think the answer is in your statement. Unless they rub the records in a pigpen at the factory noise on a new record is probably there to stay. Secondly, is it research-proven that alcohol bad for vinyl? The problem is alcohol (especially methanol) is a moderately agressive solvent. It will leach out the plasticizers, which function as a preservative. Without plasticizers the vinyl will become brittle. The effect won't be immediate. It may only effect a thin layer on the surface so the record won't feel any different in the hands. However, playing wear will be greatly increased. could it be just a legend that helps to sell the proprietary concotions which surely have detergent chemicals of their own. There's a big difference between a detergent and a solvent. Try pouring a little gasoline in a styrofoam cup. You don't have to buy expensive proprietary fluids. Kodak sells "Photo-Flo" which is basically glycerin. Glycerin is a pure wetting agent that works like a mild soap and leaves no soap scum. I'd guess it's a main component in those record cleaners. Photo-Flo is used as a last step drying agent when developing B&W negatives. A 16oz bottle is $7: http://tinyurl.com/8zx27 You dilute it perhaps 100:1 to clean a record so a bottle goes a long way. TB Thank you. Informative, to the point and helpful. Ludovic Mirabel |
|
#31
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article . com,
" wrote: Jenn wrote: In article .com, "ScottW" wrote: Ok... I'm gonna get a nitty gritty for my birthday (George promised).... but I have some doubts. I got the disc doctor kit some time back and spent time diligently cleaning about a half dozen old albums that were noisy.... improvements were little to none IMO and hardly worth the effort. I recently got a couple Classic Records (Didos) album through themusic.com which offers a hand selection for warp, scratches and a "professional cleaning" free on audiophile records. I got the albums and the first thing I note is that the don't come out of the poly lined sleeves dust free. They appear to use the same sleeves I got a bulk pack of... and the damn things are full of dust right out the pack..... you'd think after paying $33/album for an audiophile pressing they'd make sure to package them in a dust free sleeve. I diligently remove surface dust with a discwasher before every playing. Anyway... I played a Classic Records copy of Sara MClachlin Surfacing without cleaning and the Dido albums with cleaning (both their latest quiex sv-p vinyl)... and IMO, surfacing is just as quiet or even quieter than the Dido albums. One of the didos is a bit noisy on the lead in. I had hoped that cleaning the records before a stylus touched them would be a significant improvement... but apparently not in this small sample. And in another rant... the heavy jacket protector they use to replace the original since it gets opened, is so tight it takes too much effort to put the album away. So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. By the way, yesterday at the Stereophile show, I listened to about 20 LPs in various rooms, and there was not a "click" or "pop" to be heard. Someone around here said to me once that this is impossible and that I don't hear the pops due to "hearing damage". lol -------------------------------------------------------- There are several things about vinyl cleaning that I don't understand and would appreciate expert help. Firstly how can one tell dirt from faulty pressing? I had some brand new LPS straight out of the jacket which had and still have lots of clicks and pops. Some had Nitty Gritty- no better. Secondly, is it research-proven that alcohol bad for vinyl? I've been using it to remove grease and noted benefit only. Without being or -why not?- being paranoid, could it be just a legend that helps to sell the proprietary concotions which surely have detergent chemicals of their own. Or else how would theirs work? I saw no research work to back up Disk Doctor and other mixtures. I agree that a good arm and a good turntable seem to improve things considerably Ludovic Mirabel I'm no expert, but what I know was very well stated by TB in another post. In my experience, Nitty Gritty type of machines work for most problems very well. Be sure to get the record very wet when starting...don't be stingy with the fluid. |
|
#32
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW |
|
#33
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article kRGgg.40307$fG3.20643@dukeread09,
"ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW No difference that I know of. The Record Doctor was 205 when I bought it, as opposed to best deal I could find on the 1.0 being 265. I see that the Record Doctor has gone up to 229. |
|
#34
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article kRGgg.40307$fG3.20643@dukeread09, "ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW No difference that I know of. The Record Doctor was 205 when I bought it, as opposed to best deal I could find on the 1.0 being 265. I see that the Record Doctor has gone up to 229. Do you use the disc doctor kit with the Nitty Gritty? If you check disc doc instructions.. http://www.discdoc.com/p14.html They talk about a couple things... 1) for a good srub they say the record needs to be supported so the nitty gritty isn't useful as wash platform. I have an old changer I use but its bulky and ugly and I'd like to toss it. 2) They don't recommend using the same pad for removing cleaner and rinse fluids. A VPI looks to allow an easy swap from wash vac to rinse vac while on the nitty this doesn't look so feasible. So what do you think about this? Do you follow the disc doc or just apply the nitty gritty brush? I used the disc dok system to clean these sundazed records I just got. I thought they were beyond hope appearing filthy...but this time after scrubbing and removing as much cleaner per Disc docs instruction I used a sport bottle and a bucket to give 'em a thorough rinse...followed by the brush rinse..then a bounty towel dry and air dry. Amazingly..they were pretty quiet... Can't say Im thrilled at all with Sundazed though...packaging sucked so I have wrinkled outer sleeves, torn inner sleeves, records were filthy, and worst of all.... AFAIAC, these mono mixes sound like recordings off AM radio. ScottW |
|
#35
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
In article jQHgg.40312$fG3.17087@dukeread09,
"ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article kRGgg.40307$fG3.20643@dukeread09, "ScottW" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW No difference that I know of. The Record Doctor was 205 when I bought it, as opposed to best deal I could find on the 1.0 being 265. I see that the Record Doctor has gone up to 229. Do you use the disc doctor kit with the Nitty Gritty? No, I've not use the Disc Doctor stuff, though I've certainly heard good things about it. If you check disc doc instructions.. http://www.discdoc.com/p14.html They talk about a couple things... 1) for a good srub they say the record needs to be supported so the nitty gritty isn't useful as wash platform. I have an old changer I use but its bulky and ugly and I'd like to toss it. 2) They don't recommend using the same pad for removing cleaner and rinse fluids. A VPI looks to allow an easy swap from wash vac to rinse vac while on the nitty this doesn't look so feasible. So what do you think about this? Do you follow the disc doc or just apply the nitty gritty brush? I used the disc dok system to clean these sundazed records I just got. I thought they were beyond hope appearing filthy...but this time after scrubbing and removing as much cleaner per Disc docs instruction I used a sport bottle and a bucket to give 'em a thorough rinse...followed by the brush rinse..then a bounty towel dry and air dry. Amazingly..they were pretty quiet... Can't say Im thrilled at all with Sundazed though...packaging sucked so I have wrinkled outer sleeves, torn inner sleeves, records were filthy, and worst of all.... AFAIAC, these mono mixes sound like recordings off AM radio. ScottW |
|
#36
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
ScottW wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW I think that's it. I have the AA version about 10 year old now. I replaced the velvet "lips" at least once. It does a fantastic job cleaning records. The only problem is that the damned thing is so loud that you need a few moments for your hearing to recover after cleaning a record. Which leads to the question, how much noise do the other machines (VIP, etc.) make? I guess the ideal situation would be to have the vacuum motor in a seperate room. I envision a hook up to one of those "whole house built in" vacuum systems. Also, does anyone have any tips for cleaning other than 12" discs? I have a lot of 45s and a bundle of 78s. I usually try holding my finger against the exposed part of the vacuum slot, and use one of those inserts for 45s to make them rotate properly. Regards, DAve |
|
#37
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
"DaveW" wrote in message news:8AOgg.7998$3i3.4750@trnddc08... ScottW wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... So....I'm still getting the nitty gritty (George)... and I hope its worth it. ScottW I have the Audio Advisor "Record Doctor" machine. It's about $100 less than the comparable Nitty Gritty and the results are great. So what's the difference betweent this and the Nitty Gritty Model 1.0 (which I see around for $265). All I can tell from pictures is the AA version doesn't have the little cup holders for bottles of cleaning fluid. ScottW I think that's it. I have the AA version about 10 year old now. I replaced the velvet "lips" at least once. It does a fantastic job cleaning records. The only problem is that the damned thing is so loud that you need a few moments for your hearing to recover after cleaning a record. Which leads to the question, how much noise do the other machines (VIP, etc.) make? I guess the ideal situation would be to have the vacuum motor in a seperate room. I envision a hook up to one of those "whole house built in" vacuum systems. Also, does anyone have any tips for cleaning other than 12" discs? I have a lot of 45s and a bundle of 78s. I usually try holding my finger against the exposed part of the vacuum slot, and use one of those inserts for 45s to make them rotate properly. Thanks for sharing your experience. I think I'll be going with the AA rig. I saw a 45 adapter kit on AA. Look like it offset the record so the edge of the vacuum slot lined up with the record and the adapter cover the other end. ScottW |
|
#38
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
|
|
#39
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
Jenn wrote: I had a great time. If you squint real hard, you can make me out in a picture at the SP website. Sorry I missed meeting you, Jenn. But glad you had a good time at HE2006. I must admit how surprised I was by the number of exhibitors using LP as source, with only one room I heard where the dem was disturbed by surface noise. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
|
#40
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
|
Record Cleaning
John Atkinson wrote: Sorry I missed meeting you, Jenn. Unless you were the woman who very kindly gave me a Scotty Anderson CD but whose name I didn't catch. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Another homemade record cleaning recipe question. | High End Audio | |||
| Keith Monks record cleaning machine | Marketplace | |||
| LAST DAY :VPI HW-17 Professional Record Vacuum Cleaning Machine | Marketplace | |||
| eBay: VPI HW-17 Professional Record Cleaning Machine | Pro Audio | |||
| eBay: VPI HW-17 Professional Record Cleaning Machin | Marketplace | |||
Linear Mode
