Herman eats crow, RRL record cleaning fluids work


I recently answered a post on
distilled water saying that using deionized water was a bunch of bunk. Several people folowed up basically calling me an idiot and singing the praises of RRL fluids. I responded I didn't believe that these fluids could possibly live up to the hype accorded them. I then received an offer from a fellow member offering to send me some of these mystical fluids free of charge to try for myself. I accepted his challenge.

I just returned from Japan where I purchased some used vinyl including what appeared to be a mint Japanese pressing of Art Pepper "Live in Tokyo 79," one of my favorites. The RRL fluids were also awaiting in the mail.

I put the record on straight away and was greeted by quite a bit of surface noise so I decided it was time to give the RRL a trial on my VPI 17. I first applied about 10 drops of the deep cleaner and worked it in with my Audioquest carbon fiber brush turning the record several times in both directions and then vacuumed it off. I follwed with the same amount of vinyl wash using the same regime.

A massive transformation in background noise! I went from a used record that I was dissapointed in due to surface noise to a record that was dead quiet using barely enough fluid to even dampen the record. I am used to using a large volume of Disc Doctor fluid folowed by a lot of rinse water because if you leave any of the DD fluid on the record it will dry up and leave a residue.

I can't say for sure the DD routine would not have yielded the same results, but the RRL fluids were so much easier to use and so much quicker due to the tiny amount required that I am getting ready to order a big bottle of everything they have to offer.

A big thanks to 4yanx for sharing his fluids (record cleaning that is) with me.
herman

Showing 3 responses by jyprez

Sean, 4yanx, Can you provide us with the specific citation from Kodak stating that it is detrimental to vinyl?
Thanks
I've tried RRL cleaning fluid and I must agree with many previous posters on this site that it worked GREAT. On the other hand so did my "homebrew" with distilled water and a touch of detergent and photoflow. I must agree with Lugnut that there is no really significant difference. The most important thing to do is just cleaning the records carefully to begin with.
But I still really respect RRL - after all, anyone who can sell water at over $100 per gallon deserves our deepest capitalist respect.
Doug, I have purchased RRL cleaner several times and as I indicated, I thought it worked great but not any better than my home brew which just uses a barely measuable amount of photoflow in a gallon of ditilled water per several recipies that can be found on the net. If anyone can hear the "sonic signature" of this trace amount then their ears a far superior to mine (which is not impossible since my 49 year old hearing is certainly not what it used to be). Bottom line then, I have nothing against RRL cleaners except I can get comparable results to my hearing for a fraction of the cost and as I am inherently cheap (prefering to save my money for records) that's what I do.
(P.S. You should come over my place and we'll spin a few records on my new setup - I picked up 50 classical trumpet albums from a classical trumpet player's collection for cheap and you're welcome to take your "pick of the litter" as it were, since you're more into classical than I.