Results from Beta Testers of New Formulas


Hi everyone,

Please use this thread to post the results of your testing of the 2-step formulas. Thank you.

Best regards,
Paul Frumkin
paul_frumkin

Showing 7 responses by dougdeacon

Hi Kurt,
We must have posted almost simultaneously. Yours wasn't there when I was writing.

Great minds thinking alike perhaps? Naw, we even missed the entrance exam!

Doug
Sean,
Thanks for a well reasoned addition to a thread that has gotten a bit heated, unfortunately.

The protocol you advise seems like a prudent one. It offers the possibility of sample-testing the safety as well as the efficacy of Paul's solutions over a larger array of samples, situations and observers than one person could easily manage.

I'm also concerned about the vinyl safety issue raised by 4yanx. Since Paul has declined to specify what if any safety testing he's done, prudence forces us to assume that he has done none before this test. That seemingly puts the onus on the volunteer testers, to report not only their immediate cleaning results but also to report the ongoing condition of the cleaned vinyl for some length of time.

Since Paul (apparently) didn't perform safety testing before making his offer, it would have been best if he'd included a request for that, with a warning not to test his solutions on valuable records. That would have made the situation clear from the beginning and prevented much regrettable bloodshed. Having failed to do that, no doubt innocently, Paul could have responded to 4yanx with a simple followup request to his volunteers for a protocol like the one described by Sean.

I hereby move that the volunteers adopt a long-term vinyl-safety test as described by Sean, and that they include as many non-valuable LP's from different labels/eras/countries as possible. Meaningful results will of course require weeks/months/years depending on the degree of uncertainty each of us is willing to accept for the (presumed) cleaning benefits received.

Do I hear a second?
Jjmali,
As you can see, Mr. Frumkin himself is open to suggestions and ideas from others, and has just explained some of his safety testing in response to Sean. If the thread starter is willing to respond constructively then by definition the post was useful.

I will of course honor your request by never offering any thoughts or suggestions on any thread of yours. Now that I understand your sensitivities, I wouldn't dream of intruding on your private space.

Hope you enjoy talking to yourself,
Doug
Would it also make sense to clean some records with Paul's formulas first, listen to them, then re-clean with RRL and listen again? You might learn if the benefits change or if they're due to double cleaning vs. particular solutions.

Just some suggestions from a lazy guy in the cheap seats!
Non-tester jumping in here, just to offer thanks to all who are giving of their time, energy, knowledge and beater vinyl. It seems like you're getting excellent results so far and there's potential for even better ones with that water quality improvement in the works.

Joe quoted a comment I made about how often we use our stylus cleaner. We frequently play 10 or more sides with only a dry brush swipe between sides to relocate the cat hairs. I've gone 20+ sides without needing to clean. Paul's doohickey is the best stylus cleaner I know, but not needing to clean the stylus at all? Priceless. Record cleaning is orders of magnitude more important than stylus cleaning.

While a need for stylus cleaning clearly correlates well with dirt in the grooves, IME a stylus often comes up clean even after playing a noisy side. If the grunge is stuck to the vinyl... Listening is the ultimate indicator, as usual.

We do have stubborn LPs that resist repeated applications of RRL, Vinyl-zyme, Premier, alchohol-based solutions, brillo pads, etc. If vigorous scrubbing with DD brushes and repeated Loricraft sweeps won't clean these things then maybe Paul's solutions will. Can't hurt to try, so I'll be ordering a batch - once he gets some decent bottles and clean water of course! ;-)

BTW, some of the irretrievably noisy LP's in our collection were ruined with tap water and a GroovMaster. No amount of subsequent cleaning has helped. I caution everyone: avoid using tap water on anything but a beater record. I don't know what's in your water, but ours often contains high levels of manganese oxides (I think that's what Paul found). Once something like that gets ground into the vinyl, enzymes, alchohol, deionised water and juju juice are all useless. Metal oxides probably aren't much good for the stylus either.

BTW, it makes perfect sense to this non-chemist that leaving Paul's enzymatic solution on the LP for a bit would help. Enzyme reactions take some amount of time, right?

BTW #2, I don't know about the inventors/providers of other cleaning solutions, but I'm pretty sure the reason Brian Weitzel (RRL) hasn't chimed in on this thread is simply that he is a gentleman. His chemical knowledge and practical experiences would undoubtedly be beneficial, but commenting on a thread devoted to a competitor's product would be unprofessional and provocative. Brian is neither of these things. Even in private conversation I have never known him to be other than a model of propriety.
Hi Sean,
I'm not sure why you addressed that to me. I'm no chemist, so engaging me in a theoretical discussion of surfactant behaviors would waste my time and your brains! Confused here, as usual...