RRL Cleaner, Vinyl Zyme, and Groove Glide

Aroc, you stole my line..... :-)

Did you try using JUDT the RRL and skipping the enzyme. Unless I miss my guess, doing so will allow you to realize th esame detail with out "moving back ten rows".

Shasta and Sean, from my experince RRL Fluids do not leave behind any residue of any kind when used in conjunction with a vacumm cleaner - unlike MANY other fluids I've used. DD fluids do, even after rinsing with distilled water, again in my experience. The resaon that RRL recommends no rinse is that the fluid itself is more pure than the distilled water one would use for a rinse. If you are experiencing what you think is residue following RRL cleaning, I'm guessing process must have gone awry or your vacuum wand are dirty/contaminated. If you a hearing good result using it, it is not due to any reside left behind. It is because the fluid has held the crap from the grooves in suspension before you vacummed it away - what a cleaner should do.

As for price, you can get it from Galen Carol for $20 a bottle. I think people use way, way too much. I can do a shade over 180 LP's with 32 oz. At $20 a bottle, that is about 11 CENTS an LP. Cheap.

Send any and all you have my way, Joe!

Let me ask this. If, on the one hand, there was Product A and you were not certain whether it "left anything on the record" and, on the other hand, there was product B in which you had full confidence that it left nothing on the record, why use Product A, at all - at least on a record that wasn't anything but a testing candidate?

I understand where you’re coming from Dan. I appreciate and share your pursuit of clean vinyl. We are all only too aware that noisy vinyl (from crud OR residue) can be the bane of an enjoyable listening experience.

I also know that your trust in the RRL fluids is well-founded. Before Brian Weitzel brought the RRL fluids to market, he conducted very extensive research regarding the properties of vinyl record composition and the interaction of certain agents with these compositions. Among other things, he sent tens of samples of vinyl (different labels and different eras within labels) to a lab to have them tested for composition and their expected reactions with ingredients that he considered for use in his formula. Some ingredients passed the "test" while others did not. I cannot speak in specific detail regarding individual ingredients because I was not personally privy to the test results. Maybe Mr. Weitzel will chime in on this some time. I do feel, after speaking to him on a few occasions, that he did his homework, and more. Bottom line is that I can use the products with utmost confidence.
David

Doug, a fair response. :-) You should have a few records on which to test these products right now! ;-) Let me know how that works out!

"Playing the record dirty is riskier than trying a different cleaner IMO."

Depends on the definition of dirty. I suppose you refer to stylus damage. If a record, once thoroughly cleaned by most any of the many available cleaning fluids, still has the remnants of a greasy fingerprint or two, I'm not sure that is of a greater risk than possibly damaging the entire record. But, yes, if it is a "lost cause" otherwise, what does a guy have to lose?

Actually, my answer to Dan's post was not really intended to pit one product against another but, rather, to reinforce the virtues of the RRL fluids. I know that Brian Weitzel went to considerable effort and expense in the pursuit of due diligence in making a proven and safe product - and that counts for a lot in my book (though there will likely never be sales of my book). :-)

Oh, we're square! I think that's been proven. I know, I know, speak for myself! :-)