CD Tweaks and Longterm Damage


I was reading the blurb for LAT International's C Diamond CD treatment. They bragged that it has a ph of 7, while some other tweaks they have tested have ph values as low as 5. The latter they claimed would damage CDs over time, just like Armorall did for those who used it.

Has anyone tested the ph levels for Optrix, (new and improved) Auric Illuminator, or Vivid? Do any of these pose a longterm risk for CDs?
socprof
Jependleton,
.
Try Walker's Vivid on your CD's it is a vast improvement over the Auric Illuminator. A friend and I did a blind comparison using several types of music on 3 identical computer burned CD's. One plain(no treatment), one with Auric Illuminator, and one with Walker's Vivid. Both of us easily preferred the Vivid in a blind listening test.
.
The Auric was better than no treatment, but the Vivid clearly outshined the Auric.
.
I agree, PH isn't what damaged my CD's back in the mid 90's, it was the petroleum in the Armor All that did it.

And yes, I did wipe mine thoroughly.

I will not use anything on my shiny discs that has oil or wax on it, period. I learned my lesson.
Yioryos,

All injection/blow molded products require the use of a release agent (usually a silicone based oil) to prevent the product from sticking to the mold or press. This release agent remains on our discs at purchase and can be removed with any of the popular disc cleaners or with very mild soapy water. There still remains all the surface imperfections of the mass production/stamping processs. Some of these treatments can improve the surface by filling in and polishing the 'pitting' to a closer to perfect level. This, in theory, would help reduce laser diffraction and lessen error rate and correction. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!!!