|
|
Post by pinkie on May 8, 2015 15:04:22 GMT
Nah - he'd have tried one and settled the issue the obvious way. You don't debate whether its raining - you go outside and find out if you get wet. You debate why it rains... Your analogy is not valid . wet clean v vacuum wet clean arguments are analogous to arguing over whether the rain in manchester gets you wetter than the rain in leeds. No. A closer analogy would be whether you get wetter in a Thunderstorm or mist. And the solution is not to debate the point but go out for 2 minutes and then see how long your clothes take to dry afterwards. It isn't a subject for debate but for experience. You debate the existence of God. Not whether there is a church building in Yalding - that can be established by direct physical experience. |
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on May 8, 2015 15:27:00 GMT
You keep banging on about it being an empirically obvious fact , but you will see I highlighted earlier how it is impossible to test the efficacy of a rcm over the wet cleaning vertical bath manual system* [ well regarded by m fremer in sterophile]
So how do you suppose people are reaching their conclusions . Many of the people banging on about their superiority have £695 mains leads and £50 fuses or numerous foo you have called ridiculous in the past . Seems to me you wish to rely on other peoples opinion only when it suits your argument .
* This would even for a subjective assessment require 2 identical records , equally dirty . I consider this to be an impossibility . New records would tend the defeat the object . I say this even accounting for ridiculous comments about cleaning the release agent
|
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 8, 2015 15:29:55 GMT
DP
|
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 8, 2015 15:31:16 GMT
Dan,
Yer a funny guy and I like you mate, but I HAVE to ask....
Have you tried an RCM to clean records?
Seems a folly to argue if you haven't?
|
|
|
|
Post by danielquinn on May 8, 2015 15:33:31 GMT
I have had records professionally clean by a rcm [ i dont own one ] I was not blown away . follwoing that , I had 2 peter Gabriel records , So: 1 professionally cleaned , 1 via hand clean bath , again i struggled to tell the difference .
I am not against wet cleaning I am against the majical properties bestowed upon a vacuum in hifi fora . I acknowledge their convenience .
|
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on May 8, 2015 16:07:34 GMT
I may be missing something here, and I'm sure I will be corrected if wrong, but I thought the point of the cleaning fluid was to break down dirt from the record which the vacuum sucks out, trapped in the fluid and drying the vinyl at the same time ...
Since we can't have two records that are identically dirty to do any kind of side by side comparison, I'm not going to argue it either way but I wouldn't get rid of my RCM based on my personal experience of it. Incidentally, I'm not aware of having any of the 'numerous foo' ...
|
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 8, 2015 19:53:02 GMT
Just spent a very 'numb' Friday (after election result....what??!) cleaning the remainder of my record collection. A good 4 hours or so but that's all my LPs done. As I've enjoyed this thread I did a few before and afters and the improvement to these ears is obvious. Silent background, music brought more to the fore and more open and dynamic sounding experience, especially noticeable with older 2nd hand Charity Shop specials. Not commenting about anyone else's experience just my own, but it works for me.  Given I've a few hundred LPs now, a lot 2nd hand, and a very expensive cartridge I wouldn't want to kill prematurely, the RCMs been a great investment. |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 8, 2015 20:31:50 GMT
If you don't like the empirical evidence given by a particular member bring in a completely unrelated accusation of possessing other 'foo'. Works like a charm - not!  |
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 8, 2015 20:44:27 GMT
Terrible case of whataboutery... Oh look, a squirrel!!  |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on May 8, 2015 21:07:46 GMT
I have a way to settle this.
Let me think about a proposal for you, DQ. I'll write it up and we will see if you are willing to give it a go.
EDIT: Actually, I am going to retract that offer because I simply don't have the energy to go to the trouble (and cost) it would take to demonstrate the difference without being accused of rigging it.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 8, 2015 21:40:18 GMT
You keep banging on about it being an empirically obvious fact , but you will see I highlighted earlier how it is impossible to test the efficacy of a rcm over the wet cleaning vertical bath manual system* [ well regarded by m fremer in sterophile] So how do you suppose people are reaching their conclusions . Many of the people banging on about their superiority have £695 mains leads and £50 fuses or numerous foo you have called ridiculous in the past . Seems to me you wish to rely on other peoples opinion only when it suits your argument . * This would even for a subjective assessment require 2 identical records , equally dirty . I consider this to be an impossibility . New records would tend the defeat the object . I say this even accounting for ridiculous comments about cleaning the release agent I'm not relying on anyone's opinion. I borrowed a moth rcm from Arthur, cleaned a record I had previously ruined with wet cleaning, drew my own conclusions, and bought a cheap rcm from Brazil which does every bit as good a job, and use it. Where does that involve faith in foo? |
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 8, 2015 22:12:37 GMT
Hiya Richard, small world. I have and use that same cheap RCM from Brazil and it works brilliantly based purely on what I'm hearing on my turntable after cleaning a record. Great to hear in comparison to more established RCMs it's just as good. |
|
|
|
Post by jamescg1972 on May 9, 2015 7:05:03 GMT
Hiya Richard, small world. I have and use that same cheap RCM from Brazil and it works brilliantly based purely on what I'm hearing on my turntable after cleaning a record. Great to hear in comparison to more established RCMs it's just as good. I have a number of records I need to clean, including one recently bought through here (good old, but currently a bit crackly, Leonard Cohen album). I don't suppose you could point me in the direction of the RCM you bought? cheers James. |
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 9, 2015 7:52:04 GMT
James, Sure can. Website here: maquinaphk.xpg.uol.com.br/home.htmlEnglish is not the guys first language but he is very good and a really helpful guy. Answered all my questions quickly. I've now cleaned about 300 or so albums and couldn't be happier. Does as good a job as far more expensive "proper" RCMs, it's just a bit more hands on in that it uses your own vacuum cleaner nozzle. Just set it up and away you go. One proviso though: Choice of record cleaning fluid is very important! I've tried a few and BY FAR the best one Ive tried and used for all my vinyl is the one here: www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rebirth-Of-The-Cool-The-Right-One-Record-Cleaning-Fluid-5-0L-/391046863571If you see yourself having a lot of vinyl in the future get a 5l tub. It'll do 500 or so albums. Hope this helps. Gaz. |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 9, 2015 8:06:04 GMT
EDIT: Actually, I am going to retract that offer because I simply don't have the energy to go to the trouble (and cost) it would take to demonstrate the difference without being accused of rigging it. Beats me how anyone with a modicum of intelligence would think that dragging a stylus through grooves full of gunk isn't going to be improved by dragging it through one that isn't. Unless of course they were being deliberately obtuse? None so queer as folk  |
|
|
|
Post by gazjam on May 9, 2015 8:15:29 GMT
EDIT: Actually, I am going to retract that offer because I simply don't have the energy to go to the trouble (and cost) it would take to demonstrate the difference without being accused of rigging it. Beats me how anyone with a modicum of intelligence would think that dragging a stylus through grooves full of gunk isn't going to be improved by dragging it through one that isn't. Unless of course they were being deliberately obtuse?None so queer as folk aye Tim, there's always that... |
|
|
|
Post by Eduardo Wobblechops on May 9, 2015 10:03:52 GMT
+1 for the Nano Meco. Cheap and cheerful but does an excellent job, particularly with the Doc's fluid, which I too have found to be the best out of those I've tried. It's far from being the most pricey too.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 9, 2015 11:11:11 GMT
I have had records professionally clean by a rcm [ i dont own one ] I was not blown away . follwoing that , I had 2 peter Gabriel records , So: 1 professionally cleaned , 1 via hand clean bath , again i struggled to tell the difference . I am not against wet cleaning I am against the majical properties bestowed upon a vacuum in hifi fora . I acknowledge their convenience . I guess this depends on your degree of pedantry. On at least one level you must be right. All the vacuum does is to be a more convenient way of making sure you don't leave fluid with dirt floating in it in the grooves to dry out and be worse than not cleaning (my former wet cleaning experience) To be fair - if you were prepared to play the records wet, there was no problem because the gunk floating in liquid, was not audible in the way dried on gunk was. It was just that if you ever wanted to play them without wet cleaning and playing wet, you were fried. And as such, it must in theory be possible to simply rinse the record so thoroughly in distilled water or similar, that all the gunk in suspension in the grooves is washed out and the remaining pure water when it dries leaves no residue And therefore - all the vacuum contributes is a more convenient way of achieving the same effect - by sucking the fluid and gunk out quickly and cleanly, rather than leaving it to dry and spoil the record, or need elaborate and extensive rinsing processes without trashing the label. And - if that was your point - you are in my view correct. But describing it as "convenient" and not better is like referring to crossing the channel by using eurotunnel rather than digging a tunnel of your own is convenient and not better. "Eurotunnel does the job no better . I acknowledge it is more convenient" 
|
|
|
|
Post by jamescg1972 on May 9, 2015 12:45:01 GMT
James, Sure can. Website here: maquinaphk.xpg.uol.com.br/home.htmlEnglish is not the guys first language but he is very good and a really helpful guy. Answered all my questions quickly. I've now cleaned about 300 or so albums and couldn't be happier. Does as good a job as far more expensive "proper" RCMs, it's just a bit more hands on in that it uses your own vacuum cleaner nozzle. Just set it up and away you go. One proviso though: Choice of record cleaning fluid is very important! I've tried a few and BY FAR the best one Ive tried and used for all my vinyl is the one here: www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rebirth-Of-The-Cool-The-Right-One-Record-Cleaning-Fluid-5-0L-/391046863571If you see yourself having a lot of vinyl in the future get a 5l tub. It'll do 500 or so albums. Hope this helps. Gaz. Thanks for that Gaz, I'll look into it. Cheers james. |
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on May 9, 2015 13:06:31 GMT
I'll happily try 'The Right One' cleaning fluid next time, but I do like having a concentrated one that you can then make up small amounts as necessary instead of having a huge bottle of the stuff ...
|
|
