I'm waiting too, and it does sound promising. I planned on using the same method as Slipknot for the test. I have 6 albums waiting, one of which I can't stand to listen to, even after my RRL cleaning regime.
Showing 11 responses by jphii
Paul, I got my samples today, many thanks again. I fired up the system to do a little pre-cleaning warm-up listening, and damned if there isn't a blown channel in my Audio Note! Changed all the tubes, but no joy. So, I had to reconfigure everything using a Belles 150a I have lying around. I'm just about done setting the electronics back up, so I should be doing some serious listening over the next few days. I think I'll leave the amp & that thing that plays the little silver things running overnight to get the amp up to speed. I really need to get reaquainted with the SS amp before I can do any real world comparisons. I'm even going to give up my afternoon golf tomorrow! Slipknot, Once again you've gotten it right! But I figure if all of those guys mentioned in that other post were there when "it" was recorded, I need something to "equalize" the differences in their ears. Thanks God I'm having tube amp problems at this time. That way, there is one less thing to screw up the sound of Paul's formula! I seriously hope I can enjoy the non-live music. Remember all, blanket conclusions are like assholes: We all are, I mean have, one, usually. Joe |
Paul, I'm testing as we speak. As some on this thread were getting a little ridiculous (not the ninja's, I was laughing my ass off over that one!), I was holding off posting until I had a good feel for the results. Given the temporary loss of my tube amp, I've been spending some time getting used to the Belles. While I like the amp, I like the Audio Note better. So, I've been playing a loy of lp's to get the sound down. In the preliminary usage of your formula, I am impressed. Not only does it get albums visibly cleaner, but I believe there to be a sonic improvement as well. Note, this is preliminary. I will spend quite a few hours over the weekend doing comparisons. The other thing I want to try is using DD brushes compared to the Last brushes I've been using. They won't be here in time for this evaluation, but I may take you up on your offer for more fluids when they get here. Be ready for a detailed report, probably Sunday night. Joe |
Ok, its time to start putting some results down as I go, so this is round one. Right now, 11:33 am Saturday morning, 18 September, 2004. Lets start with a list of LPs Ive cleaned this morning with Pauls formula. The couple of albums I did last night are not going to be included here. I used them to get a feel for the amount of formula to use. All were cleaned on a VPI 16.5 VPI. I used new felt on the pickup tube, and new Last brushes. The Denon 103r was cleaned before the play began with Last #9, and in between each LP with a Zerodust. All albums were cleaned with a carbon fiber brush when they went on the platter. Any reference to pictures here means that before the weekend is over, Ill have a page on my site with them on it. Also, this is a comparison to RRL fluids, which I have used for the past 6 months. The only other cleaners I have used in the last 6 months are the Premier spray, and the Gruvemaster (or however he spells it) in the sink, with a little Dawn. I am not using them in this test. Also, if I have to include the I have no connection, yada yada disclaimer, you have misunderstood the purpose of this thread. 1: Warren Zevon Asylum 7E-1060 VG 2: Yes, Close to the Edge Atlantic SD-19133 G- 3: Elton John, Captain Fantastic MCA 2142 MCA (734) G 4: Joni Mitchell, Hejira Asylum 7E-1087 VG 5: Stan Getz, Focus Verve VE-1-25-28 VG 6: Eddie Harris, Electrifying EH 4MWB 4M106 NM 7: Kingston Trio Capitol T-996 VG 8: Frank Zappa, Apostrophe Discreet DSK-2289 G 9: Pink Floyd, WYWH (HSM) Columbia HBL-43453 NM All grading is visual, before cleaning, and I tend to be very conservative. For example, the Electrifying Eddie Harris is new, played once. The Yes album had some mold or some crap on it (otherwise it was ok), so that rating may be generous. Nasty Yes Normally I would use the sink for this, but I figured this might throw a curve ball here, so I just used the fluids. One thing first: Paul, if you sell this formula in those bottles, Ill have to hunt you down and kill you. For the freebie samples, OK, but they were a pain to use. If the formula were a concentrate they would be OK, because you would not have to try and pour it on to an album. Well, I guess the first thing you need to know is the way Ive gone about this. The Stuff! First, for this round I ONLY used RRL and Pauls formula (hereafter referred to as PRCF, for Pauls Record Cleaning Formula), playing after each cleaning. I can honestly say that doing this was a tremendous pain in the ass. After about the second record, I realized that it is almost impossible to make direct comparisons if you clean with RRL, listen, then clean with PRCF, and listen again. Too much time goes by for a valid comparison, IMHO. Per Dougs suggestion, I also did the reverse, PRCF then RRL, to which the same PITA addendum applies. So, for a couple of albums I did the side a, RRL, side b, PRCF thing. I also kept the volume and other settings on the electronics the same, and made no adjustments to anything EXCEPT the VTA. For round two I am going to try using albums I have 2 copies of. This presents another set of problems, such as the condition of each album, but Ill address that issue when it happens. Round one is going to address the surface noise and grading issues EXCLUSIVELY. Sonic improvements or degradation are set for round 2. One more disclaimer here: Only the Zevon, Mitchell, Getz, Harris, Kingston Trio and Pink Floyd albums have been played on my TT. The other 3 were in too bad of shape, which is why I bought them for this test! Right up front, I have to say one thing: Surface noise is greatly reduced using PRCF. This is not a subtle thing, but glaringly obvious. Even using PRCF first, then RRL, the results are the same, less noise. I attribute this to the enzymatic cleaning, since watching the output tube on the 165 shows dirtier output using it. No matter which order you clean them in. As I stated in my last post, PRCF also makes the LPs LOOK cleaner. Six of the nine albums I am very familiar with, and know EXACTLY how much noise they have on them. Just to be sure, I played them again before running the test, without cleaning. They have all been cleaned with RRL, just not recently. Now, after cleaning for the test, every one has improved. It may sound like I keep repeating myself, but this stuff works, and works well. Also, the visual grade of the albums has improved. The Elton John, Zappa, & Yes albums were a mess, but second copies I have. Each one is now at least a VG-, maybe VG or better. RRL has never improved surface VISUAL CONDITION like this. PRCF took that shit off side 2 of the Yes album like it was never there Clean Yes. Normally I would spend 10 minutes in the sink with something that looked that bad, and then go to town on the RCM. The other interesting thing Ive found is that the stylus seems to pick up more crap after using PRCF. The Zerodust has all kinds of stuff in it now See what I mean. I think that the process may loosen some old junk in the grooves that the second stage is not strong enough to remove. This happens when I clean with RRL then PRCF. Going the other way it does not seem to happen as bad. It may be possible that the RRL Super is a little stronger than PRCFs second stage. Interesting, but not conclusive. More testing is needed to see if this is primarily due to the filth on some of these discs. But, for the next round dealing with the sonics, I am going to pay special attention to the stylus. I plan to give it a good cleaning with Pauls funky little stylus brush. That thing works! So, for now I would have to say Im very impressed with the PRCF. I do have some preliminary opinions on the sonics after cleaning, but I am going to do many more hours of listening over the weekend before I make any comment. Its taken me 4 hours to write this up so far, and Im just getting started. Be prepared for another long post before the weekend is out. |
Psychic, I think you said "clean water is better" but damn if I can tell!!! Thanks for the compliment, too. Paul, I hope you know I was kidding about the bottles (sorta!). I think the frugal use may be the culprit. I am using more RRL, just because I have more. I think I've got enough left to finish the sonics test. I've been listening all day today, and finally got through the first 9 albums. I may be getting ahead of myself here, but I do have a definite opinion on one of the albums. I bought the CBS Mastersound Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here new in 1980. I paid $14.95 for it, the sticker is still there. I can honestly say that the album has never sounded as good as it does now. I tend to dislike most of the adjectives used to describe sound. But here, I guess the one I would use is, it just sounds more right. For the rest of my opinions, wait and see.... Joe |
I just wanted to add one thing that I am trying tonight. Since the #1 solution is an enzymatic formula, and Paul has left it on albums for extended periods without harm, I have decided to leave it on after I spread it on the lp, but before brushing, for a couple of minutes. I figure this may help loosen the debris that is in the grooves. I did this on an lp, and it seems to make the runoff even dirtier. So I am assuming this is a good thing. Said lp does sound very good, too, which is after all the whole point. I wonder if the wonder water would help loosen this stuff and make it easier to remove? I know the difference between distilled & RO water, after so many years around boats. Boaters love RO water, but I can see your point here, Psychic. The ultrapure stuff is beyond me! So, I called a buddy of mine who runs the steam plant at East Carolina University, and he confirmed what Psychic said. Now, remember, this was not because I doubted what you said. It just never hurts to have a second opinion. I have no problems deferring to experts (except Raoul, of course). More to come as I finish my testing and finalize the review. |
Psychic, I checked out that site you posted for the water filters. I'd like to get one, but don't know what I would need besides that filter, or how to hook it up. I hope it's not too much to ask, but, could you help a brother out? Paul, I'm working on Part 2 of my review right now. It should be up in a few hours, detailing last night's listening session. Quite frankly, I'm amazed at the way it went. I think those following this thread will be too. I need to get it posted so I can finish up today. Joe |
Okay, here are some observations from last night's listening session. First off, With 1 exceptions, I used albums that had already undergone my normal routine, and just used PRCF. I also allowed #1 to sit on the albums for a few minutes before proceeding. One thing first: Leaving the fluid on brings more crap off of the album than you can believe. I thought they were clean! I see now I was mistaken. Wait till you see the picture from the outflow tube. The lineup: Cat Stevens: Catch Bull at Four A&M SP4365 Genesis: Trick of the Tail Atco MSFL-1-062 Eagles: Long Run Asylum 5E-508 Volume 2, Classic Blues Bluesway BLS-6062-A Roy Orbison: Black & White Nights Live Virgin ST-VR-897531 Neil Young & CH: Everybody Knows This is Nowhere Reprise MSC2282 The Blues album was the exception, it was SS. Got it for 2 bucks, how can you pass that up? All of the others are NM. You still would not believe the crap that came off. This applies to every album Ive used PRCF on. I feel that the enzymes are doing something right. Leaving it on helps to loosen crap buried in the grooves. Then, this time I left them under vacuum for about 6 revolutions, instead of 2. I was a little concerned about static, but using the Gruv Glide styrofoam peanut, there didnt seem to be ANY. Ill hold judgment as Patrick is, and see how long this lasts. The real surprise here was with the Roy Orbison. I think this is an excellent LP, but I always thought it was poorly mastered. You can barely hear T Bone Burnetts guitar on most of the tracks. Well, guess again. Im still going to stay away from all of the adjectives, but I hear things now I never heard before. And I thought his album was clean. Now, there is ABSOLUTELY NO SURFACE NOISE AT ALL. While there was a reduction in surface noise across the board, nowhere was it this dramatic. And while all of the LPs sounded better, again, nowhere was it this dramatic. I had to listen to it several times to be sure! And it was better every time. By the third time I could hear JD Southers strings buzzing, the rasp in Bonnie Raitts voice, and levels of detail that I never knew were there. And yes, you can tell whose guitar is doing what. Amazing. I also have this on DVD, and I do not think I can listen to that copy again. Id rather have the level of detail than the live experience. This effect was nowhere near as dramatic on the other albums I tested. But it was still there. I dont think it is at all a subtle difference. But one thing that I consider essential is to leave the #1 solution on the lp, to allow it to work. Also, forget about the 2 revolution rule on your RCM. You need to get that crap up! After using it in this way, I noticed no more crap on the stylus. Doug said it all in an email: Glad to hear yours is still working. Ours is too, though in truth it's rarely needed. Clean records don't dirty a stylus.I cant say it any better. So here is the process I used: 1. Apply #1, and use the brush to spread it till it covers the lp. 2. LET IT SIT! 3. Use the brush to scrub. 4. Vacuum, vacuum, vacuum. 5. Apply #2. 6. Use the brush to scrub. 7. Vacuum, vacuum, vacuum! 8. Carbon fiber brush for a couple of revolutions. 9. Enjoy! So in summation, Id have to say what happens using PRCF is the availability of a new level of detail, making the MUSIC more enjoyable. Thats what I want out of a clean record. And IMHO, PRCF does it best, so far! |
Sean, If I thought I could hear any degradation of sound, I might start to worry. But so far the opposite has been true. As we speak I am playing the Orbison disc, and I still can't believe how good it sounds. Also, I remember Paul stating that he had left it on for half an hour. I beleive that the enzymes just clean that much better. I understand your concerns, and a do share them a little. But once the enzymes are gone from the record, they can do no damage. And if they did in the first place they should be obvious on first play. If the plasticizers were leeched out of the vinyl, the first play should ruin it. Don't get me wrong, the RCM outflow tube isn't turning black. But there is substantially more dirt in the fluid than with RRL. Not so much on a disc that has been sink-cleaned, then done with RRL. I have to say it again: I think PRCF just works better, and leaves a disc cleaner. I've got about enough left to do 2 more albums. I plan on leaving it on those two for as long as I can before it starts to dry. If I think it causes a problem, you can count on me letting all of you know. Joe |