Print

Print


And I will repeat, that contrary to his vast knowledge of everything about disc recording, Mr. Fine is completely wrong wrt the absolute need to use a vacuum source to remove from fluids for a disc recording.  Users have successfully used cotton terrycloth to great effect for decades.  With a properly configured cleaning solution the impurities are contained within the fluid & the wicking action of the terry loops is as effective, after the rinse step as the most expensive toy you can find.

The loudest voices against our work on this list are people who have never used the materials, are unlikely to follow directions & in a number of cases, such as Mr. Fine, believe they have some G-d given right to free samples.

Cleaning any materials is all about the chemistry of the contaminants & that of the cleaning agents & protocol for their use.  The components chosen are known for their broad-based ability to solubilize the variety of contaminants usually found on disc surfaces & to leave no residuals after the rinse step.

I have a right to be on this list & to respond to inaccurate & unfounded comments when my experience tells me that such is the case.  A lot of this animosity also comes from realizing your past ernest efforts have not be as thorough as you thought; but we’ve been telling you this for 25 yrs.
  
Regards,

Duane Goldman

H D Goldman Lagniappe Chemicals Ltd. 
PO Box 37066 St. Louis, MO 63141 USA
v/f 314 205 1388  [log in to unmask]





> On Jan 17, 2016, at 1:45 AM, Dave Burnham <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> I never realized the emotional feelings people felt towards record cleaners; such a religious Fervour over a pretty basic procedure. As Shai says if you can hear a difference after you've cleaned a disc, whatever method you've used, then at least to some extent, mission accomplished. Now tempers have flared and Dr. Goldman has presented his credentials which, though impressive, don't have much to do with cleaning records, and left in a snit. 
> 
> In my own case, I try to look at it logically - if the procedure makes sense, it probably works; I certainly don't go to the trouble of checking cleaned records with a microscope. The Monks machine makes perfect sense to me; the recommended fluid is largely distilled water which is pretty harmless. I have seen records destroyed by using a wrong cleaning fluid or the wrong amount of fluid, and as Tom Fine pointed out, nothing beats a vacuum for getting  the fluid off the surface before it settles in and leaves water marks. 
> 
> db
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 17, 2016, at 1:49 AM, Shai Drori <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>> Agreed, although A look at the groove does tell a lot. There is also the
>> glue method that I haven't tried yet but makes perfect sense to me.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Shai Drori
>> Expert digitization services for Audio Video
>> Hi Res scanning for film 8mm-35mm
>> www.audiovideofilm.com
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Frank Strauss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The closest anybody has come to having actual science is not very high res
>>> magnified before and after pictures at the Keith Monks website.   Everyone
>>> seems to say that when they use their favored system, they can tell it
>>> works because the sound is better.  Maybe all the systems work? Perhaps
>>> instead of looking at the grooves, a better test would be to compare the
>>> auditory results.
>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Shai Drori <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Not even close to the original. The original was microfiber special type
>>> of
>>>> fabric that had a one direction for cleaning. It went into the grove to
>>>> pick up dirt. For a teenage on a budget it was terrific. The new ones are
>>>> just corduroy.
>>>> BTW, I have been reading everything on this thread. I must say That the
>>>> Goldman dude hasn't convinced me even a bit. Too much vague claims with
>>> no
>>>> hard evidence for anything.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Shai Drori
>>>> Expert digitization services for Audio Video
>>>> Hi Res scanning for film 8mm-35mm
>>>> www.audiovideofilm.com
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Lou Judson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> <http://www.needledoctor.com/Discwasher-D4-Kit>
>>>>> 
>>>>> I bought one of the RCA look-alikes and it is not nearly as good, of
>>>>> course,
>>>>> <L>
>>>>> Lou Judson
>>>>> Intuitive Audio
>>>>> 415-883-2689
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 14, 2016, at 4:15 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I agree that's a good one. Can you get the fluid anymore?
>>>>>> Another good one is the LAST cleaner -- some sort of smelly solvent
>>>> with
>>>>> a nail polish brush.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shai Drori" <[log in to unmask]
>>>> 
>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 6:55 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cleaning stylus
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have been using the Discwasher stylus brush that came with my kit
>>>>> that I
>>>>>>> bought around 1986. Still works wonders.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Frank B Strauss, DMD
>>>