Archive through April 05, 2006
|
Gold Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 1847 Registered: Dec-04 | But Pledge makes it hard for the Rainbow Foil to stick to the disc. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8006 Registered: May-04 | Exactly! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8009 Registered: May-04 | "But Pledge makes it hard for the Rainbow Foil to stick to the disc." Possibly the folks at Johnson Wax will debut a version of Pledge titled "Anti-Dumb-Tweak". But I doubt that. As to how often and what happens; if the treatment contains nothing to harm the disc, you can apply the material as often as you deem necessary. Most treatments are similar to a record cleaning device in that they are trying to remove mold release agents which adhere to the surface of the polycarbonate. Once these are taken away, the disc should appear "cleaner" and more reflective. As Larry says, the disc surface will literally look smoother and I have no doubt a closer examination would verify that assumption. Most of these treatments do not require the same cleaning procedure a LP washing system would demand since there are no contaminants which will be forced into the discs surface by the heat and friction of playback. I clean a disc again after a few months or if I wish a particularly clean disc for some reason. As a note, the Emma Demo Disc which I sent out to a few folks had all the source discs cleaned prior to ripping and the DV-R was cleaned before it received the data. I used only Pledge for this cleaning. The discs also had edge treatment though the benefits of this tweak seem far less obvious (even specious) compared to the benefits of cleaning the disc. Edge treatment has always varied from player to player as to its efficiency. The gains are similar to, but more apparent than, a good system cleaning. The jump in audiophile desirables is across the board. There is a sense of the window having been cleaned between you and the musicians. I can't tell you your system will have improved bass response because some systems might not have terrific bass to begin with and I have no idea what you consider "good" bass response. I wouldn't say the low frequency extension is altered. But, then again, most of my listening is through LS3/5a's. If your system can reproduce a three dimensional image of a performer, this should be made more evident by cleaning the disc. For those of you familiar with photographic, TV or stage lighting techniques, the effect is as if the top lighting has been tweaked in intensity and the backlighting from the rear 45's has been taken up a point and one half. The result is a performer who has a bit more "pop" to their size, shape and apparent position in space. As with most gains in staging, the space between and around the performers is made more evident. If you are listening for recording venue ambience, cleaning the disc will bring that to the fore. I prefer to say the nuances of the performance are enhanced rather than point to "detail" retrieval. If anyone is familiar with the Elvis selections I included on the Emma Demo Disc, during "I Believe in the Man in the Sky" the back up vocalists are heard with more definition between performers while retaining the sense of a cohesive unit. The pages turned at the outset of the piece as the tape rolls and the performers settle into their places are more easily picked out as the sound of paper rustling and not just a scratching sound around the area of the vocalists. Not to belabor the point but on the same disc Elvis' version of "Fever" benefits from a slightly more heated sensuality to his vocals and the sandpaper blocks off to the left have a grittiness which makes them definable as what they are and not as someone scratching their backside during a run through. Though there is no obvious difference in the noise floor as you would gain from LP cleaning, the effect of treating a disc is to gain that degree of "quiet" which allows these nuances to become audible. Regarding Pledge, the standard formula of all pressurized cleaners seems to contain some evaporative agent. If I understand my chemistry properly, formaldehyde is the additive in Pledge which gives it the ability to "go away". Should you not wish to put this chemical on your discs, I would avoid Pledge other than as a test case. From what I can gather the amount of formaldehyde is very small and unless you slop the material all over the disc, proper treatment shouldn't get the material anywhere near the edge of the disc where it could then "leak" between the layers of substrate on a poorly made disc. This contamination issue seems to have been resolved as digital disc manufacture has improved. But anyone who remembers Sam Tellig's advice to treat your discs with WD-40 might want to give additional consideration to the Pledge treatment. This is not a recommended use by the manufacturer but rather is a DIY tweak which has been around for many years. I've used Pledge for several years and can report no ill effects from the materials. Once again, use the smallest amount that will allow complete cleaning, possibly doing two treatments should you have any concerns. Personally, I've found no benefit to more than one properly conducted treatment per disc. Do not allow the Pledge to dry on the surface of the disc. Spray and wipe. Just as the commercials have always suggested. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1207 Registered: Oct-04 | All: How many good points can Jan V. make in a single posting? Eh? OK - a lot of them. I'll be the first to admit that - as Jan stated - the "edge treatment" gives far less improvement than any of the surface-cleaning agents I've tried. Copying down a disc? Do as Jan says - clean both the "mother" and the "daughter" discs BEFORE you press the Play buttons! I'll try to find some of the apparently new Pledge for Electronics later this week - it sounds like it might be a final answer for many people, as it is designed for use on plastic, glass, metal - but not wood. As Jan says - believe it - use the smallest amount possible - and if I use a spray product I spray it on the Paper Towel, not directly on the CD. With my Zaino, I use a dab about half the size of a dime - on the towel. then I carefully rub that on the disc - let it stand just a short time without drying, and carefully rub off. Note: The Viva towels I use tear off in "half-sheets" - and I usually use one of those for every two CDs I clean - then I toss them. That's for the Z-14 first-step. For the Z-6 second-step I spray one (1) spritz on a towel, carefully wipe the CD, and turn the towel over so I can wipe the disc dry before the solution itself dries. Once done, I look at the difference between a cleaned disc and a "dirty" one, and marvel at the surface. I'm sure Jan will back me on this - the cleaning really gets rid of a lot of "grunge" that you just don't believe is there until you clean. So - that puts us back into the realm of jitter. Does this cleaning produce a better "lens" for the laser, so it more accurately reads the beginning and end of the pits? Can't prove it - but I'll be it at least helps. Actually, I guess you really want NO lense - and nothing to stand in the way of the laser. A clearer polycarbonate layer would surely do this - and the Zaino formulas were designed to be, as their ad says: "optically perfect." Yeah - well. . .if you've ever seen a show car polished with Zaino - and I have - you'll swear the finish is three-dimensional. Now - I MUST find some of that new Pledge for Electronics! Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 436 Registered: Nov-05 | That's a lot of good helpful info - thanks again Larry and Jan. I'll look forward to your test with Pledge for electronics Larry.  |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8016 Registered: May-04 | John - Wasn't there a problem downloading those files you created? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4051 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan - the problem was they are 720 MB each. I just began downloading one; the estimated time on my ADSL link was 3 hours. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 439 Registered: Nov-05 | Well, it seems that particular Pledge product is not on sale here downunder. I checked the supermarket and the Aus distributor website. Anyway, curious as I was to try this 'cleaning' tweak I threw caution to the wind, grabbed an old aerosol can of Mr Sheen (regular), some generic paper towel (will use Viva when I get serious Larry) and a piece of microfibre disc cleaning cloth. I used a couple of old cd's that I rarely listen to and went to work. I sprayed a dab on a folded paper towel and rubbed with little pressure in circular motions (yes, I know) and dried with a clean folded towel with a little pressure applied also, rubbing from center to rim and back etc - using the correct radius method - then the same again with the MF cloth. Oh, needless to say (but I will anyway) I did listen to a little of each untreated disc prior to the treatments. Mr Sheen is a dust and shine spray for lacquered furniture, household appliences, dashboards etc. It even says audio covers (t/t lids) but to test a small area first. I must admit I was a little skeptical at first reading about your cleaning tweaks some time back, but this experiment has opened my eyes - er - my ears. The shimmer and decay of cymbals was more definite (I thought that was about as good as it could get for standard cd's), more space seemed to surround the vocals and instruments in a sense they became more individualized, bass seemed to change little, but the sense of timing seemed a little better also. If old Mr Sheen can do this, I may be willing to try that more expensive stuff. If Mrs Rantz is willing, though there are several more important expenses that will have to come first I'm afraid. I ended up giving this treatment to about a dozen titles (old and newer) and the effect was better on some than others with age not being a factor it seems. At worst, I am sure there was a tad of improvement. At best, it was like going from standard cd to a HDCD encoded version. So thanks guys, I too can recommend your treatment, though I do not know the long term effects of our Mr sheen. So take heed please. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 440 Registered: Nov-05 | Now, my only hesitation in continuing with this treatment is: does this remove the antifungus treatment supposedly on cds and are we, in the more humid climates, taking risks in having our music infected. http://www.stereophile.com/news/11073/ Any thoughts |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1211 Registered: Oct-04 | MR: Well, sir, considering that the article on CD rot is five years old - um - I'm not that worried. Here in Swampville, though, we DO know that without air conditioning most of our plastic and leather stuff will develop a severe case of the cruds. And rather quickly, at that - especially in the most humid summer months. Never heard of your "rot," but am not surprised. As to anti-fungus treatment, wellllll - I never heard of that, either. Maybe Jan can enlighten? I am happy and relieved and glad and satisfied and all that sort of thing that your treatment both worked and produced sonic improvement! As in, "whew!" (GRIN) I'm still looking around for that Pledge for Electronics, which is not sold in our grocery stores, but in Office Depot stores, I'm told. OK - away to one of those this week. If I can get the same level of improvement with a $7USD spray can that I get from the Zaino products - whoopppeeee! As it is, my initial bottle ($12.95USD) of Z-14 and my spray bottle ($9.95USD) of Z-6 have coated more than 300 CDs- some of them twice or more. And I have enough left to do another hundred or so. But still, the initial cost was way above Jan's Pledge-level spending. On disc longevity - can't offer an opinion on that, as I've never had a disc degrade - yet, anyway. Many of my CDs are more than 20 years old now - and going strong. BTW, Rantz, your perception of the changes pretty much parallels the differences that Mer and I have observed. Next - you might try your spray on your DVD movies. I'll be surprised if you and Ms. Rantz don't use the "wow" word regarding video upgrade. We certainly did. And now - uh, shhhhh - we treat all of the rental DVD movies before we watch them. Never scratched a disc, and we know we're getting better video. . . BTW - did your towels at all scratch the discs you were polishing? And one more thang - if the truth be known, I polish all my discs with a circular motion. Seems to de-gunk them much better than radial swiping. Only time I scratched any was a couple of discs polished with a towel that had apparently picked up a tad of grit. Sigh. Pretty bad scratches there, and I had to get a Brasso brass-polishing cloth to rub them out - or almost out, anyway. Happy polishing - and keep us informed. I know Jan will feel vindicated, as do I! Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1212 Registered: Oct-04 | MR: I believe I posted a long time ago that my friend Verne and others of his ilk in LA once put some CDs under a very strong microscope - looked at the CD layer, and said: "no wonder we don't get better sound." Then they polished several discs with various products, and looked again. Much smoother surface, without what they said looked like "boulders and pits." Maybe Jan's tongue-in-cheek comments about using a belt sander are on track, after all! (GRIN) BTW - Verne says he uses a home-made polish for all his discs - never offered me any, though! Hmm. . LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1213 Registered: Oct-04 | Ad nauseum: Sooo - what if our liddle surface-smoothing helps the laser more accurately read pits and planes? Here's part of a 6Moons report on jitter and the Exact Audio Copy - FYI. Each time the waveform crosses the zero line -- every time a pit-to-flat or flat-to-pit transition is encountered -- the player writes a 1 to a buffer. All other samples are 0s. Thus from just a part of the original waveform, the player is able to recreate a very close approximation in digital form. However, the newly created horizontal part of the waveform -- the time data of the clock -- isn't a digital signal at all. The clock is a constant-flow analog signal generated by an analog source, a crystal oscillator. Now this stream of 1s and 0s must be converted to analog so we can hear the music. Several things can and do go wrong during this whole process, from the glass master if generated from DAT tape or CD-R to the glass-mastering machine to the translucent quality of the actual polycarbonate, the quality of the stamper to form accurate pits, to the reflective aluminum layer which may or may not be thick enough or suffer from pin holes. In practice, it is the lack of crisp pit formation in a stamped CD that causes most of the problems. If a clock 'tick' prompts the laser to read the next sample and the wall of that pit isn't interpreted as a wall, the sample isn't misread but read just a little too late. Every transition from pit to flat and flat to pit becomes read as a digital 1. For a purely digital likeness, time delays don't pose any problems since the 1 is properly extracted. During playback, however, you will notice a peculiar harshness often associated with the medium. These offsets in time are called jitter. If we tie up all of the above -- and there are in fact many more issues that influence CDs - we can conclude that all manner of mechanical and external issues can interfere with our musical pleasure of playing back a CD OK - so maybe our collective cleaning efforts do some good. And as you commented - some discs are better than others - probably due to differences in the initial processing/pressing? I'll ask Jan. . . LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1214 Registered: Oct-04 | All: Please see my "conversation with Verne" on the Old Dogs site. . . LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 442 Registered: Nov-05 | The 6 moons articles makes sense Larry. I didn't scratch any discs but I will take your advice and use the Viva towels in future. I've often wondered what gunk they use in those disc polishers at the video rental shops. The dvd's come out with a brilliant mirror finish, and sometimes there is a trace of the stuff on the inner rim and it seems similar to car polish????? We sure seem to be getting ripped off again here in Aus regarding those Zaino products - even allowing for conversion, import duties, freight etc. But that seems usual :-( |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1216 Registered: Oct-04 | MR - yeah, that's just a small portion of the article, but I thought it relevant to our disc-cussions. Wow - your rental shops have disc polishers? I go to two shops here, but have never encountered any evidence of "laundering." Will ask, though. . .most of the discs I get are fingerprinted as though going to prison - and though scratched, aren't usually unplayable. Hold off on the Zaino-trying until I get some of the Pledge for Electronics. IF it, indeed, totally removes the surface-gunk, then I'll give it a thumbs-up. But I worry that it may simply cover over the gunk, and give it a good polish! Hmm. . . . If you have access to microfibre towels, I'd recommend that you use them - but be SURE to launder them regularly - and do NOT USE any fabric softener. Ruins the absorbability - not good. Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 445 Registered: Nov-05 | Larry, Jan etc, I put through a call to the customer service department of the Mr Sheen distributor to obtain information regarding the long term effects the product may have on cd's. The nice lady promised me she would email the manufacturer's technical department with my queery and that I would receive an answer (reading in between her lines) when they get around to it :-) Anyway, got some Viva paper towels Larry and I'm going to take the risk and try the goo on another few discs. They say it's good for computers and stereos so it should be okay. Oh well . . . This is intriguing stuff. |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 745 Registered: Feb-04 | After Pledging a cd, I can describe the sound as lemon-fresh with slightly metallic overtones. It's one nice smelling cd. For the Pledge test, I chose a cd that sounded lifeless compared to the LP version. The cd sounded dull, veiled and compressed before the Pledge treatment. On went the Pledge with the Viva paper towel massage. Popped the cd into the player and pressed play. Wow! It sounded significantly better. The music was more transparent, the bass sounded deeper and tighter. Soundstage increased in all dimensions. In other words, it sounded more like the LP version. It still sounded dull compared to the LP, but the gap was definitely reduced. One thing the Pledge doesn't do is fix a cd that skips. I suppose that's asking too much. For $3.50 for the Pledge and $1.89 for the Viva paper towels at Target, this is easily the thriftiest way to improve cd sound. Thanks, Larry and Jan! |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 446 Registered: Nov-05 | Okay, I tried the Viva towels and found them harder and scratchier than the generic ones I used previously, I wonder if they are manufactured the same here as there? Anyway, I went back to the generic brand. Also, I agree with 2C about his assessment of improvements to the bass (and other benefits) - I wasn't certain previously but upon more testing, on some discs it was noticeable. I wonder if or how much better the Pledge and Zaino treatments are then good ol' trusty Mr Sheen. Somehow I think they may well do the job a little better. After all, Mr Sheen has been around since I can remember, so he must be getting on :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 447 Registered: Nov-05 | Larry Is the Zaino Z-6 really necessary after the Z14 treatment. Does it add further improvement to the sound quality than just using the Z14, which I believe you used alone in the beginning. Though I could be wrong which I'm sure you'll tell me. I imagine it must add some benefit, if not sound enhancement, something else? Please enlighten me. M.R. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1219 Registered: Oct-04 | 2C, MR et al - sigh - sorry that you found the Viva towels "scratchy." Can't figger that one out - I have never had any trouble with those - but have had scratches with Brawny, and others. Big OOPS from me recommending the Viva, I guess. Maybe the ones in Australia are diff-runt than ours? Hmm. . . OK - Mr. Sheen I don't know, but I'd hazard a guess that it's not too far from Pledge. I'm thinking that what y'all have here are two products that take off the release gunk and smooth out the poly surface. Anything that does such without either scratching or coating will surely help! Zaino Z-6 adds an extra depth to the CDs - the company says it "bonds with the" other stuff - and so I use it. Don't really have to, I guess - but the extra shine tells me that the surface is smoother. As to sound quality with or without Z-6 - heck, I don't really hear any difference - though as you all know, my ears ain' as good as yours - obviously! The Z-14 is not car wax - it was developed to clean and clear up the special windows used in race cars, where, I guess, they really need to see out! Anyway, the stuff probably fills in the minute pits that are everywhere in any plastic - including the CD poly layer. Does it work any better than Pledge or Mr. Sheen? Welll - I'm about to test the two products A-B, and will give my opinion. Jan has already said that he feels the Zaino is a tad better - but probably not worth the extra cash for the Zaino. Interesting that - late last night when I couldn't sleep - I awayed to the CD rack, and picked out three discs that I knew had been treated with the original Vivid - not the Zaino. Cleaned them twice with the Zaino - and they came up much smoother-looking and shiny. Hmm. . .either the Vivid breaks down or the Zaino goes a step farther with the polishing. The Zaino left a mirror finish, where the Vivid had just a touch of softness to the look. I believe Jan has also said that he thinks Zaino a bit better than Vivid? Well - the testing will continue. And again, sorry for the Viva fiasco, MR! 2C - glad - very glad - that you're getting better music from at least some of your CDs! Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 148 Registered: Dec-05 | Whoa, you guys have bogarted my thread. Which is great. I always thought CD cleaning was mostly bogus. I have never tried it. But after reading all this, I sure as hell will!! |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 150 Registered: Dec-05 | I just needed to add a bit to my SACD impressions. I am now to the point, after less than a week, where I can instantly recognize a SACD recording, or at least a good one. That 'liquid' quality jumps out at me now - AND I LOVE IT. Patricia Barber's "Verse" is my favorite thus far (better even than Modern Cool, IMO). "Pieces", one of the standout tracks, sounds so much better than the redbook version (not the redbook layer, but the separate redbook CD) that I don't ever want to listen to the latter again. I was afraid this would happen! |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 448 Registered: Nov-05 | Paul, Yes, we do tend to digress at times. Sorry about that. Larry, The Viva towels weren't a fiasco but I just felt the other was softer and therefore would be more gentle on the disc surface. Maybe they are made differently here, but I will try the Viva again on an old disc and do a fair comparison. Thanks for the Zaino info. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 449 Registered: Nov-05 | For Aussies - Do not use Mr Sheen for CD cleaning/enhancement treatment. I just received a call back from the product's customer service and was told that the product is silicon based and contained a wax and could cause a build up on the discs. They do not recommned its use on audio discs. There we have it. Looks like Zaino is my only answer over here. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8027 Registered: May-04 | Look again for something similar to Pledge without wax or silicon. I can't imagine furniture cleaning is an area of North American superiority. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 450 Registered: Nov-05 | Thanks Jan, I bit the bullet and went ahead and ordered the Zaino stuff. Even though I have other more pressing things to spend our money on, I thought I'd better get it so I can redo the discs I used the Mr Sheen on. Besides, even if the Zaino is only a very slight improvement over the Mr Sheen then I think it is worth even the excessive price they charge here. This cleaning/shining tweak is a step up in sound quality and would cost possibly hundreds to obtain by other methods (upgrade components, high end cables, roomt treatments etc). I'm not saying it's the be all and end all in the pursuit of better SQ, but it's a very good start. The other problem in finding another suitable product (I have looked) is that the product (ingredient) information is rarely on the labels and phoning all the manufacturers is in the "too hard basket" I'm afraid. N.B. I have seen on the Walker website that treatments should not be used on SACD's that have a gold color or tinge and that the standard ones should not be a problem. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1221 Registered: Oct-04 | MR: Look "carefully" at the SACDs - some of them will say, inside their box, that you should not use any liquid on them. Most of the SACDs, however, have a gold color, so you can easily be fooled! Sigh. OK - we've got a bunch-ah guys going the way of CD cleaning - and I want to thank Jan for backing me up on all sorts of things - things he didn't really need to do, BTW! I'm going a "second mile" here on the forum, and am wiling to try this newest of new Pledge products (...for electronics) to see what, if anything it does that is better, or even as good as Vivid/Zaino stuff has shown itself to be. I know that this all sounds like voodoo to a lot of you, but for friends who walk the extra mile and try new stuff, well, I hope it neets our approval rating! I'm about ready to scrap my green-lining of the inner and outer rings - but will still "sand" them down a bit o stop laser reflections. Sigh. So many tings!!!! More later. . . LR |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2895 Registered: Feb-05 | Alright I'm in! Which way did you say you wipe off the CD's. I've been reading up on it a bit and the common wisdom is that you wipe inside to out and not around the CD in a circular motion. Please clarify. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 451 Registered: Nov-05 | Art, I think the less risky way is based on the 'common wisdom' but I have applied my stuff in a circular motion (like Larry) and buffed using the 'common wisdom' method without problems. I recommend checking the surface first so any scratches aren't blamed on the process. Remember Larry is using the Zaino stuff, I don't know if Jan does it the same with Pledge. I fold the paper towel to about 2 fingers wide and, using two fingers, buff center to edge back and forth, turn the disc a bit, repeat until entire disc has been done. Then I look again and dust off any particles with a small soft brush. Maybe use a couple cd's you don't particularly like until you get the hang of it. Cheers |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8030 Registered: May-04 | Common wisdom dictates you do not wish to accidentally scratch the disc surface along the laser's path. It is relatively easy for the error correction circuitry to correct a straight line "scratch" that runs across the radius of the disc. This would be an error the laser sees only once every revolution. This, in fact, is how error correction/laser set up is calibrated. A disc with straight lines along its radius is inserted into the player and as the laser tracks the disc from inside edge to outer edge, the width of the "error" line is increased. The width of the line which can no longer be corrected properly will determine part of the set up procedure for the laser assembly. However, following the same logic, if the laser encounters an error which runs along its track for any length of time, it sees the equivalent of the widest line on the set up disc. So proper cleaning of a digital disc should be from the inner edge to the outer edge in straight lines along the radius of the disc. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1222 Registered: Oct-04 | Art: welcome aboard the good ship CDClean, and we wish you fair sailing. Your confusion on wiping direction is understood. As Jan says so wisely - wipe from inner to outer edges. OK so far. . . But I have found - and I may be on very dangerous ground here - that I don't get a total clean-off wiping that way - SO I go against common wisdom and wipe in circles, using just enough pressure to keep the towel on the CD surface. As I posted earlier, I have only scratched a couple of CDs that way - and then only because I had some grit on the towel. I fold the towel into about 3-inch squares for the applicator part, and put a dot of Zaino in one corner. Then I gently wipe on. The "take-off" towel I just sorta crumple up in my hand and turn it very often. I find that I must keep a clean towel-part against the disc as best I can - and I use one of the half-sheets for every two CDs I clean. A lot of towels - I know - but it lessens the chances for scratches, and gets the discs good and clean. Some people clean with disc in hand, but I find that very awkward. So I took a CD jewel box, cut a thin cork mat to fit where the CD would be, leaving a center hole large enough to let the center holder come up through the middle. That gives me a solid surface to work on, and prevents disc-scratch on the bottom. As you know, one of the most sensitive parts of the disc is not the playing surface, but the label surface, which is dangerously thin above the metal playing layer. I do not clean that surface unless there are some finger-smudges - and then very cautiously. Jan and others may well take my circular cleaning motion as insanity - or at least a dangerous maneuver. It may well be, but I find it simply gets off more gunk quicker and more thoroughly. Use your own judgement - but remember - use Very Light Pressure! Let the cleaner do the scrubbing. . . One Very Important note: Always check the disc surface closely before you put on any cleaner. You'll probably find a bit of grit or two there - blow them off or as MR does, wipe them away with a very soft brush. One tiny bit of junk may ruin your disc - and your day! Paul: sorry about the thread hijack - and I think we all hope your cleaning produces results that please you, sir! I hope that I shall find some Pledge for Electronics at a store either today or Thursday - and will report quickly on my impressions of it - I hope positive! Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1223 Registered: Oct-04 | Paul et al: I read that Naxos is giving up on SACD releases - and I have a feeling that more labels might follow suit in the near future. If my impression is correct, the Classical genre may be the last holdout of the SACD format. . . As better CD players are produced - and as more people find that good cleaning helps the sound quality in most cases - the good old RedBook disc may be good enough for many audio-lovers. Until Blu-Ray comes along?? Well - I still think that will apply to video long before it becomes a standard audio-only medium. IMHO. . . LR |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2897 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks Larry. I'm going out on friday to buy supplies. Any opinions on using fluids designed for eyeglass cleaning. Also what about using the microfiber towlettes used for cleaning eyeglasses. Seems as though that would minimize the risk of scratching. |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 151 Registered: Dec-05 | Naxos: That sux. Jazz is my #1 priority. Surely there are still many other good jazz labels doing SACD?? Surely the writing is not on the way just yet...... |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 153 Registered: Dec-05 | Also - after really experiencing it finally - I sure am surprised there aren't more 'philes on board, enough to really support the format. I guess many have simply chosen vinyl as their preferred hi-res format, which, well, I couldn't argue with. However, at this point I'd probably wager a bet that you could get better sound for less money with hi-res digital than with vinyl. Table, tonearm, cartridge, phono stage... that stuff sure adds up. And, of course, vinyl has limited playability (gets "used up") which seems to me a major weakness, especially considering the prices of, say, the 200g stuff... Perhaps we need an all-out revolution. Perhaps the masses need SACD imposed upon them for their own good. Yeah.... |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1224 Registered: Oct-04 | Art: two things - first, you can, indeed, use eyeglass microfibre cloths for CD cleaning - but if you're of a mind, sir - look for microfibre towels in Sams Club or Wal-Mart - a large package for not much money. They're used a lot for auto polishing, and are usually blue or yellow. Mer uses them with great satisfaction in her fused glass classes - sprays alcohol on the glass and cleans with the microfibre. She says no lint and a fine polish. Same with CDs - I often "steal" some of her supply. (heck, I bought them! GRIN) One thing to watch for with the microfibre, however: they do tend to hide liddle particles - so when I use them I give them a couple of vigorous shakes before. Also, when you wash them - don't wash them with "regular cotton" towels - they'll pick up towel-lint. And - please - NO fabric softener. reduces the absorbing factor in the towels. Eyeglass solution - well, I've not tried that, but maybe so. I know that Optrix, sold for CD cleaning, is almost identical in formula in its eyeglass-cleaning bottles, often at Wal-Mart, Target, etc. However, I'm thinking that Pledge or Zaino will do a better job with that mold release-scrubbing?? Not sure. . .and if you're around an Office Depot - look for the Pledge for Electronics - it sounds like Jan's ultimate solution!! Paul: there's lots of jazz out there in SACD format - and I don't know of any further label reductions, yet. But I've found that most of the jazz I have purchased in recent months comes in regular CD format, not SACD. Alot of re-released stuff that's very good. Have you heard Miles Davis' "Sketches of Spain?" And if so - have you heard that in both SACD and Redbook format? I'm curious as to your take on that. I have both - and find the SACD has much more "depth" to it -but overall sound about the same. (it's one of Mer's favorites) If you look at hi-end equipment catalogs, Paul, you'll note the mega-bucks - what? - TURNTABLES! Seems that there is, indeed, a revolution (yeah, pun intended) of sorts with the vinyl. If you have money, time, patience and dedication, the good old LP may be fine for you. I ain' got much of that stuff, however. . .(grin) Respectfully. .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8031 Registered: May-04 | Two labels which promote jazz and SACD are Telarc and Chesky. However, should you peer into the set up instructions from both labels you will find they suggest a speaker configuration which is not alinged to the typical lay out diagrammed in the Sony SACD liner notes. Where Sony, and most audio companies who manufacture SACD players, outline a typical surround "pie chart" which follows, more or less (mostly less), the lay out for THX presentations, Chesky and Telarc both have similar to one another but different than the mainstream (and not identical to each other)ideas for multichannel reproduction. Both labels dispense with a discrete center channel output and have no provisions encoded on the disc for a LFE channel. Rather the preferred speaker configuration for both labels involves re-routing the pre amp outputs for those channels and configuring them as "height" channels. This set up places two speakers more or less above and slightly behind the two front main speakers. Since the lack of adequate "height" information is one limitation which stereo cannot over come and a supposed benefit of multichannel, these two labels prefer to play up that aspect of their recordings. The original Old Dogs will remember this as one of my many objections to the multichannel format wars. While offering some advantages over two channel reproduction, the current suggested alingment of multichannel speakers is not synched to have THX, Hi-rez or the two labels mentioned here operate at their best without physically moving speakers or having discrete systems for each variety of recording. This goes back to the format wars of an earlier generation of "surround" systems where the speaker set up for SQ and QS did not agree with the set up for CD-4 and none of those was best for RM. As Larry would intone, siiiiiiiigh! |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1225 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan: Siiigh! (grin) wowzer - sounds like a lot of work, sir! Wish I had your techno-knowledge. . . On CD-cleaning. IF you have a scratched disc, do what my LA friend does, and use Brasso polish. Here's something to back that up. . . http://www.burningissues.net/how_to/scratchrepair/scratchrepair.htm LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 455 Registered: Nov-05 | "Chesky and Telarc both have similar to one another but different than the mainstream (and not identical to each other)ideas for multichannel reproduction. Both labels dispense with a discrete center channel output and have no provisions encoded on the disc for a LFE channel. Rather the preferred speaker configuration for both labels involves re-routing the pre amp outputs for those channels and configuring them as "height" channels. This set up places two speakers more or less above and slightly behind the two front main speakers. Since the lack of adequate "height" information is one limitation which stereo cannot over come and a supposed benefit of multichannel, these two labels prefer to play up that aspect of their recordings." Well Jan, not to disagree with you, but it seems this does not apply to all Chesky and Telarc SACD's. I have a Chesky 4.0 and 5.0, I have Telarc SACD's ranging from 4.1, 5.1 and 5.0. Also Chesky has at least one 5.1 SACD I know of: Dr Chesky and his Band of Maniacs. None of the above I have came supplied with the speaker set-up instructions that you stated and sound absolutely fine with the normal set-up. Whether those special set-ups you mentioned were early editions or just some variations those labels have of the format I do know, but I am yet to see them, but granted, I don't have that many. Paul, many other jazz labels such as Heads Up, Concord, Linn, Verve etc can be found by clicking on SACD on the acousticsounds.com website. Scroll down the rh side of the page to view the many labels. |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 154 Registered: Dec-05 | I'm familiar with acousticsounds (stupid name, BTW - think about it :-}), but I guess the question is more to the future of the format. Hope other labels don't follow Naxos. I have one Chesky CD (Area 31). I had no idea labels were doing such things re: speaker setup recommendations/instructions. But, I'm listening to SACD in stereo, of course, so multichannel considerations don't apply. This disc also sounds absolutely wonderful in stereo. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 457 Registered: Nov-05 | None of us has a crystal ball, so who knows what the future beholds. Certainly not the magazine reviewers. Okay, a couple of labels have dumped the format, there are plenty of others and there are more than enough titles on sale to keep me happy for a while. If I listened to SACD in stereo only, it wouldn't be a big deal to me. But others will disagree I know. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1227 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz et al: I think the subject of "surround or stereo" is a good one for general conversation - but not so good for meaningful dialogue - in other words, let's let Old Dogs lie down and peacefully slumber - sound-wise, that is. . . What I am most concerned with is the quality of sound that I get from a disc - not whether it has surround or two-channel. All this "manic cleaning" on my part has given Mer and me a lot of added enjoyment - soundwise, that is! Hmm. . . None of us will ever totally agree on the issue of multi-channel versus 2-channel - and for us, it's a split decision, anyway: 2-channel music, 5.1 surround movies and - yes - opera. for some reason, the hall ambiance in opera helps us to appreciate the performance even more. Maybe that's because we've been to opera halls so many times - and have gotten used to the overall ambiance of the facilities? Not sure. . . I hope to have some Pledge for Electronics in my hand by tomorrow afternoon - and will post prelim results soonish - promise. . . Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 460 Registered: Nov-05 | Larry, I wasn't trying to start up the 2 vs multi channel debate again, I was just making my comment on the state of things as they stand. Will look forward to your PFE cleaning test. But since we touched on the subject of multi channel, I just received an order from your country (CDUniverse this time) and finished listening to Donald Fagen's Morph the Cat in 5.1 DVD-A and I was blown away. I did find my way back thankfully so I can get back to work - or do some listening - hmm - anyway I know you're well versed on Donald Fagen so I won't go on :-) |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8038 Registered: May-04 | "Well Jan, not to disagree with you, but it seems this does not apply to all Chesky and Telarc SACD's." Possibly not. I'll try to find the notes I had on the speaker set up. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1228 Registered: Oct-04 | Mr. Rantz, sir: well, now, you've shamed this olde dog into branching out, reaching out, and nearly passing out - gasp - in other words, I actually went Online and auditioned some Donald Fagen! (could this possibly be written by the super-curmudgeonly Lar???) And here I thought Disco was dead! Nope - and here I mean NO offense - it's apparently alive and well in the heart and soul of Donald Fagen! took me back to the time of life when I could actually move with the likes of Johnny Travolta! Hmm. . . OK - enough jabs. Hey - at least I tried! To listen, I mean. . .and I dutifully went through all the Amazon snippets on his latest album. Good thing Mer had already gone to bed, though, or she would have made me turn it off. Sigh. Double sigh. Then again - there are very old people on earth who actually listen to opera! (grin) I haven't ordered from CD Universe, but will give them an Online look-see. Always interested in what shops other than Amazon have in stock. On jazz: did some auditioning of Charles Lloyd tonight, also - and found it interesting that, in his slower moments, there are echoes of Paul Desmond. I don't have any Lloyd CDs - but am tempted. . . respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 461 Registered: Nov-05 | Larry, as the famous (or infamous) David Byrne sang: That ain't no disco! Where've you bin sir? Steely Dan has been around since they were a college band in the late sixties. They are blend of rock, pop, jazz and blues, but disco - never! Hurummph! Anyway Larry, if you ain't been into Steely Dan, you haven't lived - no, kidding of course - so I guess Mr Fagen certainly won't tickle your fancy. But, darn, it is one heck of a great hi-res surround disc. Okay, Mr opera/classical/jazz aficionado, me, I have varied tastes in music also, with classical being at the low end. Blues, jazz/blues, jazz and good old rock are my faves. My latest order was a mix of rock, jazz (fusion) and classical, so there you have it. Insult me all you like you big palooka, see if I care [grin]. As for saxophonists, I often listen to a very nice jazz/blues cd of Jimmy Witherspoon, and the man blowing in the skinny end of the tenor sax is Scott Hamilton. He plays smooth. Then there's Getz, Turrentine, Bobby Malach - so many, so much talent, past, present and hopefully (let's pray) in the future. I started to learn sax when I was a young whippersnapper but I mistook the 'a' for an 'e' and got a bit sidetracked. Cheers |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1229 Registered: Oct-04 | MR: Sir - insult you? Never! The very thought of it turns my stomach to Vegemite! (sp?) (double grin) No - I was only relating how the music affected me, and I DO realize that, to most people, I'm a music dinosaur. Yep. Youze young guyz have totally diff-runt histories of listening - which I respect, not ridicule, BTW. Steely Dan - and here I tread very carefully - no, I don't think I've ever heard - him? them? is that a person or a band? Really don't know. . . OOPS! this almost slipped by me, until I read our morning newspaper. Eric Clapton is 61 today. Are you reading, Jan? John? Rantz? SimplyMcIntosh? I relayed that fact to Mer as she approached the breakfast table in her usual morning funk. "Eric Clapton's 61 today," I informed her. there was a long pause. . . "Who is she?" Mer retorted. "She?" I asked, not understanding. "It's a he, and I think he's a famous British Blues singer." "You said Erica Lapton." "No, I didn't - I said Eric Clapton." "Oh. . ." "That's it?" I asked. "Isn't there a guy on your audio forum who keeps answers short, like, uh, yep?" "Yep," I answered. "His name is Kegger, but he hasn't been around for awhile, and I worry about him." "Ok, then - my answer is yep." At that point my tea water boiled, and Mer settled into her morning Mensa crossword puzzle, during which she insists on no interruption. Sigh. Anyway - happy birthday, Eric Clapton, whomever you are. . . Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1230 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz: PS - who's David Byrne? LR |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2905 Registered: Feb-05 | Kegger is a regular poster over at Audiokarma. No need to worry he's just gettin' into his vintage thing. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1231 Registered: Oct-04 | Art: Thanks - I really was a tad worried about Kegger. I'll try to call up the Audiokarma forum, but not sure how to do it other than type it in Google. Hope you have a wunnerful Oregon Day, sir. Life out there is surely more sane than it is down here in Swampville! Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8044 Registered: May-04 | Apparently there is little consistency within the Telarc catalog. Telarc SACD Sampler I - Various - Telarc multichannel SACD SACD-60006: Telarc has been a leader in the multichannel employment of DSD and the release of multichannel discs originating both from DSD and analog masters. This is a well-chosen sampling of 15 tracks from their fairly recent efforts ... ... The liner notes refer to Telarc's sometime use of the LFE channel for side/height information; however I found little signal in that channel and when I did it was low frequency material as one would expect in the LFE channel. Certainly the effect was nothing like the spectacular Telarc 1812 Overture's use of the side/height channels. Perhaps Telarc should cue those of us who go to the trouble to set up these additional speaker(s) by putting an "H" next to those tracks with a height channel. (Chesky uses both the center and LFE channels for this purpose.) From the Linkwitz web page: "3 - SACD and DVD-A use of the center channel I had acquired the DPR 1001 Audio/Video receiver to experiment with SACD and DVD-A playback, and have learned a bit more about the use of the 6 discrete channels that can be recorded in these formats. While the two storage formats have been well defined at the bit level, there seems to be no universal agreement about what to record to the different channels, nor about the loudspeaker layout to play them back. In particular, I read that some recording engineers would rather not use a center channel for music, while others insist on it. Chesky, on the other hand, proposed 2 front speakers, 2 elevated side/front speakers and 2 rear speakers. This takes up the available 6 discrete channels. A universal player like the Pioneer DV-45A has 6 analog audio outputs for SACD or DVD-A multichannel sound recordings, which are labeled Front L/R, Surround L/R, Center and Subwoofer. The de-facto standard for multi-channel music playback seems to be the Home Theater 5.1 speaker setup. The multi-channel music demonstrations that I have heard from Sony, Meridian, JBL and others used a 3+2+.1 setup and have been disappointing in comparison to the 2+2+2 setup by Chesky/Muse/Avalon, which demonstrated DVD-A to the High-Resolution Audio Workshop during the 106th AES Convention in Los Angeles. The large number of installed 5.1 home theater setups is clearly driving the music recording industry now." http://www.linkwitzlab.com/surround_system.htm http://www.audaud.com/audaud/OCT01/SACD/sacdOCT01.html "I was surprised that neither the jewel box nor note booklet made reference to Chesky's non-standard allocation of the six channels. This is a serious omission. As discussed before in AUDIOPHILE AUDITION, finding 5.1 inadequate for music-only surround, Chesky uses both the LFE and center front channels full range to feed a stereo pair of side/height speakers to be located midway between the frontal pair of speakers and the rear surrounds - allowing the rears to be further back if space permits. Chesky's web site has details on this and some discussion about it on their forum page. One user reported that simply feeding their special six-channel mix into his 5.1 system with subwoofer sounded weird, and therefore he felt it was not really compatible. David Chesky replies that Channel 5 - which he identifies as the center channel normally - becomes the left side speaker and Channel 6 (the LFE) becomes the right side speaker. My sources show that Channels 4 & 5 are normally the surround channels in 5.1 recording, so it appears that Chesky is also non-standard in the way they allocate tracks on their recording equipment as well as the way they allocate the speaker layout." Multichannel Reference SACD - DMP SACD-16: Tracks are: Ubi Caritas, from Guadamus "Sacred Feast" Autumn Leaves, from Warren Berhardt Trio "So Real" Shiny Stockings, from Bob Mintzer Big Band "Hommage to Count Basie" Carioca Blue, from Joe Beck & Ali Ryerson "Django" Bach's Lunch, from :Pilhofer Jazz Quartet "Full Circle" Knockin' Myself Out, from Vivino Brothers "Blues Band" Tsunami, from Hohner Percussion Ensemble "Far More Drums" Test Signals for each channel using pink noise A fascinating and useful disc absolutely indispensable to setting up a multichannel SACD system. The test signals are the same as those on the Telarc 1812. Tom Jung's approach, like Chesky and Telarc, puts the LFE channel to uses other than separately handling the lowest bass frequencies. However, his take on it differs from the other labels. It is suggested for optimum results that the LFE channel signal be fed to a raised-height center rear surround speaker near the ceiling - thus fulfilling some of the "ES" center-rear-channel requirements and at the same time providing some additional vertical spatial enhancement (provided by Chesky and Telarc's raised left and right side speakers). Alternately, the DMP note booklet suggests the LFE feed be used either for an actual overhead height speaker or conversely a center rear speaker located at the same floor level as the other speakers. The overhead ceiling speaker (or speakers) would be the optimum method for playback of the first track on this sampler, since the a capella choir was recorded with an overhead mike in the chapel where they performed. I heard a demo of this with one of the Theil flat-mount speakers overhead and the result was really uncanny. The other tracks all utilize Jung's subtle and tasteful approach to multichannel, with natural ambience in the surround channels and no gimmicky pan-potting of instruments to either of the surrounds."} "One wouldn't expect multichannel reproduction to add a great deal to a standard piano trio, but let me tell you it does. On material using DMP's subtle rear-ambience approach it is very important to have all five main speakers equidistant from you, and if possible all identical too. It would be nice if component manufacturers would give us a simple front/back balance control as in car stereos, since even a half dB too high level on the surrounds can bring about a focus on them which should not occur if you want to maintain that So Real playback." Sorry, I cannot find any explanation on the Chesky web page for their speaker set up. If someone else would care to wade through their information, please, have at it. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1232 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan: As usual, sir, you have done exhaustive research, and are to be commended for it. Meanwhile, I spent three hours going store-to-store in Swampville today - even called around - and NOWHERE in this miserable substitute for a cultural environment could I find the Pledge for electronics. I'll try one more store on Saturday - then just order some from Amazon. Sigh. I'm happy with the Z-14, so it's no big loss - but I'd like to know if the Pledge works as well as the Z-14. Sure would save a lot of money if it does! LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 462 Registered: Nov-05 | "Rantz: PS - who's David Byrne?" He was a "Talking Head" Larry. The lead singer in the "Talking Heads" Now didn't Jan say Z14 is better than Pledge? Jan, I looked on both the Telarc and Chesky sites for their recommended suround set-up. I did once see a setup that included the option of side height speakers - I think it may have been on one of the DTS sites I'm not sure. The Telarc and Chesky SACD's I have, are different, not just to each other but even the same labels vary with their channel use. Heads Up (Telarc's jazz label) uses the normal 5.1 set up. So go figure. I won't be using side height channels - not unless I can get a skyhook to hang 'em on one side of our room anyway :-) An addendum to the Denon 2900's manual, for playing Chesky discs and some others, suggests setting setting the filter to off, thus keeping speakers set to large and the sub to 'yes' (if my memory serves) and this adds 5dbs to the subs output for DVD-A's and 15dbs for SACD's. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8050 Registered: May-04 | Larry - From what I can see, Johnson Wax corp. no longer lists the Pledge for Electronics as a product they manufacture. Pledge is not going to match the Zaino. It will come close but there is an improvement when Zaino follows Pledge. Take that for what it is worth. Rantz - As I said on Old Dogs, lack of compatibility or consistency remains an issue for me when considering multichannel. You might still disagree, but in my mind there are no consistent levels to achieve correct playback. "Correct" might be in the opinion of the listener, but I would like a bit more than what I find on most of the mc discs I own. Giving the engineer more channels simply makes for more ways to deviate from the norm. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 463 Registered: Nov-05 | Jan, I do disagree, but only up to a point. When discs like Chesky's, some of Telarcs perhaps, and possibly Mobile Fidelity (of which I have none) come into the mix, I may agree, however with the titles I have in both DVD-A and SACD I do not find I ever need to change my surround settings. As I have some redbook titles of the same albums to compare, everything seems right and makes the MC music a very enjoyable experience imho. But, I do very much enjoy stereo as well - even with that gear you find non-musical:-) Anyway, I've been known to deviate from the norm with many things. But, not too far. |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 157 Registered: Dec-05 | "Everybody's got to deviate from the norm"... |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 1908 Registered: Dec-04 | And you may ask yourself'Well how did I get here'? And as days go by... Or 'swamp' in the Tom Cruise movie when he drowns his dad's Porche. Or'burning down the house' a bit commercial, but Thomas Arais on percussion. Water flowing underground |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1233 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan, et al: Well, it's worth a lot coming from Jan V. - and now I've gotta go Online again and see about the Pledge. Both Amazon and Office Depot sell it Online, but it may be end-of-lot? Hmm. . . Anyway - got a new bottle of Z-14 today - I was told that, although the product has a long shelf life, it may need to be replaced every year - which I have done. Heck - I may just forget about the Pledge now!!! Rantz: Sigh. I know - or should say I have heard of the groups and people you refer to - but I simply have never listened to Rock, and thus am a bit skimpy on the details. Forgive me, but it jest ain' my bag. thanks to many of you Old Dogs - Don especially - I am constantly learning more about jazz - and liking it. Thank you all. . . respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1234 Registered: Oct-04 | Quick addendum - Rantz et al - was getting out a new roll of Viva to clean some new CDs - when I remembered Rantz's puzzlement over the Viva's less-than-soft texture. I know what MAY have happened. when I unwrapped the roll and began to peel off several sheets, I found some sort of adhesive sticking to the sheets. Hmm. . .I finally unrolled about three layers of the towels - and found the remaining ones nice and soft. Perhaps - try to unroll about three layers and see if the towels do, indeed, have some sort of gunk that sticks the outer layers together? Not good - but at least I know of the problem. . . LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 465 Registered: Nov-05 | Thanks Larry My Zaino stuff (Z14 & Z6 over $70,00 delivered) should arrive early next week. I'll retry the Viva towels then and give my appraisal of both. By God Larry, this stuff better be good! I think Nuck, you wear a big suit :-) Psycho Killer! |
|
Silver Member Username: SemNew York USA Post Number: 570 Registered: Mar-04 | same as it ever was..... |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1235 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz: Uh-oh - -I may be in real trouble now! As in, "ouch!" Seventy bucks to clean CDs? I may have to call in Jan V. to back me up on this now - but I do know the stuff works for me. You've read Jan/s many posts on the issue - and if there's anyone on the forum whose judgement I respect, it is his. (send checks to my home, please, Jan!) I think he gave the Zaino, and other glop, a pretty fair testing. I have coated all of my CDs and DVD-video discs, and Mer has agreed with me on all points - the stuff improves both sound and picture. BUT - not greatly on every disc. Some have 50% improvement, some have about 10% - which has always puzzled me. BTW - once you get your stuff - be sure to keep a tight lid on the Z-14. I actually transfered a small amount to a little bottle, and use that, rather than opening and closing the main bottle constantly. Instructions on the bottle will say to let it dry, but I find that if I start polishing before the stuff gets very dry, it seems to work better. I usually go about 30 to 45 seconds before buffing. Jan may have a much different method - I can't remember if he lets it dry or not, for example. I hope he adds his comments to this. . . 2C - Jazzwannabe - SimplyMac - John A - Sem - Art - Rick - Nuck - et al - jump in, if you please - I think you'll find the difference in sound is more than worth the effort and cash. Respectfully. . .LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: PaulfolbrechtPost Number: 158 Registered: Dec-05 | Hey Nuck, didja get the Rush reference? (Vital Signs....) |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 467 Registered: Nov-05 | Don't worry Larry! You're too far away to send the leg-breakers. LOL! |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1236 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz: Yeah, but as you know, those leg-breakers are everywhere - and are only a phone call away! (grin) Now, if we could only get more people in on this grand experiment. . .sigh. Might be a lot of fun. Respectfully. . LarryR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 478 Registered: Nov-05 | Well the Zaino Z14 & Z6 arrived this a.m. Yesterday I bought some micro fibre towels. I have treated about 4 cd's so far. Each one had been treated with Mr Sheen. I'm very disappointed. I expected nothing short of the musicians eminating from the music and appearing before my eyes because the sound was supposed to be so realistic after this supposed "treatment." That did not happen Larry and Jan! What did happen was another veil coming off somewhere between my ears and the disc. I was kidding about being disappointed guys [grin]. I noticed an obvious benficial difference over and above the Mr Sheen treatment - two more so than the others, but all emitted even more 3 dimensional, articulate and detailed sound. So far all I can say is thank you. This is a little like stepping up to a higher end player - who knows, maybe better :-) After I have redone all the Mr Sheen treated discs, I shall start on the others, including some hi-res surround titles and give a report. Thanks again Larry & Jan. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 1973 Registered: Dec-04 | i did and I do. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8116 Registered: May-04 | Rantz - Did you order Zaino with the "eminating musicians" additive? |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1251 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz: Yeah, Jan is right - I forgot to tell you to order the Zaino with the Eminating Musicians additive. thanks, Jan, for reminding me. In the future, I'll be sure to include that in my comments re the Zaino! (grin) In reading your first posting, I got this heart-pounding reaction - oh, no! I thought - all that money, and nothing in return??? Gasp. . So it was with some degree of relief to read on as you gave us the rest of the story. . . I'm glad you found/bought the microfibre towels. In my estimation, they do about a 1,000% better job than the paper towels. I think I mentioned that our towels come in 15x15-inch (38x38cm?) size. I cut them in half, launder them, then use them on the discs. I average six discs per half-towel before I throw it in the wash. I'm afraid to let too much Zaino build up on them - but don't really know how many discs each towel will safely clean. I was interested in your reaction - because it pretty well matched Jan's impressions from some time back. Good cleaning - and good luck! (hmm. . .) LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1252 Registered: Oct-04 | 2C - how is your cleaning/polishing coming? LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 483 Registered: Nov-05 | I guess I didn't get the eminating musicians 'cause their computer couldn't process the incorrect spelling. Maybe I'll get it right when I order the next bottle. Larry, do you apply both the Z6 and Z14 with the microfibre towels or use them for buffing off (which I do)? Anyway, have cleaned more discs including a couple of surround SACD's and am still getting mixed results. Some enhancements more obvious than others. Yet improvement overall. Good stuff! |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1253 Registered: Oct-04 | Rantz: I apply the Z-14 with a foam makeup pad, and then buff it off with the microfibre. For the Z-6, I fold one of the Viva towels into about a 3 by 10 cm shape, and spray on ONE spritz of the Z-6 - wipe it gently over the disc, then turn the Viva over to a dry spot and very gently wipe it off. Not much pressure used. I supposed I could use the microfibre for everything, but I just got used to doing it that way. You will get mixed results. On some of my discs there is NO difference at all - other than a wunnerful shiny surface! On others, it warms up the CD, spreads out the sound, and generally "softens" the digital harshness. Many people who clean discs with various products report the same thing - inconsistency. BTW - on the SACDs - go very gently, for some reason, I've found that they scratch more easily. Not sure why. . . Good luck! LR |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 488 Registered: Nov-05 | Thanks Larry - I hope you wash out your makeup pads before putting on your face in the mornings [grin]. |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 747 Registered: Feb-04 | On the Ecosmetics forum, there's a thread on Zaino's effectiveness in removing wrinkles. Women are so gullible, they'll believe anything that promises smoother sound, er, I mean, skin. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 1977 Registered: Dec-04 | Ecosmetics..hehehe |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 495 Registered: Nov-05 | Attention all OCCDCS's! (obsessive/compulsive CD cleaning syndrome) About Zaino Z6 - I learnt a lesson today - I have been putting about 6 small dollops at intervals on the CD surface then I begin to polish. Treating up to about a dozen and a half discs, so far so good. Next up was a Linn SACD and when I had finished polishing and buffing, I could see marks on the disc surface where I put the six or so dollops. Subsequent polishing did not make them disappear - nor did the Z14 gloss enhancer. However, I played the CD layer without problem and am yet to play the SACD MC layer. Just a warning - place the amount of Zaino polish directly to the material you will use to polish the disc - not on the surface. This has only happened to one and I don't know why. Also, with using the microfibre towels I have noticed a few fine scratches after polishing and buffing. So take care. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4080 Registered: Dec-03 | Phew. Can I just recap...? One could buy two identical discs, brand new, break open the wrappers, polish one (up to three times...!), and, as a result, it will sound better than the other? 2c. Great. Now the Body Shop has been taken over by L'Oreal, there's no telling where it will all end. Foil strips, eyeliner; why stop there? For some of my golden oldies, I'm considering a full face-lift. Because I'm worth it. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 497 Registered: Nov-05 | "One could buy two identical discs, brand new, break open the wrappers, polish one (up to three times...!), and, as a result, it will sound better than the other?" You got it, John. Sometimes better, sometimes just barely better, somtimes not at all. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4082 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, MR. Hitherto my disc cleaning has been to exhale on it, then polish off children's finger-prints with a clean cotton handkerchief, moved gently and radially. I could not hear any difference, but they looked better. I thought it was prevention. Grease, sweat, and salts in finger-prints would be a nice substrate for mould and similar things. I've had a few mis-tracking CDs. Close inspection reveals no visible flaw, and cleaning doesn't help. We used to rent DVDs which people had visibly done strange things to, and occasionally the above treatment restored correct tracking. I'll bear all these comments in mind. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2953 Registered: Feb-05 | I have decided that I am going to do more research on the CD cleaning thing before moving forward. I'm going to ask a couple audiophile friends who own audio stores if they clean and if so with what. I am not into scratching my CD's even if just a bit. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1258 Registered: Oct-04 | All: DARN! It happened again - I had this wonderful reply to all - and the Forum server dropped out on me, and I lost it. (bad words here) Anyway - Rantz - be extra careful with the SACDs - they have a softer surface - and some of them carry a warning on the jewel box not to use any cleaner on them. You may have one of those. Scratches - take them off with Brasso brass cleaner. Many fine FM stations use it - it works better than anything I've found. Art: understand your hesitation - and cleaning is not for everyone. Summing up (if the server stays on this time) use light pressure - only put Zaino on applicator - shake out towel before each use (they collect every mote of dust) and good luck to all. . . Oh, yes - Rantz: I ain't used any of dat dare makeup stuff since I walked off the TV some 15 yars agoo! But I loved your comment, anyway. . .(double grin) LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1259 Registered: Oct-04 | OOPS - Rantz - with the Z-14 - use only ONE dollop on your applicator, then wipe on VERY FINE layer. With the Z-6 - ONE SPRITZ on towel or applicator, wipe on gently, then turn the towel and wipe off before it dries. It WILL leave marks if you let it dry on the disc surface. I go two applications of Z-14, which I let dry only about 30 seconds, then the spritz of Z-6 on the towel, which I turn over the wipe off the Z-6 before the little drops dry. I've never had the staining problems you report - but I'm EXTRA cautious on the SACDs. LR |
|
Silver Member Username: SemNew York USA Post Number: 574 Registered: Mar-04 | I'm still able to find recordings that interest me enough to buy in both SACD and DVD-A formats. I've even picked up a couple DualDiscs recently and, so far, have had no problems playing them either. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4085 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry, "Scratches - take them off with Brasso brass cleaner." No, no! It is abrasive; has to be, to get the tarnish off brass. It'll just make more scratches. Might as well use "Vim" (is that in US?) or steel wool pads - "scouring pads" over here. This is getting bizarre. One could also "remove" scratches with fine sandpaper or emery cloth, but the scratches would only go because the surrounding surface goes. Polish removes the dull appearance caused by fine scratches because it fills them with wax or similar, which lessens the refraction of light at the edge of the scratch. "Buffing" is removing the excess wax and bringing its surface down flush with the surrounding surface. That is how things like Turtle wax make a car shine, as I understand it - the surface becomes more like a mirror. With a CD, there is a reflection or not; ones or zeros. If a little reflected light gets scattered, the detector will still see a "one"; the information is still there. Also, the laser is projected normal to the disc surface, and the reflexion is read off along the same path. Except in extreme cases, I doubt that the shiny look of a polished surface makes much difference to optical read-out, only to the human eye. The best condition for an optical disc is unscratched and perfectly clean. If it is ain't, then maybe there are a few remedial things one can do. I could be wrong, and may have missed something. Can anyone explain? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8142 Registered: May-04 | How about we begin with your assumption "polish" fills the surface with wax. Not true. Polish actually removes a small amount of the surface material and attempts to (slowly) smooth the surface through an abrassive action. Polishing and waxing are two distinctly different procedures with quite different intents and results. Polishing is done to remove a small portion of the surface material. How much is removed depends upon the abrassive quality or chemical reaction of the "polish". The most typical use of a polish is an automotive finish or furniture "polish". In automotive use the most typical material will be an abrasive which will vary in "grit", or abrassive quality and will "cut" the surface faster or slower depending largely on the size and shape (and to some degree the hardness) of the abrassive particle that is suspended in a lubricant and is doing theactual work of removing a portion of the surface material. In today's market, automotive "polishes" begin of course with a "wash" to remove the biggest chunks of crud and move on to a cleaner which will mostly rely on a chemical reaction to remove the "gunk" from the old, dull surface of the paint and old wax and would either make it difficult to polish the paint surface evenly or would possibly cause damage to the paint if it was rubbed into the surface along with an abrassive material. Consider this to be an abrassive action which develops some small amount of heat through friction also, somewhat like dragging a stylus through a record groove. Then, depending on how much of the paint surface must be removed to bring back a smooth, evenly reflective surface, the next step is to move on to what would typically be termed a "polish". This is the most abrassive product and can range from a heavy duty rubbing compound where you can feel the abrassive material to a light polish which has a much finer grain or grit to the abrassive and is supended in a heavier lubricant to slow its cutting action. This polishing/cutting action will leave "swirl marks" if it is too abrassive but what it has done is remove a thin layer of the paint surface and left behind a smoother surface which will more evenly reflect light back to your eye. By removing the oxidized surface of the paint, the underlying paint is exposed and the dull surface will begin to reflect light in what we call a "shine". To remove the swirl marks we're going to have to use a finer grit material than we had in the polish. This finer grit and higher lubricant quality slows the process of paint removal thus making it more controllable. This step will remove a thinner layer of paint and leave the surface of the paint smoother which will then be more reflective and have more "shine". Depending on the amount of shine we're seeking we can continue this process and possibly cut the final polish's grit by adding water as a lubricant between the abrassive and the paint surface. This is similar to a woodfinisher using mineral spirits as a lubricant between their finest abrassive, such as a 600 grit sandpaper or a 0000 steel wool pad, and the surface they are 'polishing". The idea in any polishing procedure is to smooth the surface of the material in increasingly less aggressive steps in order to make the surface more evenly reflective of light. At one point in the polishing process, if you use a heavy abrassive which cuts quickly, you can end up with a surface that is rather dull as you put abrasive marks in the surface. Then you proceeed with the process of smoothing the surface until you get the amount of reflectivity you desire. So in this portion of the "polishing" process you are cleaning and smoothing. At the end of the polishing process, the paint surface is "shiney" but unprotected and will quickly oxidize and turn dull if not coated with a sealant. That is the job of the "wax". The wax serves two purposes, one is to fill the small voids that are still left in the surface of the material and therefore bring up an even more reflective surface appearance and, depending on the material we use for "waxing", the second function is to seal the surface and protect it from the environment and further oxidation. Applying wax still leaves a slightly irregular surface as the wax dries and leaves a "rough" upper crust which is what we remove when we wipe the dried layer of wax off the surface. If you've done the polishing properly, however, there should never be any dirt on the rag which you use to "wax" the surface. What is left on the ragw we use to remove the dried wax should be nothing other than the dried wax itself. Since the wax has no abrassive action, it cannot cut the surface of the paint. The removal process, be it dirt or oxidized paint, is all accomplished in the abrassive polishing steps. Two or more coats of wax will eventually get us to the point where more layers of wax will not produce a smoother, more reflective surface due to the restrictions of the wax and the material we use to remove the layer of crust. Stepping through a finer material such as terry cloth to lamb's wool pad will get a bit more shine as the material of the lamb's wool does a better job of evenly smoothing the surface of the remaining wax and results in a still more reflective appearance. After the surface of the wax has been brought to its maximum reflectivity or "shine", depending on the type of wax used, we might decide to do a final sealant on top of the wax to further protect it from the elements. Mostly this is unnecessary but some finishers like the additional smoothing action this final step can bring. Each layer of wax and sealant add literal "depth" to the shine as the reflective surface of the paint, after correct polishing, is bouncing the light back through several layers of smoother and smoother materials. How this relates to a CD is another quite long post but I think you can begin to see the process of bringing a shine to a plastic (polycarbonate) surface is more than just applying "polish". I assume John is more used to the one step cleaner/polish/wax/sealants sold in the automotive stores for someone who wants the job done quickly and relatively well but not a "smooth as glass" finish. The process of smoothing glass to an "optical finish" is much the same, though it leaves out the wax and sealant since the surface of the glass is hard enough to resist the damage from oxidation which the relatively soft surface of a car's finish will absorb. However, the finsh of an optical glass will involve the same functions of polishing the surface in order to smooth it in gradual steps which will finally result in a reflective surface. The same process applies to polishing a rough cut diamond to the reflective surface we desire. Polishing always follows the same basic steps to smooth the surface of the material. In the optical glass the task is to then coat the glass with a treatment which does not cause reflection or refraction of the light passing through the surface of the glass. Cleaning CD's is about the same process of ensuring the light passing through the polycarbonate surface is not refracted away from its target nor loosing intensity by striking a layer of dull oxidation both on the way in and on the way out. Next question? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4087 Registered: Dec-03 | That's great, Jan. Thanks. Yep, I was mixing up polishing and waxing. I had a car once which I cleaned, polished and waxed so you could use it as a mirror. Now I have beat-up car which birds cr--p on, and it still goes. But CDs? I have some old ones that have bronzed and still play and sound OK. I assume the disc manufacturer sells it to me clean, and with good optical readout. Unlike my car, I don't leave discs in the sun, under trees, splashed with mud, etc. If not, life is short for trying to improve on manufacturer's quality control, and it seems to me we then have another argument for downloading and storing data on magnetic media. Which seems to be the way things are going, anyway, for convenience. As I said, I'll keep all this in mind. Your comments are much appreciated. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 498 Registered: Nov-05 | I think you have us pegged John. I'll be the first to 'fes up. We're just having a lend of you and everyone else here. You don't think we really so silly as to use this gunk on our own music collections do you? Here's another mentally challenged person's review of a similar treatment: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/audience3/illuminator.html |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 499 Registered: Nov-05 | Darn, I forgot the smiley John. So here it is: |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 1992 Registered: Dec-04 | My ugly is only skin deep, Neuroses go right to the bone. To each his own, although the spit shine is a bit distasteful... |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1260 Registered: Oct-04 | John, Jan, et al: Well, the Forum server made my posting disappear - again - so here goes another. First - Brasso is used by many hi-end audio folk, and by a number of fine FM stations in the US to get scratches from their discs. I know - it does NOT create more scratches! But it DOES get scratches out. Just use carefully - not with an electric buffer! As to all the polishing hype - sigh. First - all CDs come with some degree of mold release compound on them. Jan can tell you about this. It needs to go. Second - any method of smoothing the polycarbonate surface will aid in accurate laser pickup. Light scatter happens, and it ain' good. Third - Jitter occurs - if you believe in such - when a laser reads the line between pit and plane either too early or too late, and creates "fuzz" in analog form downstream. Anything that can create better focus for the laser will reduce jitter. Fourth - although it hasn't yet been proven in scientific labs, CD-cleaners appear to smooth and clarify optically the poly surface - which might translate to less jitter. So - if Rantz and Jan and 2C and I all put some poly-smoothing gunk on our CDs - AND clean off the smudge from mold-release compound - and make a better and more optically-accurate layer between laser and aluminum recording surface - would it not make sense to be left with a better-sounding disc? this is NOT "waxing," John - it is polishing and smoothing. In fact, putting wax on a disc would be counter-productive, because of the wax's natural aging and yellowing. I know I sound like some backwater preacher on this, but it has shown me that the "magic" of polishing DOES make a sonic difference on most CD-SACDs. And - if Brasso creates more scratches than it removed, why does the Military and a lot of other picky organizations go with it to create a mirror-shine? Nuck - some nice psycho-thought there, but your conclusion is off-mark. Whew - I'm out of cyber-breath. LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1261 Registered: Oct-04 | Nuck: it would seem that, at least in urban-speak, you are a general nuisance. Hmm. . .maybe you get your monicker from somewhere else?" I quote: "so basically, it means to get crunk and go crazy if you're a wild type of person. This is mostly done when listening to rap music, dancing in the club, or getting into a fight." Forget the spit-shine. . .my point is not to offend, but to clarify. LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8151 Registered: May-04 | " ... this is NOT "waxing," John - it is polishing and smoothing." I'd have to disagree. There is no polishing going on here; at least not as I describe the process of using an abrassive to clean the surface. If we lump cleaning under the label of polishing, then we can say there is polishing going on, but not really. As I see the process happening, the crap on the surface of the disc is being removed either by a chemical reaction or by the use of a surfactant which loosens, lifts and suspends the dirt allowing it to be removed from the polycarbonate surface. This is certainly true of the Pledge approach to CD cleaning. As with the one step car cleaner/polish/wax, Pledge leaves behind what Johnson Wax describes as "polymers" which fill and smooth the surface to give a smoothness which appears to the eye, and I assume, judging from the audible results, to the laser to be a more optically correct lens. John, I don't understand your problem with this procedure. All it requires is a simple test to find out whether you hear an improvement in sound quality after the cleaning process. The whole thing can be accomplished for about $10 and a minute's worth of time. When you are dealing with a manufacturer who begins the whole recording process with a 162 track mixing board I would say assuming the disc manufacturer sells the disc to you as "clean" as possible is akin to assuming no manufacturer would distribute the high and low strings of a violin across the two channels of your system. Such assumptions might be fine in some perfect world where profit and the occasion of sheer dumbness was never accounted for, but have no basis in reality. |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 502 Registered: Nov-05 | I agree with you Jan, but one look at the seemingly renewed glossy surface after a treatment and it could be described as 'polished.' The other thing, the enhanced sound quality after cleaning is not always evident right away. Sometimes it comes with listening to the music, then you realise, the tune/song/whatever has never sounded better. Other times, the enhanced SQ is evident almost at once and sometimes there is barely little or even no discernable difference (at least to my ears). Now I don't bother with before and after comparisons - I just give them the treatment regardless. I believe it is that worthwhile. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4089 Registered: Dec-03 | "You don't think we really so silly as to use this gunk on our own music collections do you?" Argh. Well, Larry is serious, for one. Unless he sustains a level of deep irony beyond my previous experience. Foil strips aren't in it. I still have the Vivid trial discs, somewhere. Unless you are doing double-irony, MR. I would not put it past you, you old ___ (smiley) Someone tell it to me, straight.... Which treatment? What does it do? To what sorts of discs? (I am particularly interested in new, apparently clean, etc.; Getting crud off is another topic). How does it work? Jan, "All it requires is a simple test" Is it that obvious? More irony? Not withstanding the reams of psychoacoustical analysis and sociopolitical comment on which subwoofer cable sounds best? I tried to talk about "the light gets out, or it don't" on a thread concerning brands of digital optical cable, but failed. People like to do crazy things in order to feel comfortable membership of a group, and to recognise fellow members. I know; I do, too. Are you QUITE sure this is not another example....? |
|
Silver Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 503 Registered: Nov-05 | I read what you had to say on this thread, John: https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/207560.html I think we've explained and provided enough info already. Why should we bother to rehash over it all again when you obviously are going to remain the eternal skeptic. Larry knows what he knows, so too does Jan and so do I. Yes, we are all playing make believe to feel comfortable membership of a group, John. I've said all I'm going to say on the subject and just keep enjoying my 'cleaner' music. Cheers. |
|
Gold Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 1262 Registered: Oct-04 | John: After reading the above-listed give-and-take, all I'd like to say to you, sir, is: "just try it." Go out, get yourself some microfibre towels and a can of Pledge Clean and Dust anti-static spray. Spray some ON THE TOWEL, and wipe rather gently onto the CD in question. Turn the towel so there is a dry side, and buff with very light pressure until the Pledge liquid has been taken off. That's it. The surface should be much more mirror-like. Nothing more. Shiny. Period. Now pop the disc into your player - and simply play the darned thing! Listen closely. It would help a lot if you listen to the disc directly before "Pledging" it - then again directly afterwards. Will you hear a difference? I just don't know - depends on the disc, your ears and probably your mood at the time! (grin) Try several CDs - not just one. Rantz is quite correct on this - the sound-correction varies greatly. Jan and I differ on the definition of "polishing" - I just consider polishing "to make shiny." Anyway - the Pledge and Zaino that Jan uses, and the Zaino that Rantz and I use - well, it's serious stuff, not a joke at all. At least to us. If, sir, by this time you remain set in your skeptical ways - so be it. All I can tell you is: "please try it before you flat-out dismiss it." Is that too much to ask? I hope not. . . Art: please let us know what your audio-friends say about CD-cleaning. I understand your hesitation. LR |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8155 Registered: May-04 | Is it that obvious? Either it is or it isn't. No one is playing a joke on you, John, so we won't all burst out laughing if you tell us you cleaned a CD and heard nothing. Personally, I've found the cleaning process to be evenly beneficial though I will admit I have not done A-B tests on each disc I clean. But, once again I would suggest it will cost you but a few dollars and you can either continue or not. No membership will be revoked - nor horns added - and I have the feeling everyone is getting a bit worn out by the topic and we have little more to say on the topic. You either hear the equivalent of a better interconnect or superior player or you don't, John. Actually, I'm beginning to suspect you are playing the joke on us and have been religiously cleaning discs for years now without admitting the fact. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4092 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, guys. OK, I'll take this seriously. "Eternal skeptic" I can live with; it's a compliment. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 1996 Registered: Dec-04 | Larry R., I have scanned this thread twice and cannot find the quote which you quote. Could you lead me to this quote attributed to me on THIS thread? Thanks. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2965 Registered: Feb-05 | Alright just got off the phone with one friend and the other I forgot to call today. He is the one who I trust the most as he is the most knowledgeable audiophile I know by a wide margin (and I've known him for better than 20 yrs). The friend I just talked with says that her store uses a Nitty Gritty cd cleaner which they don't make anymore. She stated that she has tried alot of the solutions and most of them don't work at all. A few of them work marginally but in general it's not worth the risk. I asked about the Pledge and she said that she has not used it specifically but she would believe that it would stand a better than average chance of providing some benefit. She stated that the anti-static feature provides the greatist benefit. She also stated that she would not even consider polishing, especially radially. Lastly, she said that she would clean with a diaper. Tomorrow I call Jim (if I remember). |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics