[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Record cleaning fluid recommendations?



here is some info

http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/av/2000/11/msg00029.html



marcos sueiro bal
audio engineer
2807 newtown, astoria NY 11102
718.626.8528
mailto:tierecords@xxxxxxxxxxx


From: Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
<ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record cleaning fluid recommendations?
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:45:10 -0500

I'd like to point out that this is their formula, not the results of their
tests.

Steve Smolian

----- Original Message -----
From: "David S Sager" <dsag@xxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record cleaning fluid recommendations?


> The LoCs formula is posted on the LoC website. > > >>> smolians@xxxxxxxxx 12/16/03 08:09AM >>> > Ask the Preservation people at the Library of Congress who run tests > and > keep them secret. > > Steven Smolian > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Ross" <johnross@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:31 PM > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record cleaning fluid recommendations? > > > > Has anybody actually done any systematic research about the relative > > effectiveness of various commercial and home-brew record cleaning > mixtures? > > It seems as if all of the suggestions posted to this thread have > been > > anecdotal reports based on relatively limited experience. > > > > I understand that many on this list have extensive experience > cleaning and > > preserving sounds from LPs and other media. I don't intend to > belittle > this > > expertise. But it's entirely possible that more than one mixture > will > > produce equally effective results, within the requirement that they > do not > > do any damage to the media. Seems like most people will stop > experimenting > > after they find a product that appears to meet their needs. > > > > And it's also possible that some common methods are in fact > potentially > > destructive. Or that the difference between different mixtures might > be > > below the noise threshold of many playback chains. > > > > I would like to see a study that compares the subjective and/or > measured > > reduction in surface noise after treatment with different mixtures, > and > > using different techniques. Of course, it's true that every LP has a > > different amount and type of crud in its grooves before cleaning, so > the > > starting point will be somewhat different on each one, but using a > > reasonable sampling of records from collections and thrift stores > ought to > > produce some kind of useful averages. > > > > Does anything like this exist in print or online? If not, would it > be > > productive to organize some formal standards for testing? > > > > John Ross > > Northwest Folklife > > Seattle > > > > > > > > > > At 11:09 AM 12-15-2003 -0600, you wrote: > > >With all due respect, you're recommending products based upon price > rather > > >than the quality of the cleaning. I'm confident that a superior & > safer > > >level of cleaning is available at a reasonable price & its > unfortunate > that > > >you have not had an opportunity to hear the results of using these > materials.

_________________________________________________________________ It?s our best dial-up Internet access offer: 6 months @$9.95/month. Get it now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]