Steam cleaning records 2

Axelwahl, thanks for the GREAT response! Very informative. I agree with your Classic Records assessment--their products always seem to be the most problematic when brand new. An interesting aspect of your post is that loose bits of vinyl, maybe even too small to see, can be a real problem on new records, and cleaning MIGHT actually take these bits and rub them into the surface, damaging it. No technique, steam or otherwise, really avoids this risk. I wish quality control were better for these expensive records. The worst one I've come across recently (and surprisingly to me) is the MoFi Sinatra of "Only the Lonely." Huge pieces of vinyl flashing were evident on three copies, and they must have scratched the surface during shipping on all three. I finally gave up and got a store credit.

Thanks again--as analog lovers we're just trying to find the best way to preserve and present our precious records.

crem,

i've tried steam cleaning a few lps, found no appreciable audible difference so was pretty disappointed. will devote the next two weeks to cleaning one batch normal and another batch steam and see if i can find a difference. need to get up a decent test sample otherwise no proper conclusion is possible. i'd simply be jumping to confusions! will do three batches of bout 3 lps each and see. whether i finally use steam cleaning or not i'd like to thank you though for all the help and encouragement extended throughout my searching process :)

regards

Don't throw stones at me for asking a dumb question, but do you think it the steam cleaning that you are getting good results with, or that you are in essence rinsing many times over that gets rid of any residue or fingerprint?
I ask this due to using a new cleaning fluid for me, from Audio Intelligent, that when using their fluid you can keep applying to remove more and more residue, and then eventually wash with ultra pure water, till in effect there is nothing left behind. I've used many cleaning fluids and so far this is truly the best I've used, and heard. It has sure made a believer out of me. Maybe it's the thoroughness of the process that is giving such good results in either case.

I know Audio Intelligent products & have spoken to the owner several times. Audio Intelligence products are respected by audio reviewers & many of my audio friends for good reason - They work to reduce many disavantages of record cleaning.

Nevertheless, it is my view (supported by actual listening experiments) that all record cleaning fluids leave a sonic fingerprint (some more/some less ) that is only appreciated following steam rinses or water baths. Keep in context that every Institution in the Western World that stores recorded music for future generations supports water rinses.

It is my view that steam rinses do the job faster , not that rinses don't provide a potentally smoother finish to the cleaning process. Its a matter of time & I am persuaded that time may be worth the effort.

A secondary issue is system transparency. The more you have, the greater the available detail. Unfortunately, many well intended analog front ends have issues either the as result of set-up ,or limits to transparency via system matching.

There are several excellent books on the matter. George Merrills "Turntable Set-Up" & Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" are resources we all should own & use. Many other excellent articles exist on "Tracking Angle" and in back issues of "TAS" , "Stereophile" & "Audio".

I am of the view that what you hear is a mix of compromises, some good & some not so good. Without an extensive self-education & subsequent re-education , evaluation and regular re-evatuation, system issues will filter into the listening experience.

Nothing could be more true than that in the world of analog. Changes in the weather cause a need to tweek one's turntable & tonearm. Not apprecating those changes can result in slight smearing of mid-range. Phono cartridge suspension's change/age over time, some very quickly. All of these challenges confront a LP listener.

If you can't hear certian differences from steaming , so many varables exist that its sometimes a challenge to discern. Re-read the inital reviews of RCMS vs buyer complaints . Its not that RCMS did a poor job , but LPS with a history of 6 , 12 to 20'ish gram tracking weights were impossible to rehab they were so gouged out. Only the inital RCM user did not appreciate that fact. The Record Cleaning Magnets spent years educating the public via the print media at great expense.

Its my view that we are repeating history to a degree. As we move forward with new innovative ideas , new challenges crop-up. In a world of "Make-It-Happen-Yesterday" analog is at a distinct disadvantage to digital. No matter what limitations of CDS, they are easy to use & require almost no maintance. LPS are difficult to extract that SOTA sound but when you do , by effort or chance, now that's an experience.

The end-user will never get to the "Land of Qz" because it does not exist. With persistence you may see the turrents.

Hi Crem, what do you mean by this?
LPS are difficult to extract that SOTA sound but when you do , by effort or chance, now that's an experience.
Hopefully you're not talking Sota turntables....