Clearaudio Double Smart Matrix or Loricraft PRC4

Mark,
I was not aware of the AVIS #15. Is it used before the enzyme soak or instead of it? How would you describe one versus the other?

Regarding your stance that the VPI 16.5 with the 4-step AVIS gives better results than a "$4000 Loricraft ...with lesser cleaners" I have no doubt. I'm curious to know if, given the use of the AVIS cleaners, which type of RCM - wand type vs. point nozzle - works better. I have not made a direct comparison, but I would gues that the Loricraft would outperform the VPI 16.5 in absolute terms. Time, effort and cost are another matter.

I, too, am most appreciative for the information I have learned from reading Doug Deacon's many posts about analog, including the Magic Eraser discovery.

Peterayer,

The best way I can describe AIVS #15 PreCleaner, it is like the Enzymatic Formula on Steroids.

As far as I can tell, no Alcohols are in this product, and I was told it contains not one, but two broadband vegetable based Enzymes.

As I understand it, the #15 PreCleaner can be used as a replacement for the Enzymatic Formula, or in conjunction with the Enzymatic Formula as a following-next step.

The #15 can also be used as well as a first step in a two step cleaning process, and then followed by AIVS #6 One Step Cleaner.

As suggested by Osage Audio, it states #15 PreCleaner is not to be used all by itself as a cleaner.

I myself seem to find a 4-step AIVS process works best on all my records, old, or new, using #15, the Enzymatic Formula, the Super Cleaner, and then lastly, the AIVS Pure Water Rinse.

As Doug states, and I concur, on average, a 5 minute application, and soak seeems just about right with all steps preceeding the Pure Water Rinse.

As for the contest-battle of the RCM's, the Loricraft vs VPI method of fluid removal, I cannot personally give the lowdown, having never used the Loricraft, or any other String Feed Nozzle Type Machine.

Advantages, and disadvantages with both machines-methods I'd assume.

I think Doug is more experienced in that regard, having used-owned both. I would probably recieve no flak, saying that the VPI 16.5 is the "best of the cheap". And the most convenient in the lesser expensive RCMs in this price range.

The new Clearaudio Smart Matrix is in another class, with better build construction, better quality of parts consist than the VPI 16.5, and at twice the price, it should be.

I'd still have to say, it's undeniable, that Harry W/VPI still puts out the best bang for the buck, price king RCM on the market, the VPI 16.5.

Some may argue that, in regards to price, as there are many Nitty Gritty Fans.

I personally like the fact that the VPI has a Platter, on which I can easily apply Fluids, no need to move-flip records for vacuuming, that gravity is on my side to let Fluids sit, and soak as needed, before one chooses to remove. A simple swing of the Vacuum armwand, hit two power switches, and the fluid removal is done in two revolutions of Platter.

As for Doug Deacon, I've been following his personal advice, and reading his posts here for a number of years.

Doug IMO, has always been the voice of unbiased logic, sensibility, and wisdom-knowledge. Mark

What I find most interesting about this particular LP is that the enzymes seem to have been working on some contaminant. This was a recently opened pressing from the Music Matters series of Curtis Fuller's The Opener. Was it the enzymes or was it the extended soak? I don't know. I'm just bummed about the extra time involved.

Dan,

In our experience, the majority of LP's have some amount of that blurring veil. We agree that it behaves exactly like a thin layer of some contaminant (or lubricant) and it's difficult to remove.

"Was it the enzymes or was it the extra soak?"

In our experience it's the enzymes. We tried scrubbing and soaking many LP's with multiple non-enzyme fluids (AIVS and others) to no avail. It was always the enzyme step that did the trick. If they aren't used first that veiling layer isn't "loosened" enough for other fluids to work. Unfortunately, enzymes require extended soak times. Unavoidable but certainly a bummer.

Since most LP's have such a layer we clean every one with the full regimen, starting with AIVS #1 Enzymatic. For us it feels faster to do it well the first time than to hope a shortcut will suffice, then end up recleaning anyway. (Been there, tried that, hated it.)

***
Completely agree with Mark that more effective fluids and *some* RCM, well used, will outclean less effective fluids and a "better" RCM. By definition, a less effective fluid is one that doesn't dissolve or suspend all contaminants. With such a fluid the record won't be clean no matter how well we vacuum it, though it will be really, really dry.

***
We use AIVS #15 as a pre-clean step for especially dirty looking records (which we never intentionally buy, but one slips in now and then). It works well. Others use it instead of Enzymatic or even instead of #1, 2 and 3, following only with a pure water rinse or two. We signed up for the full masochistic plan long ago and now we're too old to change. ;-)

Yes, I used to use a similar regimen. I think I got lucky on a few records, adopted a short cut, and then sang myself to sleep. So to speak. :-)