|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.235.135.152
In Reply to: Newby set-up question posted by johng on December 18, 2005 at 20:06:44:
According to Stereophile, this is a recommended component. "MF considers this indispensable for optimum vinyl hygeine—he uses it to clean records before using a vacuum-operated cleaning machine." I have no personal experience with it. Retail is $49.95
-Bob
Follow Ups:
I think if you don't have an RCM, the Orbitrac 2 works better than...nothing. It definitely helps. Using it in tandem with an RCM though sounds crazy. I had an Orbitrac 2 when I first starting getting into quality vinyl playback...I now have a VPI 16.5 and it seems to me that using it along with an Orbitrac 2 would be an absolute waste of time.
Bob-I believe the Orbitrac is another of an endless chain of overly hyped products of dubious merit at best, first it's little pads need to be replaced frequently if you don't intend to transfer gunk from one record to the next, the expense of which is actually equivalent to, or greater than the cost of the best commercial record cleaning solvents themselves, which when used in conjunction with any competent DIY or commercial RCM do a splendid and complete job of record cleaning.
Anyone who has more experience or knows better please feel free to set me straight, but the idea of using one of these Rinky Dink Orbitrac's prior to the wet clean/vac seems absolutely preposterous, ridiculous and patently pointless.
Have I missed something here ?
I defy Fremmer or anyone else to present one single reasonable, rational or logical reason one who use an Orbitrac immediately prior to a proper wet cleaning.
If you base your buying decisions primarily on Stereophile recommendations you can be virtually assured of spending a great deal of money and achieving modest results at best.
Stereophile is simply all about attracting and keeping well paying advertisers and maintaining adequate circulation to maintain or increase their advertising rates and very little else.
They ceased to be a serious "On the level " Audiophile/hobbiest publication a number of years ago, not long after they started to accept advertising.Regards FredJ
Geez Fred, it's not THAT bad. I do prefer the Discwasher system myself, but you could use the Orbitrac if that is what was convenient with good results. Some people like to use brushes, but the "large loop" type "felt" pad devices work too. The point is that some really cruddy Lps need to be mechanically scrubbed before a record cleaning machine will remove the grime as they don't apply any pressure.
Not that it is the only method or that you should be worrying with "really cruddy" records anyway, but if you find one that you can't live without but can't live with, then the "two step program" may apply and help you out.
I agree that it is not a $50 product however. The Discwasher is half that is is built to last.
-Bill
My beef concerns the idea fronted by MF that to do a really proper job record cleaning you need to use the Orbitrac as part of a complete wet cleaning proceedure immediatly prior to the real RCM, which I see as on the patently ridiculous side of pointless, the only conceivable benefit would be to Alsop or it's shareholders, no ?I said I thought it was Mickey Mouse and expensive to use, but I couldn't care less about folks using an Orbitrac as an alternative expedient cleaning method.
I think the Discwasher D3 or D4 is another device that outlived it's usefullness as well but I still have one and do use it on occaison, but it's reletively reasonably costed and doesn't require
ongoing expensive pad changes like an Orbidrek.Just for curiosities sake Bill, do you see any validity to MF's assertion of using one as part of a complete wet cleaning/vacuuming ?
If so I'd love hearing your rationale.
I think people get pretty whacky with record cleaning and some of the things that we hear about do amaze me. I have a Signet wet cleaning brush (which is basically a SOTA, D4 brush!) at home that I use regularly. I also use a Nitty Gritty 2.5 machine on occasion.
I think that I already outlined what I thought of it in the first post on the subject here, but just to recount:
For typically clean looking Lp's, a spin on the vacuum record cleaning machine is all that is required. For Lp's that have been cleaned by that method already, just a slap with the D4 device or a carbon fiber brush will do unless you have managed to get it dirty again somehow. Finally, for records that you find at a one-off type of sale or even at a used record store that does not clean them (most record shops either clean them or simply don't trade in dirty Lps), you probably do need to clean them by scrubbing with a D4 or similar prior to a vacuum record cleaning. I don't have the patience to allow a solution to rest and do its job, so i just use the single ingredient (Pure 2) and add my own elbow grease. A hard, flat surface such as a countertop and then a soft bath towel laid on top makes a great, absorbent work surface. So in that case, I would recommend you to scrub a record with the solution first to break free the really deep, stubborn crud. Then the vacuum machine will remove all of the dissolved particles.
The only trouble with a record cleaning machine alone is that it simply doesn't scrub hard enough for really grungy stuff. It will certainly clean any record that doesn't look dirty by removing all the stuff that you can't see but it really just knocks about half of the stubborn, ground-in crud from the grooves, if you are lucky. So it all boils down to where you get your records and what you consider to be clean (I would like to think that we can all agree that no pops or sissle sounds on playback is clean).
I don't side with MF because he is MF and I don't like the Orbirator much either, but find it is simply a choice that will work if that is what you have in your arsenal. I have always used the Discwasher D4 (that is what I sell here) and then the Signet job which is basically the same thing, built to a higher level but was only available for a few years from what I have gathered. That has worked for me for many years and many repeat plays.
-Bill
I have to agree totally with Fred on this one. I have an Orbitrac and quite frankly, after the first two LP's cleaned with it I would just as soon use a wet paper towel, it's a real POS. A good dry brush such as the Decca 2+2 is way better when used in conjunction with a good RCM. Of course this is just my humble opinion.
Whoa! Sorry to open a can o' worms. I guess that's the danger of just repeating things you hear or read. Good to have you guys around.
"If you base your buying decisions primarily on Stereophile recommendations you can be virtually assured of spending a great deal of money and achieving modest results at best."Dare I mention that I used to be a reviewer for Stereophile? But it was purely classical recordings--no equipment. So you won't have to kick me out of the Asylum or anything. Or at least not for that! Maybe for giving bad advice, though.
-Bob
I'd venture to say not all the inmates would agree with my opinion on Stereophile,and I do enjoy reading it on occaison, but I do it for the humor and absurdity, once I get past the music reviews and interesting advertisements etc.I am an absurdist and I find the sheer pomposity, elitism
and disingenuous nature of Stereophile quite humorous or at the very least fairly ammusing.My hard on for Stereophile is largely based on the fact that they
seem to feel that unless you have $10K= or more to spend on a system
you're not really an Audiophile and $10K would be considered very minimalist, Where $20 to $30k is where respectability begins, I remember reading a Pre-amp review a number of years ago, the reviewers synopsis was that while this component was essentially a somewhat respectable performer, and it would probably be fine for the summer cottage or guest bedroom, that one should keep in mind that it was in fact rather decent in it's own way as, realitically what can you expect from such a modestly priced pre-amp (which was like $3,495.00) I find this laughable, as I suppose if you're a noted Cardiologist that owns a few burger Kings and his own clinic etc. or a partner in the Mendellian or cali Cartel, it doesn't make much difference and presents no problem.But it's really pure bullshit,as any number of Vintage,used or
even new pre-amps that cost $1500 or less would smoke that particular pre-amp and that there are $500 Vintage pre-amps that may have some coloration etc. but are more musical and enjoyable which they fail to mention, so someone just getting into the hobby may start reading this crap for a few months and logically conclude being an Audiophile and doing it at all right is not unlike the expense of operating a twin engine aircraft so why bother ?
Fred,Just for the record, I took no offense at all at your comments about Stereophile. I have great respect for, and like very much, the one person there that I worked with, then music editor Richard Lehnert. The others I met (very briefly, at a Sterophile show) were very kind and gracious. But with my budget, I'm more in the $ensible Sound category!
-Bob
Bob- I have a short fuse, and more often than I should shoot from the hip, I really wasn't meaning to slam you per se, but just pissed off about the seemingly never ending Michael Fremmers Fronting for or schilling for Alsop and all the poor proletariet types like myself shelling out their hard earned money and wasting their time based on their misdirected trust in disingenuous (dare I say it ? ;-)sleazoid) Audiophool Poohbah's like Fremer and Sam Telig amongst others.I should have reflected on it and written a better, more lucid post
where it was obvious that It wasn't directed at you and for that I apologize, and look forward to chatting with you a lot in the future.
The VA is a lot friendlier place than I made it seem.
I appreciate your comments, Fred. And again, no problem. I didn't take your comments as being directed against me at all.
The Orbitrac does work. It's convenient, does the job much better than a Discwasher, and the alcohol solution evaporates quickly so you can play the lp right away. But, the solution is expensive and the pads get to be a pain to clean or expensive to replace. Plus, there are many vinyl lovers who will tell you to avoid using alcohol on vinyl. (I'm staying out of that debate!)After using the Orbitrac for less than 2 months I ended up buying a KAB EV-1 record cleaning machine so my purchase of the Orbitrac was basically a waste of money. The EV-1 is not as convenient as the Orbitrac but it does a more thorough cleaning job and you can also play lps right away. Cleaning solutions such as RRL's are pretty inexpensive per lp. The EV-1 is now up to $159 USD so it's not as inexpensive initially, but with 1000 albums cleaned you're at 16 cents per lp. (Assuming you already have a vacuum cleaner.) Well worth the money.
A less expensive alternative to the KAB EV-1 is the Disk Doctor system, which also cleans lps very well, but is not as convenient as the EV-1 and you have to let the albums dry before playing (or rig up a DIY vacuuming tool). I considered this before deciding on the convenience of the EV-1.
Tom
I initially fell for that MF bunch of crap. What a joke! For some fun reading, check out The Tracking Angle and it's take on the world's most OCD record cleaning system. Estimated time per side: 3 hours and 27 minutes! I especially like the line, I'm paraphrasing here, "Either do it this way or go back to CD's". Okay......That's a bit of a rant, but really the only way to go is find the cheapest vacuum rc system you can, and go from there. FredJ has many posts on the subject, just follow his advice.
Exactly ! Just about all of this stuff is debateable/arguable.Frankwm and I can go back on forth for hours on the efficacy of CF brushes vs. the Milty Pad, Mark kelly and others take me to task on Surfactants vs. Alcohol or anything else and either side has it's merits, but when I encountered that " The Tracking Angle "piece
(I think someone forwarded it to me) I was astounded ! as it has absolutely no merit whatsoever, I considered that it might be satire
but was tedious and devoid of wit or irony and it wasn't April 1st.Whomever actually wrote that obviously has no real experience cleaning records or does, but has been substituting Blotter Acid for their morning Haldol dosage, as it goes well beyond preposterous, over the top or even beyond absurd, Ludicrous is an understatement, go figure ?
Kind Regards Fred
I don't think the record's cleanliness would be causing the slightly lower output on the left channel.
You're so right! I saw Orbitrac and launched, w/out checking the start of the thread!
I'm always thinking about myself.
Sorry,John...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: