Doug, a fair response. :-) You should have a few records on which to test these products right now! ;-) Let me know how that works out!
"Playing the record dirty is riskier than trying a different cleaner IMO."
Depends on the definition of dirty. I suppose you refer to stylus damage. If a record, once thoroughly cleaned by most any of the many available cleaning fluids, still has the remnants of a greasy fingerprint or two, I'm not sure that is of a greater risk than possibly damaging the entire record. But, yes, if it is a "lost cause" otherwise, what does a guy have to lose?
Actually, my answer to Dan's post was not really intended to pit one product against another but, rather, to reinforce the virtues of the RRL fluids. I know that Brian Weitzel went to considerable effort and expense in the pursuit of due diligence in making a proven and safe product - and that counts for a lot in my book (though there will likely never be sales of my book). :-)
"Playing the record dirty is riskier than trying a different cleaner IMO."
Depends on the definition of dirty. I suppose you refer to stylus damage. If a record, once thoroughly cleaned by most any of the many available cleaning fluids, still has the remnants of a greasy fingerprint or two, I'm not sure that is of a greater risk than possibly damaging the entire record. But, yes, if it is a "lost cause" otherwise, what does a guy have to lose?
Actually, my answer to Dan's post was not really intended to pit one product against another but, rather, to reinforce the virtues of the RRL fluids. I know that Brian Weitzel went to considerable effort and expense in the pursuit of due diligence in making a proven and safe product - and that counts for a lot in my book (though there will likely never be sales of my book). :-)