Walker Audio Prelude Record Cleaning Question -

There is a big difference between distilled water and lab grade purified water. But if you can't hear the difference, what difference does it make?

A good compromise would be to buy type I reagent grade water at a lab supply store($17 a gallon instead of $64 for Walker's ultra pure) It's the same thing, maybe better. I think it's made a difference for me but I also was happy using distilled water in the past. If you're going to spend the money to use the Walker system(which isn't mandatory)I think you can at least save money on that expensive water. Flooding the record is much less painful that way.

I'd like commenting, as to what's been already said.

There's first, the comment that the original poster cannot hear the difference between Walker Purified Water, and single step Distilled Waters, so with that being said, does that mean that should serve as a basis of a rinse's worth, and/or quality?

These personal findings (not to be at all insulting, or trying at all to speak down to the original poster) does not change any actual facts of analsis, that single distilled will leave deposits-residues-solids upon the LP's surface.

These variations in sonic results may then be more than likely caused by a less than state of the art resolving system, or the ultimate criteria, that we all do not possess the same level of hearing acuity. This of course doesn't change the reality, that the deposits are being left on the surface.

Sure it hurts shelling out our hard earned money for the highest quality cleaners-rinses. That's what each and every one of us has to decide, whether these costs are important to us, the preservation of our beloved Vinyl, and at what level of quality of playback we seek?

I think I've seen Lloyd Walker on a rare occasion post here to comment, but sadly, Lloyd does not regularly contribute, and I suspect one reason is because on most forums, spitting contests can ensue.

The good reasons for a manufacturer commenting, is to disspell myths, and hearsay, which unfortunately, if there is no one to clarify, or educate us, these myths then become the believed "truth". We are then left to personally decide-sift through what is fact, or fiction?

Truth, that single step Distilled, or even Reagent Grade Waters are as pure, and as worthy for the final rinse as what he, or others market. I'm very sure they are not. Maybe the quality doesn't matter for today?

But what about tomorrow? What about those who eventually seek the upgrade path. Will this better equipment then be able to extract better sonics, or will the cleanliness of the vinyl then be a limiting factor? Will there be future, irreversable harm done to the media?

I've seen much mis-information spread in the Amateur Astronomy hobby-community, with assumptions about how for instance makers produce thier Lenses-Mirrors, etc, and without the manufacturer commenting, and providing real information, you will read everything from soup to nuts, and generally, 99% of the assumptions are generally false-incorrect.

From what I understand, is that Reagent Grade waters can vary in quality, and that there is no one set standard.

There is a good archived thread about waters here, but it is a very complicated thread, and one I have found very hard to sift through, and draw hard conclusions about.
Mark

Mark: No disrespect intended, but I think that lumping single stage distilled (or simple RO for example) in with a reagent grade water like this:

http://www.opticsplanet.net/casco-nerl-water-reagent-grade-9800-5.html

is a bit of a stretch. While true ultrapure might undergo a slightly more stringent ultrafiltration (as well as ultraviolet radiation) than a Type 1 Reagent grade like that above. I'd bet that a good reagent grade would certainly be a lot closer (possibly very close to, possibly better-we'll never know without testing both products) to the ultrapure that AIVS, Mo Fi and Walker market with there products than any single stage distilled or Walmart type "purer" water.

The price is also quite a bit different. Not cheap, mind you, but not "audiophile" priced either.