Rain-X as CD Enhancement Treatment


I have used the Auric Illuminator treatment on my CD collection for several years now. I am a believer in the AI, and repeated A/B tests of identical treated/untreated CDs bore out significant improvements after treatment with AI.

I ran out of the fluid and my marker dried out, so I was searching for mew treatments on the market before buying another AI kit or choosing something new. That's when I ran across this article by Greg Weaver at Soundstage, where he talks about having used Rain-X and a green marker(Staedtler Lumocolor 357, price about $3.00) as a treatment on his CDs to great effect.

http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize200005.htm

Being the complete geek that I am, I had to try it for my self. I found the marker at Office Depot, and picked up a little bottle of Rain-X for $2.99. I treated a couple of CDs that I have ended up with duplicate copies of (Grant Green's Green Street, Frank Sinatra Sextet Live In Paris)and tested the Rain-X/marker treated vs. untreated disks.

Well, low and behold, the treated disks sounded notably improved; the music was clearer and louder, especially the midrange, the soundstage was larger with better definition and separation of instruments and the bass was tighter and deeper.

I can't say that the Rain-X treatment was or was not better sounding than the AI, but at the least very it is close, for a fraction of the price.

Has anyone else ever tried the Rain-X treatment?
craig_hoch
Eldartford, thank you for conducting a test of the disc treatment. I respect people who actually will try such things. I also will accept your experience and not debate it. Variety of experiences makes for interesting exchanges between audio lovers.
So, Doug, are you changing your opinion? I continue to be perplexed at sincere beliefs that some hear differences and others do not. I am also fascinated that some love one wine while others hate it. Humans are a varied lot.

I remember several years ago sitting between John Curl and an TAS reviewer listening to a demonstration of the Shun Mook speakers. John and I were struck by the improvement gained by a slight change they made in the speakers. The reviewer heard nothing. My only judgment was that I would pay no attention to his reviews thereafter. He was soon gone.
Not in the least. I have said before and maintain now that I have heard the difference in my rig between treated and untreated discs clearly. I simply wanted to thank a man who was willing to actually try it. I cannot explain why he did not hear it. I also am not going to continue debate with someone who has tried and did not hear the change. That would be foolish. I will vigorously debate those who argue only from hunches, but there is no value arguing when someone tried and it failed.

I believe due to hearing abilities, the type of treatment used (I much prefer polishing to cleaning), environment, etc. that some will hear it easily and others will not. I have a nearly acoustically perfect room, so even subtle changes are quite readily heard.

If the changes due to treatment were such that I couldn't be sure I had heard them, I wouldn't bother discussing it.
I also make judgments based upon what others say they can or cannot hear. If someone says they cannot hear what I feel should be easily heard, you can bet I won't trust their opinion.

I have had audiophiles come into my room, and I have conducted listening tests on such things as power cords and disc treatments. They have insisted that there is no change. In the course of time I found out they played in live bands extensively. Uh, huh. They had hearing loss. No way would I trust their judgment in what could be heard. :)

It's one thing to have a variance in opinion between what is "preferred" sound. It's another altogether not to even detect the sound. I'm not judging Eldartford on his test; I wasn't there. But I certainly have not been changed in my conclusions from my listening tests.
Douglas_schroeder and Tbg...Note my words..." but this kind of comparison is difficult, and highly subjective...". Implied here is that there might have been a change (improvement?) but if so it was not great enough for me to notice vs what I heard an hour ago. In this test you can't go back and listen to the untreated disc again. The test which someone should do (probably someone who sells a disc treatment product) is a bit-for-bit comparison of digital data files from treated and untreated discs. Maybe there's a reason why they don't do this.
Hi all,
This Rain-X treatment thread/ tip is such an interesting subject and I will give it a try sometime this weekend and will post the result.
The 2 minutes and 10 seconds "proceedure" should be simple but for this little A/B test like this may take me probabpy half a day just to prep. to get an accurate result. Like let the system warm-up, pick out then listen to a track over and over before putting the treated disk in, etc.

However, with all due respect, what can we do to keep this thread interesting and not going off course? Either ones BELIEVE it or NOT, we, as readers, already got your point; we already heard and seen enough. This thread is already long, there's no more need to know who performs better in bed or who's wife has a bigger boobs.... let's keep it clean and respect others' opinion(s). Show us some actual hands-on results.