2. digital
  3. 1227242737

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
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
I am a social scientists and find it quite curious that many who profess to value science, refuse to listen

...science does not value ambiguous individual human subjective interpretation/opinions.

Either...

Perform a controlled double blind test with a large population and with a meaningful result with statistical confidence.

or...

Provide a plausable scientific explanation for your miraculous claims.

or...

measure a difference with an instrument and allow others to repeat and verify your experimental results.

Any of the above would be valued by a scientist.

Someone who values science would not waste time looking at just any old wacky idea. There has to be some logic....some reasoning...some proof...some plausability.
kenyonbm
141 posts
 
Roger Ohlhausen's 1971 patent states that the active ingredients include between 2.5 and 30% mineral acids. Polysiloxane is the main ingredient, the acid helps with adhesion to glass.

Will these acids affect the plastic of the CD?

Ken
tbg
5,263 posts
 
Shadorne, I think what you have said evidences your not being a scientist. If you are, you have little experience in the development of early ventures into research in an area. Also, you seem woefully unaware of validity issues in operationalizing concepts and variables. I strongly suggest you read the Ghost Map about the cholera outbreak in London. You will see where a hidebound, unfounded commitment to an explanation or theory can dampen our understanding of nature.
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
Tbg,

Ok so you are on the science high horse.

Well you are absolutely right on. I plead guilty as charged to willfully dampening our understanding of the nature of Rain X and CD treatment.

What about you? Are you going to do something about it? Why not get some grad students to perform a Double Blind study and write an AES paper? Why hasn't AES published something already? Or is this like paranormal stuff...it doesn't work under rigorous test conditions?
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Tbg...."Zero errors" means exactly that. The copied digital file is an exact duplicate of the original.

Science is sometimes proven wrong when it extends into new areas. Not often, but frequently enough to provide ammunition for debates like this. There is no reason to abandon science in areas that are well understood. You can't argue against Ohm's law, for example.

You might enjoy a book I read once "The Big Bang Never Happened". As you know the Big Bang cosmological theory is almost universally accepted, but the alternative, continuous creation is convincingly set forth in this book. The first chapter, which you would most enjoy, describes all the "firmly established" scientific theories that have proven wrong. Of course, creation of the universe is an example of an area where you might expect science to be on shaky ground. But do you really think it possible that the earth is supported by four elephants standing on the back of a tortoise?
More to discover