Zeal : The question asked can't be fully answered unless taking into account the method employed.
For instance, most differences in cleaning fluids have less to do with the manner in which they clean vs. the resudue left behind. Most $$$ record cleaners make claims they clean fast (they can) and leave almost no residue(perhaps). For years, I have experimented with Record Cleaning Machines ( most types on loan & including some proto-types) and fluids (some but not all types).
These experiences have demostrated that Steam Cleaning vinyl LPs to be vastly superior to cleaning w/ RCM's alone. A significant reason is that regardless of the cleaning fluid employed (home-brew to $$$$) fluids all leave a "sonic fingerprint" easily recognized for what it is, when a recording is steam cleaned (Nee: See Thread listed on Steam below). It appears most developers of record cleaning fluids do not steam clean recordings. So, few if any recognize the phenom exists or express a willingness to advertize that fact in leiu of developmental costs that could run into the $$$$$$$$.
Another record cleaning method that I use that is vastly superior to all record cleaning fluids , is experimental and not on the market at this time. Simply, I have "teamed-up" with a scientific group that has modified Bacteria to "eat" organic materals commonly found on vinyl either on the surface or in the groves. These engineered bacteria produce powerful enzymes which break down the organics to molescules small enought for these bacteria to consume, leaving only H20 and carbon dioxide as by-products that easily steam-off stopping the cleaning cycle. This method is safe to pets and Audioers but is exceedingly time consuming for most.
The sonic results are breath taking ; a pristine record grove reveals every nuance against as quite a backround to the limits of the recording technique employed. Of course, manufacturing defects, wear and former grove abuse never go away and may be heard when not formerly evident.
