Results from Beta Testers of New Formulas

Raul,
Are you suggesting that only the engineer can understand how a recording is supposed to sound? I guess my assumption that the purpose of this hobby was to enjoy the music contained in the grooves rather than fret over whether or not we hear it as the engineer intended, is incorrect. Any component, cable, tweak, setup, etc. imparts it's own sonic signature. Each of us assembles a system based on our own personal listening biases. Ideally, we listen through the sonic signature imparted by the equipment for the heart and soul of the composer's intention not the engineer's. Do we like what we hear? Does the music move us? Or, are we dissatisfied because we are unable to appreciate it because we are unsure that the playback is not like it was the moment it was commited to tape.
Your "point", or your mission is of no importance to me, and I dare say of any of the testers who are posting to this thread. I am not "angry" that I don't understand what you are getting at. What I am angry at is the fact that your post represents nothing short of a troll, with nothing of consequence to add to the context of this thread or it's intent. This thread is about a new formula of cleaner for vinyl, and whether or not the users feel that it works better than or worse than what they are currently using. If your intent is to start some kind of argument, I would suggest you take it over to AA, where there are plenty of paranoid folks who like to fight in the anonymous world of cyberspace. Otherwise, please stick to the subject at hand. If you have no experience with the product we are discussing, you have nothing to add and are therefore irrelevant...
If you do not think this is the case, it is YOU who doesn't understand. The title of the thread says it all.
MY posts to this thread prior to your intrusion dealt with MY perceived impressions of Paul's products, they will also return to my impressions of the product from this point forward.

Paul,

I listened to a record I love earlier this afternoon which has some annoying surface noise yet no apparent reason for it. It has been cleaned previously using two well respected products. I used your products and there is a noticeable improvement. It's not an audiophile pressing and I can't say that anything has improved beyond reduced surface noise but I can say that the music was as detailed as before. So, in this one case I enjoyed a benefit. More cleaning and postings to follow, good or bad. Of course, time will tell, as others have suggested, if your formula degrades the vinyl. If a 12 1/2% solution containing alcohol will degrade vinyl then my entire collection is headed to the trash heap some day because most of the previous solutions I've used contained alcohol. For the record, the EQ remains the same, FWIW, IMO, YMMV, etc.

Dear Slipknotl: First than all my post was to Paul not to you. I ask to Paul to give and answer and he is silent till now.
You still don't understand about it and yes I know that it is not important to you. So don't loose your time answer me for something that you can't understand and that I don't ask you: Paul has to answer.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Hi Raul,

You say "Paul has to answer." Actually, I don't, but will do so now as a courtesy to you. I didn't respond earlier because I thought that what was already posted adequately responded to you.

Your suggestion that should send the fluids to the original recording engineers (studio engineers? mixdown/mastering engineers? lacquer cutting engineers?) makes no sense to me whatsoever. They don't have hard drives for brains; they can't "replay" sounds once heard years ago for comparison. And even if they did, how would they listen to the vinyl cleaned with these formulas except on their equipment ... which necessarily has its own sonic signature?

The reason for this thread is really quite simple: whether the knowledgeable, experienced and technically-oriented vinylphiles here on A'gon think the vinyl sounds better -- or not -- after using the formulas in my 2-step process. None of us need anyone else -- whether a recording engineer or our mothers -- to agree or disagree with us when we listen to something on our system and say "that sounds better," or "that sounds worse."

Having now responded, I respectfully ask that if you want to continue this debate, please start your own thread to do so. People are using the thread to post their feedback on using the formulas, and others are coming to this thread becaue they want to read that feedback ... and not debates on whether we should or should not have recording engineers tell us what sounds better -- or worse -- on our own systems. Thanks, Raul.

Best regards,
Paul

Dear Lugnut: An equalizer is a device that can change the frecuency response in music reproduction: all the testers told us that they hear something different ( that they like it ): this " something different " is a change in the frecuency response, my point is if that changes are in the recording or not: the only people that know about it are the people that were at the live studio recording, if these people told us that after the formula treatment the reproduction sound is more accurate to the recording then and only then Paul can say that the formula really works in favor of the music reproduction, if these people told us that the treatment it does not help for " accurate to the recording ", then the formula is an equalizer. That is all.
About the tube electronics that work like a very expensive equalizers I agree with you that this is not the moment to speak about it and I apoligize for that.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.