"Shaving" optical discs

[Sonik Wiz]

My Dear William,

Alcohol not only DULLS the senses but would most certainly damage my delicate composition...slurring my ones and zeros!


Sincerely,


As much as I enjoy your posts, I just gotta say: if I was a Las Vegas stage hypnotist , I would dearly love to pull you out of the audience.

 

[ssully]

Why? They would diff to zero.

And experience shows that that result would have zero effect on dearly-held placebo-induced delusions held by the credulous.

 

[ssully]

Well I did spent an hour plus doing some more research...

I found the original Tellig article in Stereophile magazine (page 67)...
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Stereophile/90s/Stereophile-1990-02.pdf
I could not find anything official retracting the original article. I did find individuals' comments on message boards both praising and condemning the practice. Claims that it damaged the components of the disc (plastic/adhesive/foil) others that it affected the ability of player to read the disc (clouded the plastic) and unsubstantiated fears that residue could gunk up the actual CD player. There were even more positive comments about how it improved the sound or that there were no negative effects as a result of using it.

In my travels I also found a Snopes appraisal of greening the edges of the disc...
Green CDs

This article in stereophile attempted to quantify some claims that were made regarding CDs
https://www.stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/index.html
Here is something on YouTube on the subject:


The only conclusion I can reach is exactly what AYanguas said in the comment above.

However I can say that I did not see anything official that confirmed without a doubt that green markers or armor all negatively or positively affected CD from anyone but individuals that made claims one way of the other on message boards.

You're all over the place.

Anything that buffs out or 'fills in' problematic scratches on the play side could turn a disc from unplayable to playable. In that sense it certainly 'improves' the sound! Meaning the player's error correction can operate well enough to recover the data. But once you reach that threshold, there is no documented 'improvement'. Nor is there any plausible scientific basis for one. Read errors in CD playback do not manifest as 'tighter bass' or 'smoother highs' or 'veils lifted' etc. They manifest as catastrophic failure -- skipping and the like.

Your random youtube expert confirms that Stereophile issued a warning about 'smearing' Armor All on defenseless CDs after Tellig's silly article.
NB, simply 'smearing' it on with no other action would be a particularly bad idea. For any liquid/gel-based scratch treatment, ranging from toothpaste -- I've used it, it works -- to Novus products, to overpriced stuff marketed specifically for audio, you really want to buff it well off and out before playing. You don't want to risk any silicone or abrasive junk flying off the spinning disc into your hardware.)

 

[Bill B]

You're all over the place.

Anything that buffs out or 'fills in' problematic scratches on the play side could turn a disc from unplayable to playable. In that sense it certainly 'improves' the sound! Meaning the player's error correction can operate well enough to recover the data. But once you reach that threshold, there is no documented 'improvement'. Nor is there any plausible scientific basis for one. Read errors in CD playback do not manifest as 'tighter bass' or 'smoother highs' or 'veils lifted' etc. They manifest as catastrophic failure -- skipping and the like.

Your random youtube expert confirms that Stereophile issued a warning about 'smearing' Armor All on defenseless CDs after Tellig's silly article.
NB, simply 'smearing' it on with no other action would be a particularly bad idea. For any liquid/gel-based scratch treatment, ranging from toothpaste -- I've used it, it works -- to Novus products, to overpriced stuff marketed specifically for audio, you really want to buff it well off and out before playing. You don't want to risk any silicone or abrasive junk flying off the spinning disc into your hardware.)

Agreed. On the rare occasions that I use it anymore, I spray it on lightly and wipe it off thoroughly. I often do a final wipe with water only.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Sonik Wiz sez:

"As much I enjoy your posts, I just gotta say: if I was a Las Vegas stage hypnotist , I would dearly love to pull you out of the audience."

And to THAT, I reply:

SW, I'd be a lousy subject ..... as I don't believe much in VooDoo .......

SW, YOU WILL FOLLOW MY LEAD AND TREAT/BLACK RIM ALL YOUR DISCS

 

[4-earredwonder]

Sonik Wiz sez:

"As much I enjoy your posts, I just gotta say: if I was a Las Vegas stage hypnotist , I would dearly love to pull you out of the audience."

And to THAT, I reply:

SW, I'd be a lousy subject ..... as I don't believe much in VooDoo .......

SW, YOU WILL FOLLOW MY LEAD AND TREAT/BLACK RIM ALL YOUR DISCS

SW, MY DISC TREATMENTS REALLY DO WORK...

Just ask my Therapists:

 

[J. PUPSTER]

The only thing I have done to my CDs etc (digital media) is wipe someone's greasy 'tator chip schmutz (or similar) off the disc when bought used. Not my schmutz mind you,

I believe that is all that is necessary for maintenance.

 

[4-earredwonder]

The only thing I have done to my CDs etc (digital media) is wipe someone's greasy 'tator chip schmutz (or similar) off the disc when bought used. Not my schmutz mind you,

I believe that is all that is necessary for maintenance.

And here I thought ALL CALIFORNIANS .... LOVE TO EXPERIMENT!

 

[4-earredwonder]

And here I thought ALL CALIFORNIANS .... LOVE TO EXPERIMENT!

But then again, my sister lives in Southern Cali and to this day still thinks POT is a ceramic plant holder!

 

[Doug G.]

Would believers insist that, if two traces on an oscilloscope, one from an untreated disc and the other from a treated disc, were digitally identical, the oscilloscope is not resolute enough to show the difference or that it was displaying the wrong bits-derived traces and that they STILL hear a difference between the two?



Doug

 

[4-earredwonder]

Would believers insist that, if two traces on an oscilloscope, one from an untreated disc and the other from a treated disc, were digitally identical, the oscilloscope is not resolute enough to show the difference or that it was displaying the wrong bits-derived traces and that they STILL hear a difference between the two?



Doug

Doug, DOUG, HEARING IS BELIEVING ...

Don't need some osillyscope to savor the aurally seductive difference!

Sincerely,

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Would believers insist that, if two traces on an oscilloscope, one from an untreated disc and the other from a treated disc, were digitally identical, the oscilloscope is not resolute enough to show the difference or that it was displaying the wrong bits-derived traces and that they STILL hear a difference between the two?



Doug

I worked for a retina specialist for 25 years & was involved in many clinical trials. Most of these involved a new treatment compared to existing standard of care. So the patient got therapy either way. On some trials that involved prevention rather than treatment a placebo was used along with the real test therapy. The pt never knew what they got but the clinic did. It's beyond count how many times someone with a placebo claimed they were seeing better despite vision tests & exams said not. And many also said they were getting side effects when they also were receiving an inactive component.

I noticed this wasn't about IQ or education: it 's all about susceptibility, the stage hypnotist's friend. I will say it's more about the lack of knowledge or awareness about the procedure. Knowing what's at work & why something may/may not happen is a powerful tool.

In our audio hobby I find many who are susceptible to outlandish claims are frequently very un-technical. All a audio snake oil salesman needs to do is sound logical have a few "objective" testimonials and the mark's imagination takes over from there.

Indeed there are many things that actually can affect quality of high quality audio that can be heard. But there should be an identifiable technical reason as to why or you just haven't looked hard enough. Otherwise it's just:

 

[4-earredwonder]

I worked for a retina specialist for 25 years & was involved in many clinical trials. Most of these involved a new treatment compared to existing standard of care. So the patient got therapy either way. On some trials that involved prevention rather than treatment a placebo was used along with the real test therapy. The pt never knew what they got but the clinic did. It's beyond count how many times someone with a placebo claimed they were seeing better despite vision tests & exams said not. And many also said they were getting side effects when they also were receiving an inactive component.

I noticed this wasn't about IQ or education: it 's all about susceptibility, the stage hypnotist's friend. I will say it's more about the lack of knowledge or awareness about the procedure. Knowing what's at work & why something may/may not happen is a powerful tool.

In our audio hobby I find many who are susceptible to outlandish claims are frequently very un-technical. All a audio snake oil salesman needs to do is sound logical have a few "objective" testimonials and the mark's imagination takes over from there.

Indeed there are many things that actually can affect quality of high quality audio that can be heard. But there should be an identifiable technical reason as to why or you just haven't looked hard enough. Otherwise it's just:
View attachment 83424

Maybe it's time to change Therapists, SW

 

[godathunder]

Why? They would diff to zero.

well yes, thats my expectation.

however, in the spirit of open minded experimentation, Im happy to have my prejudices challenged.

If the rips are, as expected, identical then it shows conclusively that the treatment does nothing

If there are differences then further investigation is in order.