DEiNFORMER® Technologie Transfer
Ein Erfahrungsbericht von Michael Vorbau, Helmut Hausen und Horst Paffrath
Interviewausschnitte mit Martin Hoefle und Hubert Maria Dietrich.
Michael: Horst called me and asked if I’d be interested in checking out some “special water for cleaning vinyl.” Helmut was coming too and would bring some records. Oops—I thought for a moment—here we go; the guys are getting older, but wiser too? My wife is a psychiatrist; maybe she’d have an idea on how to help. But I didn’t want to scare her just yet. Of course, I agreed to the “test.” As you can probably tell, up until that point, I thought it was all hocus-pocus and the like.
But what really drives me up the wall is when the whole thing actually works. And that’s exactly what happened! During my first phone call with him, Mr. Hoefle told me, “That’s a normal reaction. He often gets calls from users who, even before they give their name, say, ‘I have a problem—it’s working, and that’s not what I wanted.’” At the 2016 Analog Forum in Krefeld, the DEiNFORMER® booth in the foyer first caught the attention of Horst and Helmut. After a lengthy conversation, they purchased the functional water to test its effects on their records.
Michael: To start with, a basic question: Where and how can the DEiNFORMER® be used? M. Hoefle: “We currently offer two types of functional water for audio media: DE-DISK for CDs, DVDs, and Blu-rays. Older DVDs in particular see a significant improvement in picture quality, and all of them benefit in terms of sound. This really comes into its own in a home theater setup, because that’s where we have the combination of high volume and visual elements. For analog media, we offer the DE-VINYL.
You can use this functional water in any record cleaning machine, regardless of the model or manufacturer. For those who don’t have a machine, the DEiNFORMER® is also suitable for hand washing. It’s very easy to use. Either mix the DE with water in the tank before pumping it up, or prepare a mixture in a 0.5-liter spray bottle—which we offer as an option—if you have a standalone turntable vacuum unit. The machine tanks usually have a capacity of half a liter, which is enough for 50 to 80 records. The cost ranges from 0.50 cents to 1.00 euro per record. Each machine has different water consumption. Always mix 0.25 ml of DEiNFORMER® with 0.5 L of water. You can start after 30 seconds. The DE is available in 100-ml bottles for 69.00 euros and has a shelf life of many years.”
Horst: We’ve already done all kinds of comparison tests—various Phono-Press units, cables, and equipment stands, as well as different methods for cleaning records. A functional water based on technology rather than “mysterious ingredients”—in other words, “variations on dish soap”? That was a first for us, so we were eager to see the cleaning results and the impact on sound quality.
Since the DEiNFORMER® is free of chemical additives, solvents, acids, alkalis, soaps, and alcohols, the manufacturer claims that, for the first time, “surface-neutral cleaning” is possible without damaging the vinyl. This is said to be the logical prerequisite for preserving the value of the records. This was originally the idea and development mandate of the initiator, Martin Hoefle, back in 2014, but how did it all begin?
M. Hoefle: We serve as a service provider for industry and manufacturers, supporting them in their development efforts through our measurement and analysis capabilities. Today, private users also include hi-fi enthusiasts who seek maximum enjoyment with a more analog feel (for CDs/Hi-Res), a homogeneous, full-bodied sound, and naturalness with a live character, and who want a comparatively cost-effective way to upgrade their existing system.
This process takes place in the lab—without water. The idea for this came later. We only discovered later that it was also feasible with audio media. We started with instruments. Together with musicians and technicians, we worked our way toward this goal over the years. It required an enormous amount of development work. World-class drummer and world record holder Martin Klee collaborated with us on the development of special functional waters for drums.
Michael: What is the DE technology capable of? M. Hoefle: The DEiNFORMER® technology enables maximum sound performance in, for example, devices, speakers, or cables—or even musical instruments. The result is not a temporary effect, but rather “permanent,” and the process needs to be performed only “once.”
Consequently, “Functional Water” was developed for home use—for CDs, DVDs, and vinyl—to bring this technology into music listeners’ homes and to enable damage-free cleaning and maintenance. So, three functions in one. There simply wasn’t a product like this on the market.
Horst: What was the basic idea behind the development project? M. Hoefle: My initial goal was to ensure the long-term preservation of the vinyl record. Back then, I was simply looking for a cleaner that wouldn’t scratch the records and wouldn’t leave any residue in the grooves that would impair the sound. The cleaning process was intended to leave a sonically neutral surface and cause absolutely no tonal distortion of the original.
Then, as a further result of the technology—the icing on the cake, so to speak—the sonic aspect came into play—and I was more than surprised that this function of the technology could also be “docked onto” and “transferred via” the DEiNFORMER®. It’s clear that the records sound better per se once they’re “cleaned”—but I had never expected, or even speculated about, such an effect. When I experienced the “sound release” for the first time, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing and immediately called the development lab. That’s exactly how users who contact me today feel. They ask, “Is what they’re hearing actually what they’re hearing?” ;*)
Horst: It’s probably not entirely accurate to describe the DEiNFORMER® as merely a tuning product, is it? M. Hoefle: The DEiNFORMER® is not a tuning product and was never intended to be one. It neither interferes with the sound nor imposes an “acoustic stamp” on it. This means that a recording that already sounds good will ultimately sound “even better,” since its full potential can be realized, allowing the music to be heard without any limitations. It always depends on the individual recording. In the case of a truly poor recording, this will also be mercilessly exposed. So, equal treatment for all. Otherwise, we’d be talking about a mere effect that always has the same tonal impact and manipulates my listening experience.
I want to experience the sound exactly as it is—as it was recorded and as the artist or engineer intended it—and not the vision of a third party who, with their “cleaner” or “effect,” smooths over something that doesn’t belong there. I like it pure and authentic, as close as possible to the original performance. I’m an “emotional listener” and want to hear the singer’s breathing or the sound of fingers on the guitar neck. The sound system should fade into the background; the sound should fill the room just as it was originally arranged, as if the band were standing right there in my living room. Tuning—that refers to effects, which are usually fleeting, that evoke a quick emotional response. Then you always need more of it. The louder the thunder, the greater the emotion. Tuning is the new “loudness” button.
What underlying issue is this supposed to address? It merely masks the symptoms. We humans have become too much like emotion junkies. Everything has to be layered with something to evoke a fleeting emotion that promises a quick thrill. What does this have to do with high-end audio? You can’t fill a glass that’s already full. Why not empty everything out for once and open yourself up to a new path? Back to the source, back to natural listening. For me, listening to music is less about emotion and much more about genuine feeling. That’s something entirely different, even if we use the two terms interchangeably in everyday life. Saint-Exupéry said something remarkable: “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add—but when there is nothing left to take away.”
Michael: What do you mean by “if the beginning isn’t right, the rest doesn’t matter”? M. Hoefle: If I limit myself right at the source—in the recording—by not fully utilizing its potential, that limitation logically carries over. That’s how you quickly get used to the limitation. Nobody wants that. If one person sings out of tune in a choir, the whole thing is off.
A chain can only ever be as good as its weakest link. The resulting sound can only reproduce and transmit through the components, devices, etc., what the audio source at the beginning of the chain provides. Everything else is “missing” from the picture. Why not draw on the full potential? This is where sound liberation comes in. Now that this technical capability is available, let’s make use of it! No one would think of driving a car with the parking brake engaged. And because this is so important to me—even at the risk of repeating myself—the DEiNFORMER® “only” unlocks.
Figuratively speaking—it clears the rocks out of the way or turns many trickles into a river. Nothing is added, supposedly optimized, or “in-formed.” There is no—absolutely no—sonic manipulation of the source material and thus of the original sound. Now everything can unfold fully and in balance on the stage. The sound becomes more relaxed, and dynamics and spatiality increase, etc.
Michael: We listened to the following records in comparison, both before and after treatment with DEiNFORMER® VINYL:
- Paul Millns – Gone Again: A Little Pain Killing
- Art Blakey and the Jazzmessengers – Sängerhalle Untertürkheim, July 15, 1978: Jodi
- Joe Jackson – The Duke: Ishahan
- Old Betsy – The Sound of Big Ben Webster: Solitude
- Quadro Nuevo – Tango Bitter Sweet: L’été indien
The recordings were played on a Rui Borges Uno turntable with a Reed tonearm and a Van den Hul MC One Special cartridge, as well as on a Micro Seiki turntable with an FR 64 tonearm fitted with a Phasetech P1 cartridge and a Helius Scorpio tonearm fitted with an Audio-Technica PTG 33 cartridge.
Our listening impressions:
Art Blakey’s drums receded slightly into the background, but in return we felt we could perceive the drumheads of the individual drums in greater detail. We no longer perceived Valery Ponomarev’s trumpet entrance as quite so aggressive, and the interplay with David Schnitter’s tenor saxophone was easier to distinguish.
On Joe Jackson’s track “Isfahan,” the piano gained more definition, while the guitar and synthesizer offered a more harmonious soundscape with greater richness.
With Quadro Nuevo, the soundstage was now more defined, resulting in better localization of the instruments. Clearer definition rounded out the whole experience into a more harmonious soundscape.
On the recording of Stevie Ray Vaughan’s “Tin Pan Alley,” the guitar sounded smoother; it no longer sounded as aggressive during dynamic shifts, yet without losing any definition. The bass strings gave the impression of having become thicker, and the drumming technique seemed more audible. With the vocals, the varying microphone distance was clearly audible.
The fast piano runs in the track “Fill Rouge” on Elisabetta Serio’s LP “April” stood out due to a clearer perception of the individual notes. The drums took on a more natural sound overall, especially the cymbals and drumheads. The ensemble playing seemed more effortless.
On Ben Webster’s *The Sound of Big Ben Webster*, specifically the beautiful track “Solitude,” we noticed changes similar to those mentioned earlier: the saxophone sounded richer, the piano’s touch was less harsh, and the timbres became more natural as well as more varied. Overall, the piece sounded more musical and harmonious.
The positive sonic impressions following the use of the DEiNFORMER® continued across all records, regardless of whether they were new, had previously undergone an intensive cleaning, or were simply old records. The changes were almost always perceptible in the same proportion. Groove noise, to the extent that it was already present, was not suppressed.
Michael: Now a question for Mr. Dietrich from the development lab. When you look at the vinyl cleaners available on the market, 100% of them rely on chemical ingredients in varying compositions. Some also contain various alcohols. Many people we know mix their own cleaner to save money. Does that really make sense, or is it actually a false economy, considering how much we spend on our hobby?
H.M. Dietrich: Normally, in cleaning applications, acids, alkalis, surfactants, vinegar solution, or soap are used. Alcohols are also used. One of the goals is to reduce surface tension in order to achieve a cleaning effect. Distilled (demineralized) water is often used for cleaning due to the calcium content in tap water. However, since its cleaning power is limited—and it cannot dissolve fats, various carbon compounds, etc.—a “cleaning agent” is added.
This creates either an alkaline or an acidic environment. The result is chemical or electrochemical corrosion (“decomposition”) of the dirt through an ion-exchange reaction, which also alters the properties of the vinyl. The intensity depends on the pH value, the duration of exposure, and the temperature during the process. One consequence of this is always damage to the surface, as extremely fine microcracks form in the structure of the record.
With each wash cycle, the surface becomes increasingly microporous and rough, as cleaning agents and contaminants become trapped in the tiny microcracks, thereby actually increasing the rate at which the record becomes soiled again. The result is a distortion of the sound caused by the degradation of the surface as well as the accumulation of cleaning agents and contaminants. Therefore, it makes no sense, among other things, to compromise the integrity of the surface (physical degradation). Every surfactant, every alkaline solution, and every chemical you use damages the microporous area of the record.
Michael: How do you address the challenges of acceptance and the “suspicions of voodoo” that often arise with new products that aren’t immediately understood? H.M. Dietrich: We’ve been on the market with our products and services for over 20 years. Every time we’ve launched a new product, the topic of “voodoo,” “fraud,” or “magic” has come up. A paradigm shift always arouses suspicion. That’s just the way it is. But anyone who listens with an open heart and open ears will recognize the immense potential of our technology.
Michael: How does “functional water” fundamentally differ from H₂O? H.M. Dietrich: Water can serve as a store of information. Our functional waters, however, are specifically “information-free” for the spatial structures in which they are intended to act. The DEiNFORMER® Vinyl was designed to enhance the transmission quality and speed of waves, sound, or light for a specific spatial structure (in this case: the substance “polyvinyl chloride”). This is what we mean by “enhancing communication capabilities” or “unlocking existing potential.” The much-discussed effect is the acoustic result of an unrestricted reading process.