Review by E. Zwerling
Rating:
I recently revived my old stereo and hundreds of LP albums from the basement. There are many of these albums that never made it to CD, and I also wanted to see what people were talking about when they say that analog vinyl has a warmth that digital CDs do not. Now, a week later, I really do understand.

But with that warmth comes dust and dirt, which is not a problem for CDs. I remembered that back in the day the standard of excellence for disk cleaning was the Discwasher. I spent about an hour looking for my old one, gave up and bought a new one, now made by RCA.

The old company either went bankrupt or just sold out, but RCA has run this product into the ground – it’s not what you remember. Now made in China, the wood handle is imprecisely cut so that the bottle no longer fits well inside. Instead, it gets lodged and took some time to dislodge. That’s not a big issue however, but indicative of how the quality isn’t what it used to be.

The real issue, however, is the cleaning pad. The old model had ridges of material that ran lengthwise to the handle, with the fibers angled so that they dug into the grooves and pulled out the dust, holding onto it. That’s why it worked so well. What’s the pad covered with now? It appears to be brown corduroy, with ridges, yes, but the fibers have no particular orientation. Thus, it does not dig into the grooves and does an even worse job of holding onto the dirt it does dislodge. I was almost going to give up on the new Discwasher as the results were so second rate.

I was very disappointed, but thought maybe my memory had built the old Discwasher into something Herculean that didn’t match reality. Memory has a way of accentuating either the positives of negatives.

Well, today I found the old Discwasher, and let me tell you, if anything my memory didn’t give the old product enough praise. I have now cleaned several LPs with the old one, and there’s an absolute world of difference. The old one digs the dirt out and keeps it in the pad until you brush it out, completely unlike the one that RCA is peddling these days. The new one leaves a lot of dust on the disc no matter how carefully you roll the brush.

Shame on you RCA for exploiting and cheapening a venerable old brand. What would it have cost you to put the proper fabric on the pad as opposed to corduroy? Maybe 15 cents per item?? But then again I guess they get the corduroy clippings cheap from a GAP factory in China.

Yes, it looks like the Discwasher of old, but that’s the extent of the resemblance. If you’re looking for the Discwasher you remember, look in the basement; maybe you’ll get really lucky like I did. Or, look on eBay, but do not look to RCA.

For those reviewers writing reviews based on the historic quality of this product – you haven’t bought this new version. It really is remarkably inferior.

Shame on you RCA for what you’ve done to this product.

Review by T. Banney
Rating:
This is NOT the original! I was horribly disappointed with this purchase. Thankfully, I kept my original Discwasher and continue to use this 25+ year-old product over this new piece of junk!

Review by Steve Wooten
Rating:
I was not really impressed with this at all. The older Disc washer 3 was softer and picked up small particles better. It was also easier to clean off after use. Plus, you could store the cleaning fluid in the body of the D3. It seems this product has been compromised to save on cost.