"Cleaning" Vinyl Makes It Worse Not Better!

Streaming. 

@vitussl101 the reason I gave you a little detail (i.e.  more, evidently, than your mind can handle) was to attempt to point out that there are many different record cleaning methodologies (i.e.  different equipment, conditions, fluid temperatures, rotational speeds; etc.) and this is only my present approach.  However, since you want answers fed to you like pablum, here 'ya go:  "distilled water and 0.004% Tergitol 15-S-9" in a US machine" set to operate between 27C and 31C" (not to exceed a fluid temperature of 37C) for "15 minute (cleaning) cycles" with records rotating "at 0.5 RPM" in the cleaning fluid and "spaced (at least) 1.25" apart" if you are cleaning more than 1 record at a time.  Does that work for 'ya or is that still too much to digest?  Try getting up on the other side of the bed, for a change.  It might improve your crotchetiness.  Happy Holidays to you and yours!

@antinn thanks again, bud!  You're the best!  Happy & healthy holiday wishes for you and all your loved ones!

@oldaudiophile It was a simple question; Has anyone tried Mofi's Ultra Record Wash concentrate for ultrasonic cleaning machines?  In stead, outside of other methods of cleaning. you recommend mixing/making my own.  When I asked you how to make my own 'SPECIFIC' cleaner, I get a treatise on something completely different.  So you do not know what's in a bottle of Mofi's Ultra Record Wash concentrate for ultrasonic cleaning machines.  That's all you had to say or nothing at all. I'm sure your method of cleaning Lp's works well for you, but that's not what I was asking about.  So I give up.  It's not that important.  

P S,

I use a Degritter and a Spin Clean with goat hair brushes.  I have a vacuum machine that I don't use anymore with a lot of cleaners that sits idle(actually put away) that I'll never use again, thank god if he exists. I'm familiar with the Degritter II, not necessary `if you own the original, the original KLA, the Audiodesk.  Honestly I don't know if the new KLA is better than the old(supposed to be more reliable), but the Degritter is built well.  I know there machines can clean thousands of records in a relatively short period without failure, well beyond what a typical home owner would use it for.  Those jewelry cleaning cavitation machines were not designed to clean Lp's.  It is what is. 

@oldaudiophile,

have I learned anything?

Oh yes, you have learned quite a bit. WRT to the Elmasonic P60H PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf, it’s a very versatile dual frequency 37/80-kHz unit with variable power and various operating modes. As the book says, a common UT cleaning process with Elmasonic P-series is 10-min auto-cycling between 37-kHz and 80-kHz; then 10-min at 80-kHz. But it’s a very powerful unit. It will heat the tank water pretty quickly.

UT tank power ratings especially for the lower cost Chinese units can be shall we say optimistic. It’s easy to check by how quickly the tank heats up (ultrasonics only) or plug into a simple power monitor such as Upgraded Watt Meter Power Meter Plug Home Energy Monitor Electricity Usage Monitor, Electrical Usage Monitor, Energy Voltage Amps Meter Tester with Backlight, Overload Protection, 8 Display Modes - Amazon.com.

If you plan on serially cleaning a large batch of records, one batch after another, for the Elmasonic P-series you have to manage the tank temperature, i.e. cool it off. You can try what Kirmuss does for his UT tank at shows which is to drain the tank into a container to allow it cool, and refill with cooler fluid, or you can add a pump, filter and radiator. I have successfully set up a few people with a pump, filter and radiator for Elmasonic P-series tanks (Chapter XIV has the radiator details).

Take care and best wishes for the Holidays and New Year,

Neil

PS/For those reading who cringe at the details being addressed for full wet cleaning, for new records (and even good condition used records), many people are satisfied with just the Audio Technica AT-6012 brush - Amazon.com: Audio-Technica AT6012 Record Care Kit with Record Care Solution, Brush Pad, Storage Base, and Adhesive Tape : AUDIO-TECHNICA: Electronics used as follows:

• Do not use the fluid provided, it’s now nothing more than water+detergent and it will leave residue. It used to be distilled water and isopropyl alcohol but worldwide shipping regulations have clamped down on shipping flammable fluids.
• Instead, drain out the detergent and 1st flush the bottle with tap-water until no foam, then rinse with distilled water (DIW) and refill with 50:50 distilled water (DIW) and 70% or 91% isopropyl alcohol (IPA). Do not use rubbing alcohol it has other ingredients that will leave residue.
• Wet the leading edge of the brush (the brush is directional) with the 50:50 DIW/IPA solution, then wipe the record (while spinning) with the wetted edge, and then roll the brush to dry, as shown in this video - https://youtu.be/eQIFbCc015s beginning at time 3:05. If you watch the whole video dismiss applying the 5-drops to the top of the pad.
• Note that over time, the pad will get dirty, and it will give back more than it removes. Just flush the pad with DIW (spray bottle works) and then finish with wetting the entire pad with the DIW/IPA solution to speed up drying the pad.

@vitussl101 Again, I cannot emphasize enough how important I think it is for all those interested in record cleaning to read "Precision Aqueous Cleaning of:  Vinyl Records" at the Vinyl Press.  BTW, if you haven't already figured this out, "antinn", a contributor in this thread, is the author of that book.  It's not an easy read for non-scientific minds, like me, but definitely worth the time.  I tried, as best I could, to incorporate Neil's guidance into my cleaning approach.

That being said, without going into too much detail, here's the method to my present madness:

I use a Knosti Disco Anti-Stat (basically, the same as a Spin-Clean but with goat hair brushes) to pre-clean my records prior to cleaning them in my ultrasonic machine.  I fill the Knosti with MOFI SUPER RECORD WASH for this.  I think this step can be avoided for records that are already relatively clean.  However, for records that are really dirty (I don't have any), I would definitely do this or some kind of pre-clean step.  When my MOFI SUPER RECORD WASH supply runs out, I'll fill the Knosti with distilled water and 0.5% Liquinox, instead.  All of this is done at room temperature.

After this pre-clean step, I use a basic 6-liter 40 kHz 110-volt machine filled with distilled water and 0.004% Tergitol 15-S-9 set to operate between 27C and 31C and run it for 30 minutes without any records in it.  Then, I use equipment I purchased from CleanerVinyl (record spinner; bath filter; record spacers; etc.) to put the pre-cleaned records into the US cleaner.  I do 2 records at a time, spaced 1.25" apart and run them at 0.5 RPM for 15-minute cycles making sure the bath fluid temp never exceeds 37C.  Then, I use my record lifter device to raise the records out of the US tank bath and let them rotate above the machine at 5 RPM for about 15 minutes to help with drying.  After that, the records go into my Knosti's drying rack until they are completely dry.

When I get around to it, I'll invest in a small HEPA air cleaner that I can set up near my drying station to help catch as much airborne dust motes as possible.  Also, I intend to purchase a better US machine (i.e.  Elma Sonic P60H) at some point to continue tweaking my cleaning approach.  On the other hand, I may just say "to hell with it", bite the bullet, get a Degritter Mark II and use the contraption(s) I have now as a pre-clean step and/or final rinse step.

So, Neil, if you're still following this thread, have I learned anything?

Hi Bill, 

Thanks for the kind words, and yes, it's been a bit of journey since the VPI Forum days.  I very grateful to @whart for jumping in as Editor and Publisher of the book and making it available for free.  Although there are days when I ask myself why did I do this, LOL.  I went back to work a few years ago, so it's not like I do not have enough to do.  But is always good trying to help people.  

Take care and best wishes for the Holiday and New Year,

Neil

Neil!

It is always a pleasure to find you ever since we first crossed paths in the VPI Forum now many moons ago.  Some things never change and I marvel at your patience.  FWIW for any who are lurking and not sure what to make of all this let me add my name to the many, many endorsers you will encounter for Neil Antinn.  He is the real deal and no person who has carefully followed his advice is not better off.

Regards,

Bill Stevenson

@oldaudiophile "Yes, I know what you mean.  The little bottle you're talking about is Mofi's Ultra Record Wash concentrate for ultrasonic cleaning machines.  Again, you can make your own for a fraction of the cost."

Okay, can you tell me how to make my own Ultra Record Wash concentrate? I'd appreciate it.

@antinn Fascinating! I hadn't known of the Helios before, but found it on the SS special order page, where it is shown in the old-style body. I know of someone who has asked Peter if he would make a high-output Hyperion, and it seems he already does.

@dogberry, 

Have you moved on from the Sussurro Gold?

No.

VPI did a comparison some year back at CAF with two exact same tables (HW-40); played back through some big Wilsons; one with the Lyra-Etna, the other with the Soundsmith Hyperion (the low output version of the Helios).  They were playing a Louis Armstrong record.  The differences in the cartridges were to me very apparent.  The Etna made Louis sound like he was singing in Aspen, CO (clear & bright - call it a bit yang), while the Hyperion made Louis sound like he was playing in New Orleans (hot and humid - call it a bit yin); but neither missed any details.  Personal taste would dictate which one you would like.  To me, the Sussurro Gold is in-between, and much more to my liking (and my equipment).

@starwarrior.

FWIW, this is what is in Dawn Ultra - CPID.  Aside from water there are 19-ingredients.  The first 3 (anionic surfactants) are what does most of the cleaning.  But understand that the thickness is artificial - they add propylene glycol (anti-freeze) and salt.  It's a good cleaner, but it's a bear to rinse completely.  

My basic recommendation for an equivalent without all the junk in the trunk (no thickeners, no fragrances, no coloring agents) and rinses much easier is Alconox Liquinox Liquinox_tech_bull.pdf which is about 50% concentrated with a combination of anionic and nonionic surfactants and is relatively cheap - Amazon.com: Alconox - 1232-1 1232 Liquinox Anionic Critical Cleaning Liquid Detergent, 1 quart Bottle : Industrial & Scientific.

@tuberculin,

I am not criticizing your system. It simply does not work for me. Don’t be so sensitive, show some humility and accept that this boy ain’t gonna buy it.

Your prior statement is obviously very critical of items that I may have never said in the past.  Unfortunately, the VPI Forum is long gone and all we have left is the published book.

So far Triton-X100, which Neil said was being taken off the market years ago, is still available and all of the other ingredients are easily obtainable, even the 200 proof ethyl alcohol, which Neil said is not available. That has fueled my skepticism.

As far as my chemicals did not work - the list of chemicals that are now in the book are quite extensive:

• Alconox Liquinox - general detergent for precleaning.
• Alconox Citranox - weak acid for precleaning
• Distilled White Vinegar with Nonionic Surfactant as a lower cost alternative to Citranox.
• Enzymes are discussed in Chapter 8
• Isopropyl alcohol (IPA) is discussed at length in Chapter 8 along with blending with the final cleaner nonionic surfactant
• Quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) such as HEPASTAT-256 and BAK50 (available EU) that some people use for anti-static coatings is addressed in Chapter 8.
• Rush Paul cleaning solution is addressed in Chapter 8.
• Nonionic Surfactants include Tergitol 15-S-9, Polysorbate-20, Triton X100, Surfonic™ JL-80X, DEHYPON LS 54 (available UK), ILFORD Ilfotol, and Tergikleen.

There are a host of chemicals that I address and many different processes.  Ultrasonic cleaning is addressed ad-nauseum in Chapter XIV detailing the effects of kHz, power, how many records at a time, spinner speed, etc,.  But depending on where you live, what equipment you have, and your own goals, the book is a handbook that can guide in any direction you want to go. 

Essentially, I have no fixed system.  My first recommendation is the basic standard chemicals Liquinox, Citranox and Tergitol 15-S-9.  If they work great, if not, and if I work with you, the hours I addressed above are my time - not yours, and I will adjust as necessary to hopefully match a chemistry and process that works for you.

And as the book says in the Forward,  All methods/procedures specified here present opportunity for experimenting with different cleaning agents, different cleaning brushes, different drying cloths, and different cleaning equipment....If you proceed down the path of experimentation, the information provided by this book can guide you to informed decisions...

Otherwise, like your selection of cartridge, I have four Soundsmith cartridges that I rotate among a two-arm table, Sussurro Gold Limited Edition, Paua, Boheme, and Carmen.   Always have one back at Soundsmith for rebuild.  

Take care,

@antinn Heliios [sic]?  Have you moved on from the Sussurro Gold?

A good wire brush with acetone. The record won't sound very good if it plays at all, but it will be clean.

@antinn I’m not going to argue with you about chemicals and processes. As I have said repeatedly that your system must work for a few records at a time. You yourself have stated that. It’s when you try to scale that to 20 or more records it becomes a formidable task, even when using US. In the research I did, reading the multitude to threads as I am sure did as well, I was trying to overcome the fear of ruining a record while having the desire to eliminate the noise I had from smoke and other dirt. You were probably still scrapping crud off of submarine oxygen tubes at that time.

I know that you are the de-facto resident expert, as no one has challenged you. But you’re just a guy like me trying to enjoy his records. I’ve written and published technical guides and manuals that were distributed world-wide by The Coca-Cola Company. I have enough humility to not think that is a big deal.

My cartridge, a Sound-Smith Heliios, is a very sensitive and linear device. I went through many different systems and chemicals for cleaning with poor results until I started using the Walker 4-step, then the Rush Paul system. I don’t hear any noise from the older used records. The blacks are blacker and deep. That was my goal and objective. When I used your chemicals either manually or in the US I did not get the same results. Also, I did.not need special assistance amounting to hours to get it right.

I am not criticizing your system. It simply does not work for me. Don’t be so sensitive, show some humility and accept that this boy ain’t gonna buy it.

@lewm If you were a smoker in the 1950's (I wasn't) you filled the room with cigarette smoke. Have you ever seen the windows of a smokers car and the stench that it produces. That stench doesn't go away. The same thing happens in a smoke filled room, it eventually smells like an ashtray. I ask you where do you think that smoke goes while playing a record?

My father and mother were both heavy smokers. Our whole house smelled like an ashtray. He would sit 10 feet from his record player and smoke like a chimney. You don't think he tainted his records? You obviously haven't been around much.

Biggest a bunch of malarkey I’ve ever heard. If you’re using a cleaning solvent that’s leaving a residual simply stop using it. Crud buildup over time on an Lp has always been a nuisance and can seriously effect sound quality. Start with good old Dawn dish soap and a clean soft cloth. After a good soap a dope, rinse it good and dry it with a clean soft cloth. Let your ears be the judge my friend, I am certain you will hear a remarkable difference.

back when i was bin diving i used the Walker enzyme with a wet vac brush Nitty Gritty before the Degritter w Turgitol….

Carry on

Jim

never a Monk, sometimes a Poet

@lewm, 

The quote I somewhat butchered was:  You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time" and web 'appears' to attribute it to John Lydgate of Bury (c. 1370 – c. 1451) who was a monk and poet.  

I will not hold it against you for using Triton X100 LOL.  Many people I have worked with had Triton X100 and while adopting some of what I recommended choose to stay with Triton X100.  It really only becomes to an issue when people want a no-rinse solution for UT, in which case you want just enough nonionic surfactant for wetting and keeping the cleaner concentration 50-ppm or less works well and this is where Tergitol 15-S-9 is a major benefit.  

Otherwise, thank you for the kind words and best wishes to you and yours for the Holidays and the New Year,

Neil

Cleaning cloth? Ouch! That’s a no no.

If you want to clean and dry records automatically and for reasonable cost look at Humminguru ultrasonic cleaner.

If a more manual approach is Ok then Spin Clean.

Sokogear, Have you ever encountered an audiophile who exposed all of his LPs to room air, by removing them from their protective sleeves, and then proceeded to smoke for hours on end? I find it hard to believe that "smoke" damage is a significant factor in the genesis of noisy LPs, except in the rare case of LPs that were rescued from a house fire. Don’t you think that is a bit far-fetched? However, there is such a thing as an LP that has been damaged by excessive play or by other kinds of misuse, like excessive VTF or worn styli. Those LPs can never be helped by cleaning, no matter how hard one might try.

Antinn, as I think you must know, Abe Lincoln was referring to "fooling the people", not making them happy. I for one am grateful for your good work and for publishing your data, even though I continue to use Triton X100.

Turtle Wax Bug and Tar Remover and 0000 steel wool are great for reducing high fequency noise.  Along with high frequence music.

@tuberculin, 

Make no mistake, you did not offend me.  You criticized the work that I have done, and I have the right of response.  Period. 

I have expended as much as 4-6 hours working with someone when they are attempting to use the chemistry and process that are documented in the book and run into problems.  For the record, I have never worked with you.  There are little details that can make a large difference such as concentration and application, even the brush and the technique using the brush (for vacuum RCM).  That is why I always say the devil is in the details.  

I would like to know the source of your statement:  

I tried your Tergitol, it didn't work as well. That's why they added the second Tergitol, to make it the same as Triton X. 

The origins of Tegikleen which is a blend of insoluble Tergitol 15-S-3 and soluble Tergitol 15-S-9 go back to 1996 when Triton X100 would have been readily available world-wide:  The Care and Handling of Recorded Sound Materials, By Gilles St-Laurent Music Division National Library of Canada January 1996  “The Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) recommends the use of nonionic, ethelyne oxide condensates surfactants to clean sound recordings. The CCI does not foresee long-term problems associated with the use of nonionic surfactants such as Tergitol. Tergitol 15-S-3 is an oil soluble surfactant and 15-S-9 is a water-soluble surfactant. Combined they remove a wide range of dirt and greases and can safely be used on sound recordings. Use 0.25 part of Tergitol 15-S-3 and 0.25 parts of Tergitol 15-S-9 per 100 parts of distilled water. The recording must then be rinsed thoroughly with distilled water to eliminate any trace of detergent residue.”.

Otherwise, you are entitled to your opinion, and as the old saying goes, you can make some of the people happy some of the times, but you will never make all the people happy all the time.  

Peace

97% or my records were purchased new, and the other 3% were either near mint or mint. I was told a long time ago not to wet records as it will make it worse. If you never got it dirty and remove the dust before playing, you're good to go. In the past I have cleaned an older record or two of mine at stores (or on my brother in law's $4000 model that uses some kind of expensive fluid) considering buying a RCM and never was able to hear a difference after cleaning versus before. These were very old, but in excellent condition. Mainly MOFIs from the early 80's. 

I use the Audioquest and Hunt brushes. Audioquest is easier to use. I wore out an Ortofon one that looks to be the same as the Audioquest with a different handle.

If you buy a lot of used records from people who ate or smoked or mishandled records (or you don't know where they came from), I guess you need to clean them. 

Very rarely (it could be once in 6 months) I will clean the stylus with an old dishwasher stylus brush and a tiny bit of that fluid (if any).

@antinn Sorry I offended you. I'm sure because you have written books, manuals and patents you're well known as an expert submarine tube cleaner. Now it is good that somebody has written something definitive, but not conclusive. That information was never in one place before.

I was merely stating, as I have before, my system works. I tried your Tergitol, it didn't work as well. That's why they added the second Tergitol, to make it the same as Triton X. As a matter of fact I have tried all of the chemicals that you recommend in my US tank and not one gave me the same results I get currently. I also used them manually before a vacuum, still not as good. And, I have zero damage and sonic loss.

The problem is removing tobacco smoke residue from the vinyl after it has set for 25-50+ years. My US system doesn't always get it the first time. I've found using the enzyme that comes with the Walker 4-step system will do a decent job if applied properly. I doubt yours does better.

You seem to be very sensitive about criticism.The fact is there are many ways, as you state, to clean records. Just look on YouTube, there are some crazy people out there..Everyone talks about your stuff as the be all end all for record cleaning. It's just a long tome with a lot of chemistry, that few people understand. I'm glad people are happy with it. I'm glad you're happy with it.

Happy Holidays

@tomic601, 

Probably a friction stir welded tank my team built….ha. One million linear inches of weld without a defect… definitely NOT trial and error…

That's impressive.  The tank was an open honeycomb design.  When they explained what they wanted to clean, I definitely took a deep breath.  But we able to clean the tank using only about 100-gallons of cleaner.  We used a high pressure multi-axis spray nozzle using Teflon diaphragm pumps to keep the fluid clean and as the fluid drained from the tank, a bank of 0.1-micron absolute filters kept the cleaning agent (that I had a Patent for) clean for continuous use with sampling of effluent to determine the process efficiency.  However, the irony is the company w/o my knowledge and w/o including me, filed for and got a patent for the cleaning process; but they never made any money on it.  I uncovered the Patent while researching something else.   Oh well, so much for ethical behavior. 

Take care and best wishes for the holidays,

Neil 

Right on @antinn 

Probably a friction stir welded tank my team built….ha. One million linear inches of weld without a defect… definitely NOT trial and error…

If Neil were to buy a Vacuum RCM and a US RCM and used his magic to invent a technique for them I am all ears. I would be very interested in that, but trying based on his description, with no practical experience, I hesitate to go down that rabbit hole.

All the procedures that are in the book Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press which include vacuum-RCM, UCM and combinations thereof have been validated with users across the globe.

As far as 200-proof ethanol this is what the book says: Pure Ethanol is drinking alcohol and aside from the inebriating effects is very safe. But most Ethanol purchased is denatured (made undrinkable) with methanol, and methanol and IPA can be very toxic. I make no statement that 200-proof cannot be purchased.

As far as Triton X100, this is what the book says: However, Dow™ Triton™ X-100 is categorized as a nonylphenol ethoxylate (NPE) and NPE chemical compounds have aquatic toxicity and are being phased-out (ref: EPA, Nonylphenol (NP) and Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs), 8/18/2010, Action Plan, RIN 2070-ZA09 (21)). Dow™ Triton™ X-100 was banned for commercial use/sale in the EU/UK on 4 January 2021 unless an exemption has been authorized. Medical use is authorized through 22 December 2023.

Otherwise, I developed and patented cleaners and precision cleaning processes for the Navy for about 20-years and assisted setting up those procedures across the globe with our allies. Those processes included ultrasonics anything from simple bench top to massive systems with 400-gallon tanks.

You can believe it or not, but I have lots of on-hands practical experience, and I have no need for the Edisonian technique of trial and error. If you understand the science, the mechanics and the chemistry, all you are doing at the end is tweaking the chemistry and process to match the user and equipment. Cleaning a record is not rocket science, but if it matters I do know how to clean rockets - I developed a spray cleaning procedure to clean a large aerospace contractor’s 30,000-gal liquid oxygen tank. But for those wed to trial and error, it’s a valid approach, just not very efficient.

The book discusses the “Rushton Paul” DIY ultrasonic cleaning formula Ultrasonic Cleaning, addressing each of the ingredients and what they mean. If you understood the chemistry (which the book addresses) of surfactants then you would understand why I recommend Tergitol 15-S-9; it’s essentially 4X more efficient which allows using less making rinsing easier.

As far as the manual process, I am open with stating that if you are cleaning more than about 6-records at a time, it’s not practical.

Otherwise, as the book states: All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. In the final analysis, the best cleaning process is the one that is best for you.

Take care,

Neil Antin

@whart I agree with you. I am not knocking all the work that Neil has done. I was pointing out that he has made some pronouncements (to me) on the VPI forum and here that are not based on any fact or practical experience. I think he should leave it alone until he has. I've tried some of his suggestions and solutions. In my experience with some of it, besides being more elaborate and time consuming, the results were less that what I get with the simple Rush Paul method. I'm just sayin'.

If Neil were to buy a Vacuum RCM and a US RCM and used his magic to invent a technique for them I am all ears. I would be very interested in that, but trying based on his description, with no practical experience, I hesitate to go down that rabbit hole.

btw, Anybody heard from Rush?

Thanks. Len

@tuberculin- I have great respect for Rush and corresponded with him at one point. I think several people have put Neil's ultrasonic work into practice, using Elma machines in cascading baths with cooling systems and have reported on their results. If I were to paraphrase Neil, it would probably be to say "there is no 'one way'' to approach this. I'm not going to play the role of apologist though my interest as publisher of the work (at no charge and with no advertising income) does not make me a disinterested observer. 

I personally use a hybrid approach of manual cleaning w/ vacuum and a US with no chemistry. I think the ultimate goal here is to share knowledge, not to make ultimate declarations. And in that I am biased too- since both Neil and I have welcomed comments and criticisms, largely through the audio fora where people reached out with questions, comments and improvements, including the availability of certain chemicals. I'd like to think we are all in this together. 

Regards,

Bill Hart

@whart I agree with you about Neil Antonin. He has developed a very good manual cleaning method which no doubt does an excellent job. But if you have many records to clean it will take forever.

About five years ago I hooked up with Rush Paul, via the VPI forum, whose technique for US cleaning you also published. The biggest expense of that method is the Vacuum RCM. I use a VPI MW-1.

Neils statements about US and Vacuum RCMs are based on readings, not practical experience. With all of the research that went into the chemical formulations before Rush settled on his mix was done with chemists and audio engineers. I am skeptical that Neil can provide any more favorable methods for the US/Vacuum RCM technique.without that experience.

His tome contains a wealth of knowledge and has helped me better understand the value of the Rush Paul method. So far Triton-X100, which Neil said was being taken off the market years ago, is still available and all of the other ingredients are easily obtainable, even the 200 proof ethyl alcohol, which Neil said is not available. That has fueled my skepticism.

My system is very unforgiving to record noise. I went through half a dozen different methods. Since I have used this technique I am pleased to report complete silence with a black background.

’Nuf said.

@unclewilbur 

everyone

I made a Virtual System called MISC on this site, just to upload pics from my computer that I want to show here. Once there, do just as noted by dogberry above;

IMAGE: any web image, right click, copy image address. in your post window, click the 6th icon from the left, paste the image address in the URL box

IMAGE SIZE: I was getting distorted pics inserted, a member here had me simply enter the width box, enter 555, click OK (it automatically retains the aspect ratio of the original).

Hit return after you insert, that moves the insertion blinker below the photo in case you want to add more text, or other links, images.

LINK: any web address, you copy it, then in your post go to the 4th icon from the right, (right of the smiley) (it's a symbol of a chain LINK). click, paste the full address in the URL box, then you can name it anything you want in the top box 'display text'.

Ultrasound bath is the way to go.  And perhaps a rinse and vacuum after.  But ultrasound is a total game changer for cleaning LPs.  A revolution.  A breakthrough.  A paradigm shift.

I could go on but you get the idea...

@elliottbnewcombjr 

Thanks for the info on where to buy the mirror.  I have two slightly different ones on order from Temu, and Amazon will be my backup plan.  i have had varying experiences with Amazon.  Say no more!

@unclewilbur 

...I tried to post a picture here, but it didn't work. Any suggestions would be appreciated. 

Try this:

1. Write your text.

2. Open a new browser tab and find a Photo already uploaded to the web. If you have an image you want to use it must be stored elsewhere on the web. Flickr and Imgur are two services that allow this, and can be free.

3. Right-click (Windows)/control-click (Mac) on the image

4. A pop-up menu appears
    select ‘copy image address’

5. Go back to your Audiogon post and click in top bar: 6th icon from left:

6. Dialog box appears: paste copied image URL in the box
    No need to do anything else.

7. Click OK

8. Post your response

One of the things I really like about my KL Audio ultrasonic machine is that the only "cleaning fluid" it uses is distilled water.  No gunk, no chemicals, no minerals, just clean (and dry!) records.  I also have a VPI 16.5 that I use first if a used record looks really dirty.  I've never had either machine make a record "worse".  

There have been times where I've wondered how much they really do, but a lot of times a record is just pressed badly, or worn and no amount of cleaning will help.  It can be very effective as well.  I remember a time I had my girlfriend over listening to music with me and the record we were listening to was really noisy.  She said "why don't you put that in your cleaning machine" to which I replied, "it's probably just worn out and I doubt that will help", but after a good cleaning it was noticeably better.

I have many used lps.  Only clean the real dirty ones.

I use Dawn dishwashing detergent and distilled water in

my Spin Clean brand record cleaner.  Then gently rub and pat dry.

An expensive tonearm will also ameliorate/reduce/change surface noise.

@vitussl101 Yes, I know what you mean.  The little bottle you're talking about is Mofi's Ultra Record Wash concentrate for ultrasonic cleaning machines.  Again, you can make your own for a fraction of the cost.

@impaler Apparently you didn’t watch the video and you completely missed my point. Take care.

  And your question about some sort of release agent on records during manufacture, I once had a Ultra one step pressing that had a ring of a grease like substance around the outer grooves.  Touching it made it smear like grease.  MusicDirect was not sure what it was either.

@impaler you want to get that junk off the record. The mold release agent residue can increase surface noise and mask some detail. I generally clean new records before playing them.

@vitussl101 maybe so. But I’m more than happy with the results I get from my homemade record vacuum machine. It is head and shoulders above the old Discwasher we used in the 1970s. No, it isn’t as convenient for one off use like a Degritter or the $6000 Clear Audio Double Matrix or whatever you said, but as I stated, I only have about 250 vinyl records and don’t buy new ones or play them like I used to. When records were about $20 a pop, I became more selective. When they became $30, I cut my buying in half. When they became $40, I stopped completely. I’m done.

I can’t see the sense in blowing $6000 on something for just 250 records.

I could buy about 500 CDs for that amount and not have to waste any time cleaning. Or I could pay for Tidal for about 40 years, assuming I live to be 106.

Alternatively, if I really, really, really was anal about it, I could box up the top 100 of them and send them off to be professionally cleaned and returned to me.

Ultrasonic cleaning of records is something Audio Advice or other bricks and mortar places should think about getting into. As a service, say charging $2 a record, it would also allow them to sell associated audio equipment like turntables, phono stages, and cartridges.

The thing is, if people are having to deep clean their records often then they are doing something wrong either in handling or in storage. Once I clean a record with my vacuum system, I generally don’t have to do it again for a very long time. Glad of that.

If a Degritter was $500 I’d buy one in a heartbeat just for fun. But not at $4000. I’d have to own at least 2000 records to justify it.

@moonwatcher "I think vacuum cleaning done right can get you about 80% of the way to Degritter sound quality"

  I don't think so.   I think the improvement more than that plus the utter ease of use.  You can be doing other things while cleaning records. You still have to buy chemicals; record wash, super record wash, Super Heavy Duty Enzyme action Record wash, a dash of tergitol and wash it all down with $20.00-$30.00/Qt water, not to mention pads and brushes.  I still have $150.00-$200.00 in chems in my Linen closet and tucked away elsewhere.  I've owned a HW16, still own a Record Dr. plus a Spin Clean with bristle brushes instead of pads(I made them with a local hardware store and I think work better).  And those videos, people still do all of that to clean an Lp?  Having  to cover my entire dining table to clean Lp's was just too much and too slow.  Here is a great video from Suncoast Audio with a comparison of a $6000.00 Clear Audio Double Matrix with antistatic wand all in a gorgeous and compact package to the Degritter.  I might add, about as easy to use as the Degritter.  Plus the video is one of the few where I actually hear a difference over the internet.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDe57dgtED8  https://imgur.com/xLtVBY3

Question for the group, is it true that post pressing vinyl there is a "lubricant" applied (or possibly the release agent?) that persists until you clean it off? Is there any reasson to preserve this for sake of record wear or is this a wives' tale?

@oldaudiophile  Yeah, that's not what I'm talking about. The newest product is sold in 1 oz bottles at twenty-five bucks a crack and you mix it with 3-4 liters of H2O, designed specifically for cavitation machines like the Degritter.

@vitussl101 I've used Mofi's Super Record Wash (nothing else with or added to it) in an US machine at room temp with excellent results.  While doing so, I've never allowed the fluid temperature to exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit.  However, Mofi doesn't recommend using Super Record Wash in US machines.  I couldn't get them to tell me why or what's in Super Record Wash that makes it inadvisable for use in US machines.  Their Ultra Record Wash concentrate, which they say is specifically designed for US machines, is probably the same or very similar to Degritter's cleaning fluid or just the quadruple distilled water, very little Tergitol and whatever the hell an anti-static cleaning additive is.  You can make your own at a fraction of the cost.

My VPI 16.5 and 17 vacuum RCM have never let me down.

Use the VPI fluid or the ‘L Art du Son fluid which is even better.

I've had a Degritter for about 3 years. It's a work horse and cleans well. Sometimes a record cleaned in the Degritter later picks up gunk and has to be cleaned again. There is nothing you can do about groove wear or even loud vinyl. There is no standard for how vinyl is made. Some of the new 180 gram records wear quickly. I think their vinyl is soft. Sometimes they just pick up gunk that can be cleaned off. Other times, they simply wear quickly. All that being said, I swear by the Degritter.

I suspect some of the LPs that I was able to revive were casualties of bad prior cleanings, rather than kludgey tone arms on changers which caused groove chew.

Hi @whart , I completely agree. There’s a well-known vinyl store in Oakland CA that kind of specializes in jazz. Great LPs, but I noticed a lot of static pops on many I bought there. Proper cleaning and vacuuming only helped so much. The owner is a deeply knowledgeable guy who has participated in nearly every aspect of the record biz since the ’70s. But still. One day I watched him "clean" a batch of consignment LPs by rubbing a damp cloth around their surfaces. Aha! No wonder. As much as I want to support him, I stopped buying records there. Once those particles get cemented in, it’s very difficult to get them all out.

FWIW the basic rules for UT are as follows:

• The power to produce cavitation is proportional to the kHz, so a 120kHz UT needs more power than a 40kHz.
• For ultrasonic tanks, the bubble diameter is inversely proportional to the kHz, so a 40 kHz UT produces a large bubble than a 120kHz UT.
• The cavitation intensity is proportional to the bubble diameter and the tank power (watts/L) but there is a maximum power above which no addition cavitation intensity is obtained.
• The number of cavitation bubbles produced is proportional to kHz, so a 120kHz produces more bubbles than a 40kHz, but smaller bubbles.
• The smaller the tank volume, the more power that is required. It has to do with the ratio of the tank volume to its interior surface area.
• For lower kHz units (<60kHz), if the tank bath flow rate (from filtering or spinning) >50% of the tank volume per minute, cavitation intensity decreases.

The Humminguru is 40-kHz and the tank is only 400-ml, so even with only 60W it is a proper ultrasonic unit and produces fully developed cavitation.  The Degritter is 120kHz and 1.4L, so it needs much more power, but at ~300W it's a powerful machine.  But the KLAudio is the king of the hill, it's a beast - 40kHz, 0.78-L and 200W.  The KLAudio is the most powerful recording cleaning UT sold.  While the HG and DG can often benefit from a touch of surfactant for cleaning efficiency, the KLAudio is just brute power (and its water level sensors prevent the use of surfactant).

Look at all these comments and go to the sites recommended for more in depth discussion about cleaners and such. I was where you are now: Trying the manual spay and wipe cleaner something like GrooveWasher. It was leaving gunk that required me to clean the stylus several times during play - and causing distortion. Not good. As others note, maybe not following instructions and using something like a Spin Clean with a few drops of surfactant in distilled water to do a final rinse might help immensely. But talk about labor intensive. It gets old quickly.

I got fed up to the point of building my own vacuum record cleaning machine similar to the guy below for about $250 and have called it a day. I would love to have something "real" like an ultrasonic Degritter but I don’t play vinyl enough to justify the expense of one. I think about how many CDs I could buy for the price of one, or an "end game" DAC.

If I had to do it over again, I’d probably just buy a Record Doctor VI because by the time I bought all the tools needed, bottles, and such, I was very close to the price of one. And that automatic turntable thing I use is no longer available on Amazon. Pity. It helps a bunch.

Note that while it does have fanboys, the Humminguru is underpowered with those wall wart power supplies and simply does not produce cavitation bubbles to do the cleaning like the far more expensive Degritter does. That doesn’t mean it can’t help, but your expectations might have to be tempered a bit or do two or three passes to get decent results. There are many videos where this is discussed.

While just a guess, I think vacuum cleaning done right can get you about 80% of the way to Degritter sound quality. Of course if you are going to get into vinyl heavily as your primary source and you have the funds, a Degritter sounds like the way to go. Sure would save you a heck of a lot of time. Time you could use for more listening and less cleaning.

Fortunately, I’ve found I can clean my records once in the humid summer, put them into good quality sleeves and then merely Zerostat them and use a carbon fiber brush prior to playing for many plays before they need cleaning again. Static electricity sucks - literally.

https://youtu.be/U1Au-WFeWQ8?t=2

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGfmZ6-x-Fk&pp=ygUQY2xlYW5pbmcgcmVjb3Jkcw%3D%3D

First if after you "clean" a record it keeps leaving deposits on the needle, you did not clean said record. You just released some dirt. You might not be using enough fluid, letting it soak in enough, or removing enough of it after the final wipe. 

For me, do a manual clean with Grovemaster products, then it goes in the ultrasonic. After that it goes into a new premium sleeve. Use 6 drops of Grovemaster ultrasonic cleaner per gallon of distilled water. Some used records need to go through the process a couple of times. 

Most of my records have 0 pop, hiss, clicks, very low noise floor. If they do, they get cleaned again. My needle almost never needs to be cleaned. I got a nice little ultrasonic cleaner for that.