Is it possible to have vinyl nearly noise free?

i bought my turntable back in the early 70's. i've experience a noise free vinyl on the first play. after that it was'nt the same. any comments on this?

@g_nakamoto, I found that with optimum cartridge set up and tracking there was no increase in surface noise or clicks and pops after numerous plays. I think its very hard to damage a record with just wear and tear if your  turntable/arm and cartridge are set up as intended.

With used records I would be surprised with the amount of fluff that the cartridge was sometimes picking up on the first or second playing. In fact playback got quieter after the first or second play.

My main gripe with vinyl was the poor pressing quality sometimes found here in the UK. EMI (Beatles) didn't seem to be too careful with quality control. By the 1990s some records were almost like flexi-discs. 

As there is much more awareness of consumer rights nowadays then there should be less reason to put up with poor pressings now. Record companies will always put up with a percentage of returns but after that they will be forced to improve their product. 

With the price of vinyl today, and I daresay for its continuing success, first rate pressings are a must.

Yes.  I just listened to a 35 year old LP with virtually no noise, and all I did was brush the dust off first.  I have other LPs that are pretty hopeless, and are noisy the entire way through.  But I will tell you this: your playback equipment matters tons in this regard.  Over the years, I upgraded both turntables and cartridges independently of each other, and each time I moved up the food chain, I got less noise.  The current setup is a Dynavector 20X2L cartridge on a Well Tempered Versalex, and it has been a revalation in terms of how low the noise floor on vinyl can get.  Comparing the same records to my previous setup (Clearaudio Aurum Beta on a Sota Comet) is simply night and day in terms of surface noise.  I suspect it’s a combination of stylus geometry and tonearm damping at play.

I heard the Sugar Cube device on a very fine audio system and disagree with the unfavorable impressions noted about. To my ears, it got rid of 90% of pops and click with no degradation to the music quality.  I think this is the only device that does what you are looking for.

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/sweet-vinyls-sugarcube-sc-1-real-time-pop-and-click-remover-any...

I saw the Kirmuss demo at Axpona last week and also saw the video Dr. K did with Mike Fremer and I laughed like hell.  I recall it takes something like 15 minutes to clean the LP with the system in a very manual process.  I dumped my SOTA vacuum TT a year ago and my anxiety level has dropped dramatically and I have never heard a pop or click with any of my digitally sourced music since the SOTA left.  Good bless you vinyl lovers.   Me, I am upgrading to Qobuz this week from Tidal Hifi.  

I suggest the critics of the SugarCube ought to put it to the test. I have one on a reasonably resolving system.  Even at a  relatively high setting there  is virtually no effect on music.   And a phenomenal reduction and pops and clicks. ..It can’t do anything about other types of service noise.
Have to agree with M Fremer when he says there is a slight- very slight -change in air, not even a reduction but rather a difference. There are no audible digital artifacts and it makes a tremendous range of potentially troublesome records eminently listenable.  
 As to the cost, how much is making 500 more of my records enjoyable worth?  Remote controlled, so you use it when the record calls for it.  I suggest this is a product that does exactly what it claims,  there are  not too many of those.
On another note, the right cartridge can do wonders.  Some Shibatas run very quietly dep in the groove.

I recently fined tuned the cartridge alignment, balance, anti-skid, overhang, etc on my friend's SOTA Sapphire TT.  Since doing so his vinyl is very quiet.   I think setup is the first step to achieve this.  He has never owned a record cleaning machine. He just uses a carbon brush 

I was at VPI last week and they make a cleaning machine and some other machine that cleans the groves.  They told me that it most cases, the Ps and Cs are eliminated.  Contact VPI in New Jersey and ask for Matt (owner) or Marc the office manager.  Great people.

As a previous poster said, the older LPs sound best, and, I find, have fewer problems with ticks and pops.

This is an interesting thread.

I just played an OP of Bob Seger "Beautiful Loser" I bought off ebay. I have cleaned it. It was eerily quiet. Still I have other lps I notice surface noise. So, I’m a little confused by the remarks by @atmasphere . I clean my records religiously. I think Ralph's "90%" is an overreach.

I exchanged emails with Rush Paul a couple of years ago. He turned me on to the Walker 4 step system. It also had become obvious that I needed a good vacuum cleaner (VPI and several others). I used the Walker system for a couple of months and heard a significant improvement in the overall sound quality, detail and timbre. More so than any other cleaning method I had ever used. But it was time consuming, I could do about four records an hour and I did the work.

Then I found a way to use ultrasonic and not spend a pant load of money doing it. See Rush’s article at: https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/rushton-paul-diy-approach-ultrasonic-cleaning-lps/ on US cleaning. It gives all the details on how to do it. I must say I heard another order of detail and timbre that had never been there before. The US is faster than using the manual Walker system by replacing the two enzyme and detergent washes with the US bath, 4 in ten minutes. It is still necessary to do a Regents water rinse and conditioner (ethyl alcohol, Regents water and a drop of Jetdry).

Additionally, the Walker Talisman will do wonders for any residual noise (aka static). This thing works phenomenally well at neutralizing static. It’s just some very strong magnets oriented in a way that does the trick. It also has other sound improving uses. You won’t believe your ears. Much of the clicks and pops we hear are static discharge (lightning) between the record and cartridge assembly.

I clean all records when I get them, new or used. Usually when I clean an old record there is some "dark matter" at the bottom of the tank. New records don’t do this. On a rare occasion that the used record was abused or poorly cared for there may be some surface noise that is micro scratches. You can’t fix them. But if you don’t clean the record those micro scratches may be full of the "dark matter" I spoke of and you won’t hear them or the improved detail and timbre. This has been proven time and again in listening tests.


It took me a while but I have become a believer. I used to think the US cleaner people were just wanting to play with something new. That it was another audiophile rabbit hole, but it really works. I will never be convinced that not cleaning is the way to go.


The Sugar Cube is a digital processor. You want analogue or digital?

Rollin

I haven't used a record cleaner in 20 years. No need.

So, I’m a little confused by the remarks by @atmasphere . I clean my records religiously. I think Ralph's "90%" is an overreach.

@slaw You have to hear a stable phono section right beside one that isn't to know what I'm talking about. Scratches- can't do anything about that. I just use a dust brush and that's all that's needed.

@atmasphere ,

All things being equal, are you saying unequivocally, that there is NO need for record cleaning at all?

All things being equal, are you saying unequivocally, that there is NO need for record cleaning at all?

Well I'm not sure what things would be equal; IME in audio its a rare thing where that happens.


But I've not had to clean any LPs in the last 20 years to get them to be silent. OTOH my phono preamp doesn't care if RFI comes into its input (so I don't need to mess with loading resistors) and its very stable so I don't get any ticks and pops unless there's a scratch. ...And cleaning won't do anything about a scratch...

So apparently in my case I don't need a record cleaning machine. I gave mine away after it sat for 20 years unused. As I think I mentioned in one of my prior posts, we have a whole generation of audiophiles that grew up listening to unstable phono sections that generate ticks and pops all on their own, so they think that's normal. It isn't- just poor design.

Your opinion is your own. I happen to strongly disagree. I should have put these (!!!!!!) 

@slaw
+1

@atmasphere ,

Ralph,  

I bought my first system in Jan. 1972. I could only afford 3 records, that weekend. Of course, the collection started to grow as soon as I could afford them. Tics, crackles, pops started to become annoying along with the phono Hiss at loud levels. Then, I saw a "parastat" record cleaner. Small tubular cleaner, You were supposed to wet the inside foam with distilled water. I did not like the water part, because it left water on the record. So, I used it dry. Then came the "Discwasher", which I still use occasionally for a quick touch up. I did not like the fluid, I probably used too much. Also, left wet areas on the record. I used it on every record side dry until 1989, when my wife bought me a VPI 16.5 for our 1st Christmas in Alaska.

It did not take long, to become a believer in wet vacuuming records.

I now put a tremendous effort into cleaning my records. - Rinse with RO, 5 minute soak with L'Art du Son, Rinse with RO, then cycle in my Audiodesk US cleaner, Finally, 2 rinses with RO with my VPI and a pickup tube that has only been used for these rinses.Then, finally on a Furutek De' Mag and a quick De' Stat. To me, it is worth the effort and time. Especially, since I have a Technics SL1200G modded with a Triplanar tonearm that Ralph modded for me last year.

Do I get every record CD clean ?  NO. But damn close on most and have removed troublesome tics, crackles, and pops, that could not be done otherwise.

From 1972 till recently, I have just accepted, that records, will have these occasional pops and tics. Ralph, you know that I follow your posts and agree with what you have to say until now. At Axpona 2018, I had a chance to sit and listen to your system. I think that, you went to visit the Technics room. There was a third guy selling 'Nipper' dogs and Tri was there. My wife bought me a nipper dog and talked to Tri.

While listening to your system, I heard occasional and small tics and pops. You must accept these as I do and just ignore them. They were there on your system, records that morning. So, do your records play at CD clean ??? Or do you accept the occasional tics and pops. Yes, I have been a vinyl guy since 1972. That's 46 years of vinyl. Used and new records have or get tics and pops. I do have Many, that play CD quiet but IMO, it is impossible to get every track or record to play CD quiet All the time.

With my cleaning regime, I hear details, timbre, sonics that you could not retrieve otherwise. If you search these threads, you will find others like Ralph, that do not clean their records and claim that guys like me are wasting time and money. You will also find guys like me. If we could actually get Chicago guys to get together, we could do some kind of A/B, shootout etc. The Chicago Audio Society is worthless. I have reached out to Chicago guys, to get together before and have had no responses. So, it is a lone endeavor to clean records or not. Your choice. IMO, I agree with slaw, that Ralphs take, is a bit of overreach.

Best to All on this Journey

rollin

it the sound that counts.   the Sugarcube exhibits none of digital's artifacts and preserves the advantages of analog.. less the ticks and pops.  It operates at hi res AD and DA and the results speak for themselves.  Quite a few experienced listeners have found it is not detrimental or 'digital sounding'.
Have you actually tried one?  

Lou

I can’t imagine buying LP’s used and not having a serious record cleaner. I "deep clean" mine only once (before their first playing), just dusting after that. I started with a Watts Preener (if you recognize the name, you too are old), and was very happy when the original Discwasher was introduced; much better! The Keith Monks was the first serious cleaner (nozzle and thread design), but it cost a fortune. The introduction of the VPI and Nitty Gritty vacuum machines was a Godsend---finally, serious record cleaning at a workingman’s price! I got a Nitty Gritty first (no pun intended ;-), but found it lacking in some ways. Next was of course the VPI, which I found much more to my liking. Now there is ultrasonic, which has it’s own advantages. At their prices, there is no reason a record collector can’t have both! And a dusting brush or two; I have a Decca, an Audioquest, and a Hunt.

 Cartridge certainly makes a difference. I had a shelter 7000 that was amazingly quiet. 

I tend to agree with atmashpere on this without even paying attention to the engineering jargon.  I've heard enough different variations of carts/tonearms/phono stages to hear the difference in how some combos play quieter than others.  My RCM also sits unused most of the time.

I don't think cleaning is a waste of time, but I'm sorry, a ten step cleaning process or cleaning each side before playing takes all the joy out of it for me.  

Like others have said, get a good pressing, get a hardware combo that plays quietly, get a brush for removing dust, play, and enjoy.  The better vinyl setups will push the music forward and the noise to the background.

Certainly, yes, but I would recommend changing your process.
First-order considerations:If the vinyl is already damaged by dirt that's been pressed into the vinyl, then I know of nothing that can be done.  But let's assume that you start with a dirty but undamaged LP.  Some LPs come from the pressing plant with damage, and you can't do much about that.  But if it's been pressed in a high quality environment (for example, new pressings sold by Acoustic Sounds) it should be good.  The best, quietest pressings I have ever heard are made by Music Matters Jazz using a vinyl formula they call SRX.
Even new LPs must be cleaned before the first playing, to remove surface impurities like "mold release compound" that prevents the LP from sticking to the stamper.

First use a wet vacuum wash, such as a VPI Typhoon.  This removes large particles.  I do this only once when acquiring an LP, whether new or used.  There are lots of opinions about the makeup of the liquid used to wet down the LP, but I'm not an expert on that.  I use l'Art du Son concentrate mixed with distilled water.

Second, run it through an ultrasonic cleaner.  That removes very tiny particles embedded deep in the grooves.  I use a KLaudio and do it before each listening.  The KLaudio machine is fully hands-off wash and dry, so it isn't a bother.  Go make a cup of tea while it runs for 5-7 minutes and both sides will be clean.
The results amaze people regularly around here, who think I'm playing digital.

Second-order considerations:As others have said, your cartridge / needle geometry makes a difference.  Generally, the better ones are less affected.
If you buy used vinyl, watch out for crumbling foam inserts.  Box sets, especially classical box sets, used to have thin 12 x 12" foam sheets inside as cushions.  Over time the foam disintegrates into powder and gets everywhere.  It then seems to bond chemically to the vinyl surface and becomes impossible to remove completely.  If someone ships you a LP set like that, refuse and return it.

The better vinyl setups will push the music forward and the noise to the background.

I think that....

Music Lovers push the music forward and the noise to the background.

Audiophiles will hear every little tick and pop. This is also one of the reasons that those that never had history with vinyl - prior to CD - struggle with vinyl.     

Vinyl has a noise floor.

How quiet it is will depend on who did the cut on the master disk.

It varies from record to record.

To be clear, I only do my tremendous cleaning effort 'Once'.  After that, I usually just give my records a wet rinse with the VPI and RO water. They stay clean for a longtime. Perhaps, I will pick off a occasional piece of dust with the discwasher brush. (I have forced air heat / cool systems)

For years, my vinyl has played quietly.  I agree with whoopycat, My big effort takes time (20) minutes per record. After a good cleaning though; good clean pressings, hardware that plays quiet, a rinse and a dusting will provide you with good music with few and faint, (if any) tics and pops.

Probably, one of the reasons that I have used Lyra cartridges, is that they play quietly. Equipment that plays quiet, is a big part of this equation IMO.

TT, tonearm, cartridge and phonostage are needed.

It is possible to get them out but!!! lots of work and kind of scary  

https://www.instructables.com/id/Bring-Ruined-Records-Back-to-Life/

@atmasphere ,

The next obvious question...Do you ever/feel a need to clean your stylus?

Hi tubelvr1,

nearly possible, depends from:
LP quality
Record player
stylus profile
quiet and balanced phono stage with proper loading

I didn't say it before, but I only clean once upon acquisition of the record. After that it's a dust brush and Talisman until it is just too dusty. Then, a rinse with Regents water and the conditioner, let dry after vacuuming for about ten minutes and I'm off listening to it again. I always change the sleeve then as well.

After the cleaning it won't help unless the rinse takes away any residue, cleaning liquid and the contents of those liquids. The vacuum cleaner just sucks up the liquid that is left. The Regents water is the purest and acts like a magnet for any micro-dust left as part of the cleaning process. The conditioner has surfactants that allow the water it contains to get deep into the grooves reducing the waters elasticity and deep rinsing the groove.

I keep the stylus clean with FunTac. Peter Lederman recommends it highly to all of his customers. It is very effective and safest of all needle cleaning that I have found.

I agree the system set up is crucial to an enjoyable, less noisy listen. Also the relative quality of the equipment may help as well. During my slough to Nirvana I have tried many different carts, turntables and tone arms. The electronics and speakers I have settled on are very unforgiving when it comes to sonic anomalies. They reproduce them faithfully so the turntable and cart cannot add anything or I will hear it load and clear. Some carts seem to accentuate the noise to my ears.

Everyone who posted here who is serious about clean records has their own process. None is better that the other from what I see. Many are probably more complex than they need to be. Every process listed is better than no cleaning. It is a lot of work, but worth it. And yes, there are still some ticks and pops even after this rigmarole.


@lwal22
If I want to listen to a silent digital facsimile of my records I use a pro audio (Lynx Hilo) A/D-D/A converter. It is high resolution. The computer software removes virtually all the tics, pops and hiss if they exist and lowers the noise floor by about 12 dB. The playback is marvelously quiet, but a digital facsimile of the record. A Sugar Cube creates a digital facsimile. It is no longer pure analogue. I want 100% pure analogue when doing serious listening.

Rollin

I have 25,000 LPs and 7,000 78s.  I tolerate record noise to some extent.  I hated LP ticks and pops back in the 70s and 80s, prior to having near SOTA equipment.  Since the 90s, I've experienced mostly quiet LPs and those with minor, non-continuous pops and clicks are just not annoying.  Used and damaged LPs are listenable but the future purchase of a Sugar Cube is pending.  My VPI cleaning sometimes eliminates the pops and clicks, other times the LP is damaged and it isn't a matter of just dust/dirt.  Sometimes its just bad vinyl (I too have really excellent, nearly or silient vinyl pressings from the European and Japanese labels).  The Sugar Cube will probably be an eye opener for 78s.  Despite the high end reproduction, (dynamic and rich sounding mid range), surface noise is often at a pop and click level.  The new algorhythms of the Sugar Cube are said to alleviate this type of surface noise.   

I am too lazy and uninterested in wet cleaning every new or silent LP I have.to remove the mold release compound.  I've played some new or silent LPs 100 times and they still are silent   Sometimes an LP like 70s and 80s DGG just get ticky from one play despite using the Talisman.  But mostly, my LPs sound very quiet and guests can't tell if I'm playing a CD or LP, that's pretty quiet,

@fleschler yes that sublime point when vinyl is almost as quiet as a CD.

That's what I think most fans of vinyl want. At that point, at least for me, its the music not the medium that counts.

@flescher
I wouldn't hesitate you use a Sugar Cube on an old 78. Or if you have a damaged LP that is rare and unobtainable (cost or availability) on the used market, it would be good to be able to listen to that LP. I think the device is meant for that. It would be a Godsend. I don't have any 78s. I have a Meet the Beatles that is like that.

I'll tolerate an LP that has a few ticks rather than sully the analogue with digital processing. Most of my LPs are as quiet as a CD after my cleaning process and the detail revealed is more than worth the effort.

Rollin

Rollintubes-exactly.  Although I do have some newer 78s, the HRS reissues exceptional vocal 78s on virgin vinyl from the original metal parts.  Those are tick and pop free surfaced 78s.  The rest of my 7,000 78s date from 1898 to early 1950s and are considered old by current standards.  I also consider purchasing the Kirmuss ultrasonic cleaning system for 78s where I just let the machine do all the cleaning and don't contaminate my VPI cleaning machine. 

I've tried cleaning some noisy valuable LPs, such as 50's EMI and Deccas worth $100-1000 new that turn out to be damaged by prior user (and cost me about $1/disc).  Those would also be worth digitizing   Due to my new home and listening room costs, I can't splurge on a Sugar Cube 2 for another year.  

The Kirmuss appears to do a better job than the Audio Desk or Clearaudio cleaners at less cost. If you have some really nasty vinyl or lacquer it will do nicely at a lower initial purchase price. The process is more painstaking than mine and I spent less than $500 on my system. Of course the Vacuum cleaner was more. It does most of the drying. He uses optician cloth. I use them all the time to wipe off records. I notice he just uses the cloth to dry. How long can you use the same cloth before it becomes saturated.

I don't agree with using distilled water though. There are still contaminants in it, that is why I use Regents water. There is nothing in it.

I think that the assumption is that the records were never cleaned or cleaned with a single liquid agent that leaves residue. Which is most likely for most of our records acquired before the 90s. Removing the vinyl release agents is paramount which is why I clean every new record before playing.

Once cleaned the record should stay that way unless mishandled. There is the issue of more micro-dust getting into the grooves while playing. At some point there will be a loss of detail that will require a cleaning. By rinsing every so often with the Regents water and conditioner I may stave of the micro-dust problem for a while.

Rollin

Isn’t the purpose of loading resistors to damp the primary resonance of the moving system in a phono cartridge?

In the case of a LOMC cartridge, no. The primary resonance is well outside of the audio band!

you will find others like Ralph, that do not clean their records and claim that guys like me are wasting time and money. You will also find guys like me. If we could actually get Chicago guys to get together, we could do some kind of A/B, shootout etc. The Chicago Audio Society is worthless. I have reached out to Chicago guys, to get together before and have had no responses. So, it is a lone endeavor to clean records or not. Your choice. IMO, I agree with slaw, that Ralphs take, is a bit of overreach.

I'm not saying you're wasting your money. I'm saying that if you have a stable preamp you get a lot less ticks and pops. In my case I found that far outweighed the benefit of cleaning. It true that we experience more oticks and pops at shows- our LPs there tend to get a bit more beat up and I've retired a few over the years on that account. At home I am used to hearing entire sides free of that sort of thing unless the album side has some damage.

The next obvious question...Do you ever/feel a need to clean your stylus?

Yes. I dust it before every album side. I also clean it with LAST.


I used to use a record cleaning machine as I mentioned before. But once I sorted out what the phono preamp's role was in surface noise, I did as much as I could to make sure that my preamp ticked all the boxes. At that point that made more difference than the cleaning. Of course I use a dust brush which probably does reduce ticks and pops by my goal there is simply to prevent dust buildup on the stylus.

Ralph, that's is exactly what happened when I upgraded my phono/pre-amps.  The solid state 70's and 80's phono/pre-amps  illuminated the pops and clicks.  I couldn't believe how quiet my LPs got after switching to a high end subminiature tube set of phono/pre-amps since 2009 or even the intermediate EAR 864 pre-amp & EAR 324 phono pre-amp from 2006.  Also, my MCs finally got the correct impedance loading using SUTs.   47K exacerbated the tipped up highs and record noise.

@geoffkait  There are already 10,000 threads about digital vs vinyl.  You could post on one of those.

@OP  My experience is that the factors that influence ticks and pops the most are:

1. Good Setup.  Get your Azimuth, Tracking force, VTA, etc right and with the stylus deep in the groove you will be mostly hidden away from the nasties.
2. Clean records.  Easier said than done.
3. Elliptical or better stylus.  This works with 1. above. 

A thousand pardons. No, make that 10,000.

It is most certainly possible to have nearly noise-free LPs. It takes a good LP start with, proper turntable setup, a way to keep records clean (I use ultrasonic), and a good phono preamp. All of these elements combined are the reason that many people can't be bothered with LP and I don't blame them. If I hadn't grown up in the LP era, my system would probably be all digital. But I'm glad that's not the case.

Whart, yes stuff will collect on the cantilever especially if the record is not grounded out. Again this is where the artist brush comes in handy. I use a very soft little pointed one. with alcohol you can safely clean the cantilever and the front of the stylus. 
What happened to your Airtight? I have a Supreme and it is built like a tank. It would take thousands of hours of play time to wear it out.
Atmasphere, I have never heard a phono stage make tics and pops. I would think that ultrasonic ringing would cause steady state distortion/overload if the unit's frequency response went that high. Granted my experience with multiple inexpensive phono stages is limited. My first preamp was a Dynaco PAS 3X and I was using a Pickering cartridge. I was listening through AR 2ax speakers which had a horribly muted high end so pops and tics were wonderfully suppressed. If the phono stage were at fault all records would make noise so if you have some very quiet records but others are noisy you can forget about the phono stage. Some cartridges seem quieter than others. It would seem stylus shape would have something to do with this. I have a friend who uses an old conical Denon because he has a lot of old less than optimally cared for records and he swears it is quieter. He was an early digital convert. He also ruined his CDs. Computer music is wonderful for people who don't take care of their stuff. This friend still has not got himself a back up hard drive! Busy Busy Busy.

All things being equal..will a Shibata stylus besides providing better detail give more tics and pops compared to say a line contact? Any thoughts from all the shibata owners?

In my early days of being in the audio business, I was invited to an exclusive seminar, given by a cartridge manufacturer ( it was either Shure, Stanton, or Empire ). We were shown a video of a stylus tracking a record ( recorded microscopically, and blown up on a large screen ). This styus / record " movie " was fascinating, but also frightening. What was frightening, we saw little pieces of the record vinyl being torn away from the record, as the stylus passed over. Like rubber off a tire, but reversed ( the record was the road ). I spent lots of money on my tables and arms, but always kept my cartridges below 1K. Supex, Denon, Monster Cable, Madrigal, Dynavector and several others ( moving coils almost always ). The best tables and arms are designed to eliminate vibrations and resonances beyond those of the record / stylus interaction itself. As my ears got better, and more critical, I became more frustrated, as only a tiny percentage of records in my collection of 5000 sounded noise free. My phono journey became monetarily exuberant, for little enjoyment, so I sold it all about 5 years ago. Analog is great, but, it was no longer for me. YMMV. Enjoy ! MrD.

Atmasphere, I have never heard a phono stage make tics and pops. I would think that ultrasonic ringing would cause steady state distortion/overload if the unit’s frequency response went that high. Granted my experience with multiple inexpensive phono stages is limited. My first preamp was a Dynaco PAS 3X and I was using a Pickering cartridge. I was listening through AR 2ax speakers which had a horribly muted high end so pops and tics were wonderfully suppressed. If the phono stage were at fault all records would make noise so if you have some very quiet records but others are noisy you can forget about the phono stage. Some cartridges seem quieter than others. It would seem stylus shape would have something to do with this.

With regards to your opening comment my response is ’-that you know of...".


In the case of LOMC, there is a peak caused by the inductance of the cartridge and the capacitance of the tone arm interconnect cable. This peak is often well past the bandwidth of almost any phono preamp, so what happens in the case of the RFI generated by this resonance is that it is rectified by something in the phono input. This is how RFI messes with any audio circuit by the way. Bandwidth has nothing to do with it.


With MM high output cartridges, the resonant peak is much lower in frequency but is still often ultrasonic. However its still often 20db higher than the actual signal and can easily overload many phono stages. Imagine a phono circuit being overloaded by an ultrasonic signal (something you can’t hear)- what do you think it would sound like? Its not that hard to hear the difference- the first time I heard it I was running a Grado cartridge that made 5 mV. It is true that some cartridges are quieter- it might have a different stylus shape but it can also have a different inductance. You might find this interesting:
http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html

"Noise free" records?

When I started buying records again, about three years ago, the constant ticks and pops were driving me crazy - to the point where I was ready to give up...

I went through the various processes - DIY formula and various scrubbing techniques. Got a spin clean, hoping that would help, but no, still noise there.

Picked up an Okki Nokki, least expensive vacuum RCM I could find. After much trial and error, I am finally happy with the state of my records.

Took a while, but got the process figured out so iy works for me. Disc Doctor brushes, distilled water and L'Art du Son fluid. Three brushes, one for wash and two for rinse. I do two wash cycles where I let the cleaner soak for 5 min before doing a "thorough, but light scrub" and then two rinse cycles. Separate wands for wash/clean. I only do one rotation to remove the fluids until the final rinse, when I do two.

Have to say I am super happy w the results. Now, gotta tackle the static issue.

I am curious about the Phono Stage causing ticks and pops. Have read a bit about this and don't quite get how it actually works in practice. The profile of the stylus seems pretty straight forward. The sharper it is, the deeper into the grooves it goes and the less the top part of the groove - the noisiest part - doesn't have as much contact w the stylus.

P

Use a Zero-Stat on the record just before play. Use Static-Guard https://www.walmart.com/ip/Static-Guard-Spray-5-5-Ounces/21092566
Puff a little around (not directly over) the turntable. Waft a little around the phono leads, phono stage, and over all interconnects and speaker cables. Between the conditions in my room and how keen I am on SQ I do this before every side. Its not like it gets real bad and I hear zapping if I don't do it as often. But if I skip a side or two and then spray there is a rather obvious improvement in terms of a little less grain and a lower noise floor. This stuff is cheap, I don't mind the smell, and I never ever hear or see any static zapping or popping anywhere when I do this.

The improvement spraying the cables tells me static isn't just a problem when records pop. Its everywhere. Cable Elevators get them up off the floor and work great. Same for power cords and interconnects. None of this was done because anyone said so. I only do what I myself have tested and proven to be worth doing. This stuff is dirt cheap. So don't take my word for it either. Just try if you want and see for yourself.

Atmasphere...
Can you recommend some stand-alone phono stages that have the design features you describe? Don’t think I’m smart enough to figure that out for myself, but it would be interesting to give one a try. Thanks!

@mrdecibel 

"What was frightening, we saw little pieces of the record vinyl being torn away from the record, as the stylus passed over. Like rubber off a tire, but reversed ( the record was the road )."

Yes, the velocities and forces in action are huge. Therefore it's safe to say tracking ability is what counts most. Of course its a complicated business but isn't everything in audio? Or even life?  

The following article on tracking may be of interest but 5 minutes or so of meditation beforehand may be needed due to the complexity involved.

http://www.phaedrus-audio.com/further_tracking.htm

Can you recommend some stand-alone phono stages that have the design features you describe? Don’t think I’m smart enough to figure that out for myself, but it would be interesting to give one a try. Thanks!

I know Nelson Pass makes a stable phono section; not sure if its a stand-alone product or not. IME a simple way to sort it out is to see if installing a "cartridge loading" (its really 'detuning') resistor makes the sound different. If not, then the phono section is probably stable.
FWIW Jonathan Carr and I had a nice conversation about this topic at Munich a few years ago. There was a nice thread on the What's Best forum about cartridge loading in which he was active (his moniker was JCarr) that goes into the 'cartridge loading' aspect of this issue in some depth. The advantage of not having to load the cartridge that he brought up with me was the simple fact that energy has to come from somewhere, so loading the cartridge with a low resistance was going to make the cantilever stiffer and less able to track higher frequencies. He and I have both written a lot about this topic; its pretty obvious that I simply have to post an article on our website that goes into it with more depth so I don't have to keep repeating myself.

mrdecibel

We were shown a video of a stylus tracking a record ( recorded microscopically, and blown up on a large screen ) ... we saw little pieces of the record vinyl being torn away from the record, as the stylus passed over.

I find this very difficult to believe, especially because I can’t recall any other reference to this video, ever. Recording a stylus in a groove is notoriously difficult, and would have been even more difficult in the pre-digital era. Also, other videos of a stylus tracking a groove don’t show this effect, such as this one here. (This video shows apparent damage after skipped grooves, btw, but that’s not normal operation for must of us.)

There’s no apparent damage shown in this animation, either, but this isn’t a real-world representation of a stylus in a groove.

Perhaps the most compelling evidence that this claim is fiction is examining an ultrasonic bath after cleaning a bunch of records. Many people have done this experiment, myself included. To make the test meaningful, I used several different colored LPs that I first subjected to multiple plays, followed by a lengthy cleaning. If there were any basis to the claim, bits of colored vinyl would have been found in the bath. But they weren’t.

I’m not accusing mrdecibel of intentionally misleading us, however. Perhaps he just had a nightmare.

Cleeds, we ( the audience ) could not believe it ourselves. This seminar is also where I learned to never play the same vinyl over and over again, if we wanted our records to last, and sound like new, for a longer period of ownership. Believe what you want, either way, I am good. And yes, it was similar to having a nightmare. YMMV. Enjoy ! MrD.