Is it possible to have vinyl nearly noise free?

 @mijostyn

LAST hasn’t used CFCs since 1993. GTFOH with your biased misinformation.

Atmasphere,
I’ve  recently experienced a dramatic reduction of ticks and pops after modifying
my system with the acquisition of new speakers (GoldenEar Triton 1’s) and a new amplifier (Benchmark AHB2.)
My preamp has been the same for over 20 years (Conrad-Johnson PV 11 recently modified with new Teflon caps.)  And same  turntable (Rega) and cartridge (Grado Sonata.)
Does this make any sense?

That's a new one on me...

Atmasphere,
I’ve  recently experienced a dramatic reduction of ticks and pops after modifying 
my system with the acquisition of new speakers (GoldenEar Triton 1’s) and a new amplifier (Benchmark AHB2.)
My preamp has been the same for over 20 years (Conrad-Johnson PV 11 recently modified with new Teflon caps.)  And same  turntable (Rega) and cartridge (Grado Sonata.)
Does this make any sense?
.

Yes, sort of.
Sweetvinyl.com
These units will eliminate 95% of the ticks and pops on the fly.  They do not currently eliminate surface noise, however, which will become more noticeable once the ticks and pops are gone.  The company says it will eventually offer a software upgrade to reduce surface noise, but it will not be free, owing to the complexity of developing the software.
I have the SC-2 as a beta tester.  You can find my thread on the Sugarcube SC-2 here on Audiogon.

so the simple answer to the OP is Yes, but you have to spend your cash wisely.

+1  That's it in a nutshell.

My experience jibes with what @atmasphere and others have been saying here. Once I moved up to a high quality phono stage (by Nick Doshi) my records have been generally silent. No need to buy expensive new releases to get that quiet - in fact, I prefer older, used records. The quality in new releases is too variable to justify the expense IMO. I do use a record cleaner, but mostly to get the best sound out of each LP and to protect my cartridges (learned that lesson the hard way). If a record is bad enough to sound crackly then I often find that a record cleaning machine doesn't help too much.  

so the simple answer to the OP is Yes, but you have to spend your cash wisely. 

Atmasphere responded and explained that many phono stages use *active* negative feedback to reduce measurable distortion, but as the signal is recycled through the feedback loop, it lengthens the duration of the ticks and pops, making them louder and longer than they occur on the record surface.

I did used to think that was why- but it turns out it really has to do with stability in the design. So feedback isn't the culprit: poor overload margin and poor resistance to RFI are.

Our little UV-1 preamp employs feedback yet no ticks and pops.

In a nutshell, proper use of stopping resistors, good layout and blocking RFI at the input all contribute to a stable design. As I have often mentioned before, if the design is stable the need for loading resistors (if used with LOMC cartridges) won't be needed either. 

Fleshler I always avoided playing an LP twice in a day as the prevailing thinking was as you describe. It is true the vinyl under the stylus is under immense pressure and is described as going liquid (never proven as far as I can tell). The mass of vinyl involved is so small that the surrounding vinyl acts as a heat sink and the temperature returns to normal immediately. I have a tire infrared temperature gauge and can not detect any change in the temperature of the record while playing. I think as long as the record and stylus are clean it is safe to play a record over again if you have too. But who wants to listen to a record twice in a day;-) 
"Last" is a joke. It is nothing but freon. You can prove this to yourself easily. With a dropper place a drop of Last on a glass slide and let it evaporate. Put another drop in the same place on the slide and let it evaporate. You can keep doing this a thousand times over and you will never see anything remaining on the slide. Nothing, Nada, Zero. That is how gullible we are. Will freon change the vinyl in any way? Absolutely not. It is totally inert which is one of the reasons it is a great refrigerant.
Lps are Lps. Some are quiet, some not. The best way to keep a quiet collection is do not buy used records. There are exceptions for instance if you are buying the estate of an expired audiophile who had so many records he may have played one once a decade. Make sure he did not buy used records. 

@voiceofvinyl & @atmasphere - Nice posts, thanks!   I have a few LPs that are dead quiet and one that is dead quiet except for a small scratch that is as loud as a gunshot.   You know, it only takes one LP to prove you can have quiet LP's, one just doesn't make it the norm.  Unfortunately.

PAY ATTENTION TO ATMASPHERE! He explained why my new phono preamp lowered (pretty much eliminated) LP playback noise.

In 2012 an audiobuddy sold me his MAGI (Massachusetts Audio Group, Inc.) line stage. MAGI is pretty much a one-man operation and they don’t come up for sale often. It made EVERYTHING sound better, because all components go through the line stage.

Two years later, he asked me if I’d be interested in MAGI’s matching phono stage, the aptly-named Phonomenal. Both components are handwired PTP with NOS tubes.I think I laid a strip of rubber from my driveway to his house. I gave the Phonomenal a careful listen and bought it on the spot.

When I got home, I started playing records through it and shook my head in disbelief at the absence of surface munge and ticks and pops.

I posted my experience to this forum to see how the lack of noise could be possible. Atmasphere responded and explained that many phono stages use *active* negative feedback to reduce measurable distortion, but as the signal is recycled through the feedback loop, it lengthens the duration of the ticks and pops, making them louder and longer than they occur on the record surface. Passive EQ passes the signals along without lengthening the noise.

It made sense to me, and five years later I am still enjoying the hell out of my vinyl rig, with mostly noise-free playback and none of the obsessive scrubbing and cleaning some of you describe.

AND! If you have a similar rig and REALLY want no-noise LP playback, get some mono albums and play them back through a mono cartridge.

Mono albums’ grooves modulate only side-to-side, meaning that true mono cartridges only respond to side-to-side groove modulations. I have gotten many used mono LPs that were too noisy to play with stereo cartridges, that were noise-free when played with mono cartridges. I have a relatively inexpensive Audio Technica HOMC mono cartridge that plays mono albums sweetly and noise-free, even 1969 albums plucked from the bins of thrift shops. My Beatles 2014 Mono LP remaster/reissues sound phenomenal with mono playback.

I have found LAST products excellent. 

You don’t mention what your system is. I think every element of the system has something to contribute to this from the quality of the LP to the cleaning process, the cartridge, the turntable and motor, and the phono stage.

In my system, noise is almost nonexistent or at least so minor that it is not an issue for me so here is my system and approach.

1) I buy only LP’s that are rated VG+ or better from dealers with a good reputation
2) I clean before each play on a Loricraft cleaner
3) I have a Transrotor Fat Bob TT which has magnetic floating bearing (IMHO this is the single most significant factor in reducing noise. I have had several other turntables and none have been as quiet as this)
4) I have a ZYX Airy 3 cartridge and Graham Phantom 2 arm

There are certainly better systems out there but all I can tell you is that with mine, clicks and pops or any other noises are a non-issue.

I agree with what voice of vinyl says.  After spinning vinyl for over 50 years, I have used discwasher products, LAST products, a stylus cleaner and purchased a VPI 16.5 record cleaning machine.  The VPI was a godsend, especially for old records that I found at used record stores.  Probably the biggest difference in sound quality and in reducing audible surface noice was the purchase of a Well Tempered Labs record player that I coupled with a Krell KPE phonostage.  I also clean the stylus after playing every side.

Got this idea from Hifi Critic magazine and it works.

Freeze a couple of records (after giving them a machine clean if you wish) and then use a rather strong magnet to take out metallic particles. Use a brush also.

Let them come back to room temp and try playing them.

Or, leave them cold (not frosty) ... and play them.

fleschler, you worded it better than I did in my post : not to play the same record over and over again, giving the vinyl time to relax, as that was spoken about at that seminar. It is possible in that video I spoke of, the vinyl, as you say, was poor, or the vinyl was one that had been played over and over again, within a short amount of time. I really don't know. As frightening as the close ups of ant armies, filmed and shown on the animal planet and the discovery channels. 

I've played some LPs 100s of times (well at lest 100-200) and they are close to or about the same sounding as when I purchased them for use on higher end equipment.  The quality of the vinyl is very important if the equipment is correctly aligned.  Poor quality vinyl will deteriorate rather quickly (some off-brand vinylite 50s  LPs appear to sound worse every play).  I try not to play an LP more than once in a 24 hour period so that the vinyl has time to cool and relax after playing (the heat in the groove is high during play).  

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.

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.

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 

"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

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!

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.

"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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

@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. 

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.

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.

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

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.  

@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

@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.

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,

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

Hi tubelvr1,

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

@atmasphere ,

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

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/

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

@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

@slaw
+1