Sean, until I got the Loricraft with the string that is the only contact with the record groove, I experienced what you mention namely the contamination of the cleaner brushes. I use DD and I do follow-up with distilled water as I can hear the benefit of the additional rinse.
If you can vacuum all that is dissolved in a liquid off the record, I cannot imagine that the Ph matters, but distilled water should remove anything remaining. |
Lugnut: You are doing what i would love to do. I was going to check with my local Cal Lab to see if i could work something out with them in terms of inspecting vinyl and documenting the differences in cleaners. I would think that they would have some type of high powered microscope and the ability to record / document before & after photo's. I was interested in doing this myself, but having some type of third party perform the tasks seemed like a better idea. I might "fool myself" into obtaining the results that i wanted to see and this would act as some type of a "control" in the whole testing process. Sean
>
|
Okay, here's the deal guys. Tomorrow I'm going to immerse several records in an isopropyl alcohol bath, labels and all. I've got an import picked out, a generic pressing from the 70's, an early 60's jazz and my least favorite MFSL. So, here's the questions I have. How long should I soak them? What magnification should I be seeking in a microscope in order to see any changes? Do the members here trust my ears when reporting sonic changes or lack thereof? How long is sufficient, in your opinion, to wait for leeching to happen?
I'm also going to try and find residue from an evaporative process of the cleaners I have on hand. I'll be using alcohol in computer chip manufacturing multi-stage processed water and RRL cleaner and wash. How much of each type of fluid would be enough in your opinion? Would you prefer microscopic inspection, weighing or both?
Does anyone have any idea on how I can find fact about whether Gruv Glide interferes with the stylus interface in the groove? My ears do not confirm what Narrod claims and my vinyl has been played on some of the finest systems I've ever imagined. Input on this subject is really wanted.
Then, if I go through all of this trouble will anyone believe the results if I post them? I did this with the rice paper sleeve controversy and the same old claims pop up.
Anyone have access to an electron microscope? |
4yanx: If a solvent has some form of detergent action to it, it is not a neutral PH. Anything that isn't neutral will leave behind some type of residue that will have some form of interaction with the materials that it resides upon. On top of that, there's no way to avoid "smearing" contaminants back onto the record. That's because the brushes come into contact with the foreign materials on the record and have the "grunge" sucked up over and through them as it is recovered by the vacuum pump. One would literally have to clean the felt "lips" or brushes after each record to avoid this. Even then, whatever you used to wash them with will have left some form of residue on the lips. As such, i'd rather have distilled water left behind as a residue than anything else i can think of. Sean
> |
Shasta and Sean, from my experince RRL Fluids do not leave behind any residue of any kind when used in conjunction with a vacumm cleaner - unlike MANY other fluids I've used. DD fluids do, even after rinsing with distilled water, again in my experience. The resaon that RRL recommends no rinse is that the fluid itself is more pure than the distilled water one would use for a rinse. If you are experiencing what you think is residue following RRL cleaning, I'm guessing process must have gone awry or your vacuum wand are dirty/contaminated. If you a hearing good result using it, it is not due to any reside left behind. It is because the fluid has held the crap from the grooves in suspension before you vacummed it away - what a cleaner should do.
As for price, you can get it from Galen Carol for $20 a bottle. I think people use way, way too much. I can do a shade over 180 LP's with 32 oz. At $20 a bottle, that is about 11 CENTS an LP. Cheap. |
Shasta: From what you stated, it would seem that you believe that the residue left behind by RRL's solvent is beneficial to the stylus / groove interface in terms of retrieving data and / or the life expectancy of both surfaces. What do you base this belief on? If i'm putting words in your mouth, please correct me, but that's how i interpreted your message.
Other than that, i do agree that giving a solvent time to penetrate and loosen imbedded particles is beneficial to its' effectiveness as a cleaner. This is akin to soaking an item in a solvent compared to simply rinsing it off quickly. A quick rinse will remove surface film, but is far less likely to achieve anything beyond that.
Then again, the more thoroughly that the solvent penetrates into the various "nooks & crannies", the more thorough one has to be in removal and rinsing. Otherwise, the cleaner itself will remain imbedded in the various "cul de sac's" of each groove. Over time, it will dry up and harden leaving a film and / or attract and hold other contaminants that it comes into contact with. Whether it becomes a dried film or retention pond for other contaminants would depend on the chemical make-up of the solvent(s) used and the long-term chemical reaction that takes place with the vinyl that they reside upon.
That brings me back to the original question: Why not rinse off any / all residue from the records? Sean
> |
Shasta, you say that, "using a distilled water rinse *after using RRL is a distinct no-no" but say DD, which I use wins hands down. Do you mean I should not be rinsing after cleaning with DD? |
I clean only used records I buy. New ones and those in my collection from new do not seem to need washing. Just the aq carbon brush and a cleaned stylus. Also, the zyme is great for mildewy records. I use Last rather than gg, but have not compared them. Last has been effective, and based in a quickly evaporating solvent, seems to get the proper dose from the mark on the pipette to the provided brush. |
In my opinion it is the GruvGlide that is sucking the life out of your records. It certainly quiets the surface but at a heavy cost. It's putting a barrier between the stylus and vinyl interface. Not a good thing. ANYTHING, that leaves gunk to be picked up by the stylus is bad. I tried this stuff 25 years ago and promptly tossed it. Try your regimen without it and, in my opinion, you will be happier with the results. I also found it took repeated cleanings to totally remove the stuff.
Good luck,
Wendell |
Using a distilled water rinse *after using RRL is a distinct no-no.
Applying RRL and giving it a wait period of several minutes before vacuuming is a positive.
The quality of application instructions between DD and RRL is day and night. DD wins hands down, and RRL/Sumiko don't even compete. At $25/bottle, RRL is shameful in this regard. |
Take the Grooveglide and throw in the thrash. It will probably take multiple cleanings to get it off your records, but you will be rewarded by the best LP sound you have heard.
I use DiskDoctor cleaner with my Loricraft but find I still need to use distilled water rinse afterwards. |
Lugnut,
I did find a bunch of gunk on the stylus. I'll take your advice and use alot less.
Does the "Grasshopper" refer to Kung Fu when he came to the Buda priest for insight and wisdom??? I love it!!!! As Audiophiles, we need a little God or Budda to pray too!!! Careful, for many of us, our stereos are our Gods.???
4yanx,
I'll skip the Vinyl Zyme and just use RRL and the Groove Glide and see what it does. I can always wash the Groove Glide back off. The Vinyl Zyme washes back off too I think with Super RRL cleaner. The idea behind this stuff makes sense but may leave a sonic signature.
Thanks!
R. |
Red2,
You may have applied too much Gruv Glide. I've found that the quickest spray you can possibly apply to the pad is just right and you'll treat about twice as many albums. You don't need more than you need. Not to worry though. The stylus will push out the excess with a couple of plays or you can buff the record somewhat with a dry pad.
I've found that record cleaning is such a personal thing to us audiophiles that it's easy to get into disagreements about the subtleties. Grasshopper, read the archives, try different approaches and you will find peace. Enjoy! |
Did you try using JUDT the RRL and skipping the enzyme. Unless I miss my guess, doing so will allow you to realize th esame detail with out "moving back ten rows". |
I should add that these improvements comes at the expense of some immediacy. Some of my LP's sound a little less "live" and more like great recordings. Difinitely a plus for some LP's, and it cleans back off with Super Cleaner and Regular Wash, but may not be for every album.
I tried it on Jimmy D. Lane's latest album from APO, and the sound lost that "you are there" edge to it that really makes the band and vocals feel as though they are in the room.
R. |
