Steam cleaning records 2

What you are hearing are the effects of the mold release coumpounds intermingled with the the vinyl formula used in the pressings.

Vinyl is more elastic than understood by many end-user. Michael Fremer's "Tracking Angle" contains a excellent article on LP composition for additional details.

The "holy-grail" of LP pressings were the early formula's used used to mix small batches of vinyl for classical recordings. Anyone/any Company that presses LPS in today's world is searching for those formulas.

The person that understands vinyl compounds is Martina Schoener , a record cleaning fluid designer who is a paid consultant to Garrard Loricraft Audio.

Martina was among several industry-insiders who observed the Steam Cleaning Process along with Terry O' Sullivan, CEO of Garrard Loricraft,as well as,a friend of Pierre Spray, CEO of Mapleshade Records : That person relayed the event to Mr. Spray who used the information as the basis for Phenophile Steam Cleaning Kit now retailed by Mapleshade Records for $150.00.

According to Martina, she interviewed many of the retired workers responsible for mixing the compounds. Many were interviewed very late in life and most are now deceased. Martina discovered the formulas were tightly held company secrets. She told me they were rarely committed to paper but instead were orally handed down to others in the trades. The European Trade tradition is different from ours and began to break down in the middle 1950's for ecomomic reasons.

Today, no one is really certian what the most exacting formula is comprised of and many chemists are making a good living attempting to reconstruct the "grail".

Steam Cleaning provides a way to remove any leaching compound(s). In my first published article/letter to "Listener" I noted the observation that all record cleaning fluids (known to me) leave a veil, I termed a "sonic-fingerprint". The sonic-fingerprint is the artifact/residue of the cleaning process & is present regardless if the fluid is homemade to Mega Buck. The final step to steaming is a steam rinse to remove all residues .

Stltrain advocates nerl water rinses. I also recommend using a pure water source ; Peak Battery Water ($3.00 a Gal.) ,however; Michael Fremer has mentioned that Aquafina is a extremely pure water source. No vacuum RCM has proven it can remove a sonic fingerprint. That is a fact. Steam has proven to be extremely effective in removing sonic-fingerprints. I believe that rinses may produce and even better finish to the Steaming process.

The above is a short-discourse on why Steam is an effective cleaning agent to vinyl LPS. Steam Cleaning is a process that needs to be followed step by step to get a satisfactory result. Rome was not built in a day & neither can one understand the results of Steam Cleaning without having done so for an extended period of time.

Record Cleaning is as much an Art as a Process , all learned and matured by time, much in the same manner as learning to set up a analog front end.

Axelwahl, thanks for the GREAT response! Very informative. I agree with your Classic Records assessment--their products always seem to be the most problematic when brand new. An interesting aspect of your post is that loose bits of vinyl, maybe even too small to see, can be a real problem on new records, and cleaning MIGHT actually take these bits and rub them into the surface, damaging it. No technique, steam or otherwise, really avoids this risk. I wish quality control were better for these expensive records. The worst one I've come across recently (and surprisingly to me) is the MoFi Sinatra of "Only the Lonely." Huge pieces of vinyl flashing were evident on three copies, and they must have scratched the surface during shipping on all three. I finally gave up and got a store credit.

Thanks again--as analog lovers we're just trying to find the best way to preserve and present our precious records.

crem,

i've tried steam cleaning a few lps, found no appreciable audible difference so was pretty disappointed. will devote the next two weeks to cleaning one batch normal and another batch steam and see if i can find a difference. need to get up a decent test sample otherwise no proper conclusion is possible. i'd simply be jumping to confusions! will do three batches of bout 3 lps each and see. whether i finally use steam cleaning or not i'd like to thank you though for all the help and encouragement extended throughout my searching process :)

regards

Don't throw stones at me for asking a dumb question, but do you think it the steam cleaning that you are getting good results with, or that you are in essence rinsing many times over that gets rid of any residue or fingerprint?
I ask this due to using a new cleaning fluid for me, from Audio Intelligent, that when using their fluid you can keep applying to remove more and more residue, and then eventually wash with ultra pure water, till in effect there is nothing left behind. I've used many cleaning fluids and so far this is truly the best I've used, and heard. It has sure made a believer out of me. Maybe it's the thoroughness of the process that is giving such good results in either case.

I know Audio Intelligent products & have spoken to the owner several times. Audio Intelligence products are respected by audio reviewers & many of my audio friends for good reason - They work to reduce many disavantages of record cleaning.

Nevertheless, it is my view (supported by actual listening experiments) that all record cleaning fluids leave a sonic fingerprint (some more/some less ) that is only appreciated following steam rinses or water baths. Keep in context that every Institution in the Western World that stores recorded music for future generations supports water rinses.

It is my view that steam rinses do the job faster , not that rinses don't provide a potentally smoother finish to the cleaning process. Its a matter of time & I am persuaded that time may be worth the effort.

A secondary issue is system transparency. The more you have, the greater the available detail. Unfortunately, many well intended analog front ends have issues either the as result of set-up ,or limits to transparency via system matching.

There are several excellent books on the matter. George Merrills "Turntable Set-Up" & Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" are resources we all should own & use. Many other excellent articles exist on "Tracking Angle" and in back issues of "TAS" , "Stereophile" & "Audio".

I am of the view that what you hear is a mix of compromises, some good & some not so good. Without an extensive self-education & subsequent re-education , evaluation and regular re-evatuation, system issues will filter into the listening experience.

Nothing could be more true than that in the world of analog. Changes in the weather cause a need to tweek one's turntable & tonearm. Not apprecating those changes can result in slight smearing of mid-range. Phono cartridge suspension's change/age over time, some very quickly. All of these challenges confront a LP listener.

If you can't hear certian differences from steaming , so many varables exist that its sometimes a challenge to discern. Re-read the inital reviews of RCMS vs buyer complaints . Its not that RCMS did a poor job , but LPS with a history of 6 , 12 to 20'ish gram tracking weights were impossible to rehab they were so gouged out. Only the inital RCM user did not appreciate that fact. The Record Cleaning Magnets spent years educating the public via the print media at great expense.

Its my view that we are repeating history to a degree. As we move forward with new innovative ideas , new challenges crop-up. In a world of "Make-It-Happen-Yesterday" analog is at a distinct disadvantage to digital. No matter what limitations of CDS, they are easy to use & require almost no maintance. LPS are difficult to extract that SOTA sound but when you do , by effort or chance, now that's an experience.

The end-user will never get to the "Land of Qz" because it does not exist. With persistence you may see the turrents.