The Wizzzard has been quiet. I hope he is all right!
The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"
The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"
I am providing this formulation for all who are interested in the very best, and can be proven and demonstrated to be the "Very Best". It can easily be made from available ingredients. On the surface, it appears to be very simple. However, it is based on extensive complex chemistry along with precise mathematical calculations and verifiable data.
You may use it with absolute confidence and be truly assured that it is beyond doubt the "Very Best". You may use it for your personal needs. Or, archival entities may use it for their purposes with confidence. Or, you may choose to start an enterprise that makes and packages quantities as either a "ready-to-use" or a "Semi-concentrated" version for sale and distribution knowing that nothing better exists. You have my blessings and encouragement with one condition. And, that is, that the pricing represents a "fair margin", and, not an obscene gouging, typical for such products.
Initially, I had prepared a presentation that briefly introduced myself, and provided the thought processes, design parameters, and the necessary basics of chemistry, physics, and mathematics to assure you and allow you to be absolutely confident in this formulation. I made a considerable effort to keep it as simple, but, also as thorough enough to achieve this confidence. However, that presentation entailed 5,239 words, typical of such a requirement, however, unacceptable in length by this website forum.
I have no option other than to offer the formulation as a 100% parts by weight version suitable to produce 1 Kilogram of the cleaner, and, invite you to question me about any aspect of the formulation.
Professionally, I am a Chemist, more specifically a Polyurethane Chemist. I have a Doctorate in Chemistry as well as two other Doctorates and a M.B.A.. I held prominent positions in significant corporations before being encouraged to start our (wife and I) manufacturing facility servicing those I previously worked for. We started, owned, and fully operated this business. We eventually obtained 85+% Market Share in our sector in Medical, Automotive, Sporting Goods, and Footwear areas before retirement.
The Audio Industry is extremely technical and many brilliant minds have contributed their talents over the decades in order that we may enjoy music today as we choose. Like many other technical industries, those of lesser minds and values invade the arena with their "magical" inspired revelations and offer their "magical" ingredients and items to all at extremely high prices. They promise that if only we are willing to part with our money - they can provide these items to you that make your audio system sound as if the orchestra, or vocalist, is in your room with you. And, after all, "magical items" must be expensive, otherwise, they would not be "magical".
This disturbs me enormously, and, it is for such reasons, I feel compelled to provide realistic and truthful information that conforms to basic Engineering, Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematical Principals in those areas with which I am very knowledgeable and familiar.
"Ultimate Record Cleaner Solution"
Ingredient Amount by Weight (Grams)
Distilled Water 779.962
Ethyl Alcohol 220.000
Tergitol 15-S-7 (Dow Chemical) 0.038 (Approx. = 2 Drops)
1,000.000
Important and/or Relevant Criteria
1.) Distilled Water ONLY. Do not use deionized, tap, rain, or spring water. Distilled Water is readily available in most grocery stores. Check labeling to be certain that it is distilled and not deionized. The pricing is comparable.
2.) Ethanol must be purchased at a "Liquor Store" or a "Liquor Control Board" that is suitable for human consumption, and the appropriate taxes must be paid. This assures that the alcohol consists of only Ethyl Alcohol and water. You need to purchase the 95+% version, also known as 180+ Proof. NOTHING ELSE is acceptable. (100% Ethyl Alcohol is not available under "normal" circumstances). Denatured alcohol from a Hardware Store or elsewhere is PROHIBITED, as well as ANY other alcohols.
3.) Tergitol 15-S-7 is made by Dow and is available on the internet in small quantities from Laboratory Supply Houses such as Fisher and Advance, etc.. I have no affiliations with either Dow Chemical, or Fisher, or Advance. You MUST use Tergitol 15-S-7 ONLY. No other Tergitol product is acceptable for this designed formula, and you need to acquire the undiluted form only.
4.) The above cleaner formula will result in a non-foaming (VLF) Surfactant Formulation that exhibits the following:
Surface Tension of 28.5 dynes/centimeter @ 20 C. (68.0 F.)
Surface Tension of 28.2 dynes/centimeter @ 25 C. (77.0 F.)
5.). A Surface Tension of 28.5 dynes/centimeter is Remarkable and will properly clean records of all organic soilings, and all oily substances, as well as very significant amounts of inorganic soilings. This available Surface Tension coupled with the Azeotropic Characteristics of very rapid evaporation and spotless drying occur because of the selection of Ethyl Alcohol and the very specific concentration determined as 22.00% p.b.w., further improves the products abilities. The "Ease-of-Use" and "Spot-Free" results are to be accepted.
6.). Be aware that an "ideal temperature of use" also exists for this formulation. And, that reasonable temperature is 40 C. (104.0 F.). Further increases in temperature offers no improvement, therefore, confirming the proper use of the term "ideal". I mention this not because of of any substantial improvement, but, only to be aware of its’ existence. And, if you have a choice to utilize a room that is warmer than another, select the warmer room closer to 104.0 F. There is no need to elevate the temperature of the records or the materials. Simply be aware that 104.0 F. Is ideal.
If interest is expressed in this submission, I am willing to provide additional submissions regarding other materials, and, other areas of interest. Such as"Best Contact Substance", "Best lubricants for turntables", " Better Dampening Materials" for turntables and tonearms, and, most significantly, "Best" material for "Turntable Platter/Vinyl Record Interface" usually called "Record Mats". The last item will certainly disturb many individuals and anger many suppliers.
Whatever I may contribute is substantiated by Science and Testing, and Verifiable. Science has no Opinions. Opinions in these matters are best reserved for those who rely on their imagination and wishful thinking.
Also, I have no vested interests in this Industry. Simply possess some scientific knowledge that also relates to some aspects of the Audio Area, and I am willing to share that information if requested!
Showing 50 responses by mijostyn
@wizzzard Thank you for taking the time to teach us about cleaning fluid. I have been making my own for over a year. It is very similar to yours. I have some questions. Is there a problem using denatured ethanol? It’s more available to us. I have been using Triton X as a surfactant. Is there any reason to change? I also add 10 cc BAK to suppress fungal growth. One other comment is the distilled water most of us use is not lab grade and will leave a residue. For this reason I greatly prefer vacuum drying. Your comment is greatly appreciated!
|
@wizzzard , excuse me, I missed your comment on denatured alcohol. I was using isopropyl alcohol and will switch to pure ethanol. To Orient you correctly my formula was 1 gallon water, 1 cup isopropyl alcohol. 2 drops Triton X and 2 tablespoons BAK. I do have a scale I use to mix epoxy and catalized lacquer and will switch to your proportions. I would very much appreciate your comments on Triton X and BAK. I use a Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro, worth every cent. You The AR XA was a tour de force of original turntable design and I think Edgar Villchur’s best work. It is a turntable design every audiophile should study. It has been copied initially by Thorens and Linn, then improved by David Fletcher’s SOTA Sapphire and gussied it up by AJ Conti’s Basis, SME, Avid, Oracle and finally Mark Dohmann with the Helix. The only error is the XA’s lack of an anti skating mechanism. Everything else is commensurate with is price. Can I interest you in a set of cable elevators? They only cost $8500:-) |
@wizzzard , I forgot to mention BAK (benzalconium chloride) as a cationic surfactant helps prevent static buildup on the record. This formula does leave a residue on the record which if used with a vacuum machine is very slight. I have to clean styluses once weekly. I get the impression records are quieter after treatment but I need proof of that and will have to devise an experiment. The anti static nature of the solution has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. I use a turntable with vacuum clamping. It generates huge static voltage charges on the bottom of the record. After treatment there is no significant charge generated.
|
@wizzzard , Thank you for your extended response. Yes, it is Triton X 100 which I got from my hospitals lab. I am a retired family doc. I use supermarket distilled water. If you let 1cc dry on a black plate you will see a white residue. My point is that if records are allowed to air or fan dry this and any other residue will be left on the record. Since I have no idea what this is I would have to assume it is abrasive. Vacuum drying will remove the bulk of this. Why is Tergitol better than Triton X100? I will swap the isopropanol for ethanol immediately. People with large record collections may listen to any particular record once a decade. Records left for prolonged periods are notorious for growing fungus. The BAK will prevent fungal grow under normal (not excessively humid) conditions. I went to medical school in Miami, Florida. I made living designing and installing Hi Fi systems in the homes of very wealthy people. I would pull records out of large collections to listen noticing that mildew smell that everyone is familiar with when they leave their laundry in the washing machine too long. |
@wizzzard , This is a continuation of the last post. Is the BAK detrimental in any way? The effect on static was a total surprise! As I said before my turntable uses vacuum clamping, a great way to generate static. The charges were so high that in removing the record sparks would jump to the tonearm causing a loud pop through the system. I had to mute the system every time I removed a record. I use a conductive sweep arm which discharges the top side of the record fine and the platter is grounded. If I leave the record on the turntable for 20 minutes the static dissipates. When I started using this formula the static stopped entirely. The effect persists over at least a year without recleaning the record. If the BAK is not detrimental I would like to continue it. Suggestions on formulation are appreciated. I think you should keep the formula in grams as it is far more accurate than measuring in volume which is why I use that method for more critical formulas. If the concentrations are that important leave it in grams. Kitchen scales are cheap. The only problem is that best of them only measure down to a 10th of a gram. More accurate scales would be a lot more expensive. So, you may want to round the formula off to 0.1 gm. Another reason why vacuum drying is important for me at least is that my formula is leaving a residue on the record and I want to minimize this. I study my styluses under high magnification and have tracked the deposition of residue on the stylus and after a week there is usually enough on the stylus to clean it. For obvious reasons the residue only accumulates on the pivot side of the stylus. One swipe back to front with a stylus brush is enough to take it off, no fluid required. |
@wizzzard , Could you please respond to my last post, I think you might have missed it. I want to spend as little time cleaning records as possible. Antinn's method IMHO is either for extremely bored people or the neurologically deranged. Subjecting a record to any heat source is a potentially destructive thing to do. Records do not dewarp themselves. Ultrasonic cleaning is an unfortunate fad. Using the same solution over and over again is a great way to contaminate records as is air or fan drying. Do any of us live in clean rooms? A good record cleaning method or machine should use fresh fluid with each cleaning, agitate the fluid so as to loosen debris, vacuum dry the record and be as fast as possible. Doing both sides at the same time is a big plus halving the cleaning time. |
@whart , Overall I agree with you. However, it is important for knowledgeable people to point out errors when they see or hear them. Avoiding errors is a very important part of the learning process. am extremely good at making them. For me the learning process is like bumper cars. Fortunately, I usually wind up at the right exit. You be right scientifically but very wrong from a functional basis. A great example of this is the Kirmuss method. The time involved in cleaning 3000 records that way is prohibitive. @wizzzard Please take all the time you need. Please be well. |
I think an alcohol is a very important part of a proper record cleaning formula. I do not care for ultrasonic cleaning. It is messy, inconvenient and of questionable effectiveness. However, I do not think a 25% mixture of any alcohol in water is easily flammable if at all. Over 50% no question but 94 degrees F will not do it. I think most people will be in far more danger at their stovetop. My idea of a good record cleaning machine is the Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro. You put a record on it, clamp the record down and push a button. Come back 2 minutes later to a clean and dry record, both sides, with nary a drop spilled. There are many less expensive machines like the Nessie that are just as effective one side at a time. |
@jasonbourne71 , just don't smoke while your doing it:-) Really, what I use is a fine artist brush which I trimmed the bristles back about 1/2 way to make them a bit stiffer. The longer handle makes it easier to use than brushes with short handles and you can brush any old which way without hurting anything. Having lost one stylus to the ozone, using anything but water or Lyra's stylus cleaning fluid makes me nervous as you do not want to do anything to weaken the glue. |
@cleeds , I was given a large collection of 78 rpm and old LPs. In order to deal with them I had to buy a record cleaning machine and deal with the peculiarities of of record cleaning. Had this not happened I would still be merrily plugging along with my sweep arm. 1st off, I have to qualify the alcohol comment. It is limited solely to PVC records. If you use alcohol on old 78s you will melt them. In the mean while I discovered that vacuum clamping generates large static charges on the bottom of the record, strong enough to jump sparks to the head shell when removing the record. In playing with cleaning solutions I stumbled into the use of ionic agents to prevent static accumulation. BAK does exactly this and the effect is lasting. I looked carefully at the KL Audio and Degritter units before going the way I did. It is a mistake to air or fan dry a record. Doing so leaves whatever is in the water on the record. Reuse the water in an ultrasonic cleaner and you will wind up with a lot of garbage on the record. Filtering is not good enough because many contaminants will be in solution and will not filter out. In short you would have to buy a vacuum drying machine in addition. The Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro not only uses fresh fluid with each cleaning it actually rinses the record three times each cycle before drying and it is doing both sides at the same time. 2 minutes and the record is clean and dry both sides. It is expensive but I stumbled over an open box deal for a 20% discount. Sometimes you have to be lucky. Unfortunately, whoever opened the box put some ungodly fluid in it, unknown to me that caused the water pump to fail. Musical Surroundings asked if I though I could take it apart and sent me a new pump. I opened it up and there was white junk all through the water lines and water tank. I cleaned it all out, installed the new pump and it has been perfect ever since. I can also take it apart with my eyes closed. The pump was covered under warranty. Sometimes life drives you in funny directions. The Wizzard's Formula was strikingly close to the one I landed on. It is obvious to me that he knows in detail exactly what he is talking about and I plan on incorporating some of his changes. I suspect he is of eastern European origin and culturally they are a bit on the gruff side. So am I. |
@wizzzard , please take your time. I believe you can copy and paste the graphs. I thought I had trouble with 9 fingers and a fused wrist. You might check out Dragon Dictate. I have used the Medical version and it is really quite good now. As a typist I am down to two fingers:-) |
@mojo771 Air or fan drying a record is never a good idea. The water evaporates leaving whatever was in the water on the record. Even distilled water has some residue in it. Vacuum drying is the state of the art at this time. It removes the bulk of the fluid and residue. People who use an Ultrasonic unit should transfer the record to a vacuum drying machine which admittedly is messy as only one machine I know of will dry both sides at the same time. I think the best value in a vacuum unit is the Nessie which you hardly ever see mentioned here. The Clearaudio Matrix is also a fine machine. It uses the vacuum motor from the Double Matrix which will suck your fingernails off. |
A good vacuum machine will not leave any water in the groove. If you do not see any water or humidity on the record you are good to go. The other approach would be to continue vacuuming a little longer. Mold will grow on the record and record cover under conditions of prolonged moisture with records stored for long periods. Records stored in damp basements are a good example. I saw several severe examples when I lived in Miami, FL. I was given an old collection of records that was stored in a basement near Boston and they were riddled with mold. If your records are stored in a living area where the humidity does not exceed 60% for prolonged periods you do not have to worry about it. If your humidity does exceed 60% air conditioning or a dehumidifier will fix it. If your record looks dry go ahead and put it in the sleeve. I only clean a record before I intend on playing it, so it is out at least another 20 minutes. If your record is still wet after vacuuming there is a problem with your machine. "The secret to a successful life is learning to have fun in spite of it." Michael Jonathan Stein " If you don't get hurt once in a while you are not having enough fun." Ditto |
Let me get this straight. You go through all this trouble making ultrapure water only to contaminate it with dirty records over and over again. Then, you use an evaporative drying technique that redeposits all that stuff that was not in the ultrapure water to begin with, back on the record. Yes, there is some contaminate in store bought distilled water and a good record cleaning machine with vacuum drying will suck it all off. The fact is, bottled distilled water will do the job just as well at a lower price assuming you clean your records correctly. Vacuum drying was instituted, I believe by Keith Monks for a very good reason. It works, no data needed. You can see it work. Now there is junk on the record, now there is not. How do you know an Ultrasonic cleaner is working on a record. Because some soap salesman says it does? The KLaudio unit in particular is a Rube Goldberg device bettered only by the Kirmuss Restoration Method. Let's break out the Cubans and scrub records. I do not believe osmolality describes particulate matter or any substance not in solution. I cleaned 5 Analog Productions album with brake cleaning fluid. They are the shiniest records you've ever seen and they sound fantastic. Even the labels survived it. Just point the can and spray away. Please keep your nose upwind and wear gloves, those thick rubber ones with the long cuffs. |
I feel like I am at the wine tasting of a local winery. I live in New Hampshire. I hate being diminutive. If I hold up a tennis ball and let go, which way is it going to go? The chemistry of a record cleaning solution is at least a subject that holds some challenge for a simple minded person like myself. Ultrasound machines are a wonderful canvas for painting pictures of record cleaning nirvana. Let me get my smoking jacket and a Cuban. |
I had an Oracle back in 1978 I think it was. It is a beautiful thing. Back then the suspension was not well sorted out and it was unstable. I wound up selling it I can't remember if I went back to an LP 12 from there or into the SOTA. Once I had the SOTA Sapphire I was in love. Nothing phased it. Since then Oracle has made great strides and I could easily envision getting another. I am however very happy with the Sota Cosmos. It is not as pretty as the Oracle but I can't do without vacuum clamping. It takes pitch consistency to a whole other level. The Oracle's reflex clamping is a close second although you have to be a little careful with 200 gm records. I have seen them crack around the spindle hole. Do you have a spindle hole drill? Do you ever have records that are a tight fit? I think in order to get anything done we should take this over to the message section. I will set it up if you are agreeable. |
Great experiment Wiz. Thank your wife for me. It backs up my argument against evaporative and for vacuum drying. Any silicone residue is disastrous for both record and stylus wear. I think you should make the experiment the subject of another post. I have a Sota Cosmos with vacuum sporting a Schroder CB arm and either a MSL Signature platinum, MC Diamond or Lyra Atlas SL cartridge. The turntable is well grounded. The tubing is plain neoprene as far as I can tell And the pump is well shielded and four feet away from the table. You can not hear it run at all. I use a Hudson conductive sweep arm during play and ALWAYS use a dust cover during play. Records are NEVER allowed to sit out. After playing a record side, if I remove an untreated record immediately, with the lights off, you can see and hear the sparks jump to the nearest grounded item which would be the cartridge! The mat is not conductive and very thick. If I leave the record on the platter, within 10 minutes the record will discharge probably via the spindle and there will be no noticeable charge. This is a wonderful example of how static electricity is a surface phenomena. Discharge is being slowed by the label as the paper is at the opposite side of the triboelectric series to PVC. The static is being generated at the surface of the mat. Making the surface conductive would be the only way I can think of to resolve the problem. Graphite powder would do it but it would contaminate the records. Very fine wire netting or fabric in contact with the spindle might work as long as it does not interfere with establishing a vacuum. I have not found any suitable material. I could also contaminate the mat with an ionic substance, an experiment I keep meaning to try. BAK in the cleaning formula definitely works extremely well but leaves a residue on the records. It is readily dissolvable in water, easy to clean off. It does not accumulate. I can see it on the stylus after 7 or 8 sides. (under the microscope) It cleans right off. I have switched to ethanol and Tergitol. I use a Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro which is a beautiful machine and the importer, Musical Surroundings is a wonderful company to deal with. I was lucky and got an open box unit with a full warranty at a 20% discount just before the last price increase. IMHO it is the best record cleaning device out there. You put a record on it push one button and 2-3 minutes later you have a perfectly clean and dry record, both sides. The secret to successful record cleaning is spending as little time as you can doing it.
|
I suspect @wizzzard is not doing experiments but is following charts that specify the behavior of various chemicals and mixtures thereof. This is all well known to scientists that deal with it on a regular basis, the Dow Chemical types. I suspect wizzard belongs to this group. In medicine we all know the 1/2 life of the drugs we use by heart, information that is lost on a lawyer. @wizzzard , I have a couple of yards of very conductive fabric, zero ohms over 10 cm. I am talking with Christan at Sota over making me a platter with this fabric instead of the standard fabric. I do not care to take the platter apart on my own without backup. |
@wizzzard, PVC is very sturdy stuff. It is hard to hurt it. There was a huge argument over alcohol damaging the PVC. I ranted on about cleaning records with brake cleaning fluid, a CFC. Always willing to put my money where my mouth is I took 5 Analog Productions albums and wasted an entire can spraying them, both sides. They still sound like the day I got them. "LAST" the record preservative is mostly if not entirely a CFC. It has the characteristic smell and evaporates almost instantly. How might a CFC decrease record wear? If you remove any of the plasticizer you harden the record. The plasticizer is in there to make the PVC more moldable. Antinn believes removing the plasticizer will cause cracking. There is none of this in the records I treated with brake cleaning fluid. I also have no way of showing if record wear is actually reduced. I have always been of the opinion that LAST is a joke. What do you think? Getting the Tergitol is not so easy. Most of the sites online require documentation and they will not ship it to e residential address. I finally found one that will. |
@ljgerens , I would think you would know by now that I use microscopes on a regular basis to do a lot of things. Yes I did. I use chlorinated brake cleaning fluid only. I can't stand the smell of the other stuff. It is great for cleaning bicycle components. That other stuff sucks. They tried to take the good stuff off the market. They failed. There in NO lubricant in LAST. LAST leaves absolutely NOTHING on the record. Flood the surface of a fresh microscope slide with LAST and let the solvent evaporate at room temperature. It will only take a minute or two. Then have a look under the scope. All you will see is some incidental dust. That solvent smells exactly like Freon which smells a whole lot like the brake cleaning fluid I use. We use to diagnose diabetic ketoacidosis by smelling the acetone on their breath. There are many diagnoses you can make by smell alone. I know it is very empirical but when a manufacturer does not list components it is all you have. Life is convoluted. You know that better than most. I am just a lay chemist. I know my biochemistry well and aced inorganic chemistry but promptly forgot all of it. Same for math. What the heck were you making? Sounds like chemical warfare. |
Way back in the 60's it was easy to get Freon. It was the cleaning fluid of choice for Ampex tape machines and I was in charge of cleaning and demagnetizing my father's Ampex. I had a brown medicine bottle full of Freon. I would dip a Q-tip in it and gently clean the heads and tape path. I think my father purchased it from the HiFi store, but I have no way of being sure. Back then nobody knew it was damaging the Ozone layer. HVAC guys would vent the stuff directly into the air! I have no idea if it was Freon 113. It was labeled "Freon." When I worked for dBx as a wiring technician they had a big bath that circulated a solvent which smelled and acted like Freon. They placed all their circuit boards in it to clean off the flux from soldering. It was open to the air!
|
please read my last post. And you believe that garbage? lj, look at you email inbox tomorrow AM and think it over. Anytime a human makes a claim that is impossible to prove or disprove it is sure to be a hoax. Lying is an art form among human beings. The real good liers get to be President of the greatest country on earth.
|
I guess human noses are not all that accurate. It must be the fluorine that has a characteristic odor. They are all very volatile substances. As for the "lubricant," is that volatile also or do you think the concentration is so low I could not see it on the slide. I was always talking about the preservative which predates the cleaner by several years. The high pricing of the LAST products is another method used frequently on the audiophile community to convince us that something really works or sounds better. Ridiculous pricing should always set off alarm bells. I apologize for not being completely accurate, but the end result remains unchanged. LAST preservative is a rather typical audiophile aimed scam. When a product makes claims that are very difficult to validate, alarm bells should go off.
|
There are numerous problems with ultrasonic cleaning that go beyond the physics of ultrasonic cleaning. Repeated use of contaminated solution and evaporative drying techniques to name two. Vinyl is relatively soft. It does not take much of an insult to permanently scratch the record. There are many who feel that ultrasound strong enough to clean the vinyl will damage the vinyl. Given that ultrasonic cleaning of jewelry removes some metal I think this is a reasonable concern. Mechanical agitation with the appropriate cleaning solution and microfiber brush are more than adequate to clean vinyl in combination with vacuum drying using fresh fluid with each cleaning. There are numerous machines on the market at competitive prices that function this way. |
Go Lew! You have to read more carefully Rich. I said "Many believe" I did not say I know for a fact ultrasonic cleaning damages records. I do not, nor do I care to prove it. I personally do not care for it because done correctly it is a PITA and messy. You can not fan or air dry records. They will rapidly collect contaminants from the air. Records have to be vacuum dried. Vacuum drying machines (with one exception) will only dry one side at a time leaving the other side to drip all over the place. If you get the machine that does dry both sides at the same time you do not need the ultrasonic cleaner because this machine does a very adequate job of cleaning records itself. You clamp a record on, twist the cleaning head in place and press a button. In about two minutes you get a perfectly dry and clean record, both sides. It is handily the most convenient, mess free, record cleaning device made. The secret to cleaning records aside from Wizzazard's record cleaning fluid, is spending as little time and effort doing it. There are a few fundamentals I adhere to and they are, fresh fluid need to be used for each cleaning and the record must be vacuum dried. There are many machines the adhere to these fundamentals doing one side at a time. I like the Nessie best followed by the Clearaudio Matrix. IMHO the best machine made by a country mile is the Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro not because it cleans the record better but because it is by far the most convenient, fast machine on the market. Brilliant design. |
THAN YOU!! Go in a dark room with a flashlight and look at the beam from the side. That is the stuff that lands on your record when you use an evaporative drying technique on a record open to air. To dry the record correctly you would have to buy a vacuum machine causing a messy PITA. The KL uses the same fluid over and over again. It does filter particulates but can not filter substances that are dissolved. Ideally you would have to change the water with each cleaning, another PITA. Hi Wiz, please pardon me if I intrude. Having researched this recently I think I can provide most of what you are after. Please comment as I am not an expert on ultrasound machines for cleaning. I can scan your gallbladder:-) The Degritter pulses a sweep of 120 to 125 Hz @ 300 watts. It is the only machine that pulses. I suspect this is to keep the water from heating up with obvious consequences. It is the most powerful unit. Audio Desk does not publish its specs. It has a reputation for breaking. Kirmuss 35 kHz @ 220 watts If you want a good giggle, read his literature. Vevor 40 kHz @ 180 watts. KLAudio 40 kHz @ 200 watts total All these machines use an evaporative drying technique. All reuse dirty water although some filter it. All use a method of cleaning that is very difficult to validate which should raise everyone's antena. You can use 4000 psi pressurized water to spray off a dirty car. You will remove some dirt but you will not have a clean car without picking up a mit and using some elbow grease. I have seen jewelry come out of an ultrasound machine spick and span using 150 degree F water and dish soap. It can not remove tarnish! Suggested frequency is 80 to 130 kHz. Higher frequencies get into smaller places and are less likely to cause damage. 50 to 100 watts/gallon is recommended. Knowing this it would seem that the Degritter is more likely to be effective and kinder to the vinyl. But, this is an assumption and assumptions are the mother of all F-ups. The machine I eventually decided on cleans both sides of the record three times with fresh fluid each time then vacuum dries the record bone dry. A full cycle takes 2 maybe 3 minutes. I have to fill the reservoir and drain the refuse tank every 30 cleanings. 6 microfiber pads need to be changed once a year or so costing $40.00 |
@wizzzard , I was suddenly blocked from posting because Audiogon's computer could not validate my address. My street sign says Spickett Valley drive. The registry has it as Spicket Valley Dr. There was a back and forth before I finally got it cleared up. Before I entered another long post only to get it wiped out I decided to try it out with a short post which you read. @cleeds , I have absolutely no interest. Enjoy your machine and use it in good health:-) |
Correct lew, I meant kHz. It is higher than usual and I have no way of relating this to the effectiveness of cleaning. Higher frequencies do get into smaller crevices and are less aggressive physically. The Degritter counters this by using higher wattage. Jewelry cleaning is done at 80 to 120 kHz, 50 to 100 Hz. But, in hot water and detergent. |
@ljgerens , given the price of phonograph cartridges and the space requirements of a large collection, I can fully understand that approach. All my CDs have also been ripped to a hard drive and sold. Most of my purchases are downloaded in Hi Res. I have the capability of recording my records to the hard drive but the time and energy required to do this is prohibitive, so I am stuck. ButI have to say, contrary to popular belief that a record recorded in 24/192 with the RIAA correction done digitally is indistinguishable from the original. Quality is not the issue. Another point is Hi Res downloads, more frequently than not, sound better than the vinyl versions, something the vinylistas do not want to hear. |
@lewm , I totally agree with your hobby argument. I also think I continue with vinyl because it is so imbedded in my head. One of the happiest events in my childhood was getting a new record. As a teen I would spend hours in record stores flipping through records. I do not get the same rush buying online. I find your "do not want to be bothered," argument a bit silly. Digital is EASY, it is vinyl that is a PITA. You can load a playlist and not have to touch the system all day. I can send music all over the house, the shop in particular. Running up and down stairs every twenty minutes while I am working on a piece would be a real PITA. You don't have to worry about being screwed with a defective $10,000 cartridge (more on that in another post.) |
The amount of Tergitol is so slight that rinsing would be an unnecessary step. It is also very soluble and will dissolve into the next cleaning. It will not build up on the record. |
@antinn , Great dissertation on Ultrasonic cleaning, Thanx! Finally got the Tergitol. I could only get 150 proof ethanol so I had to mix the formula by the seat of my pants. It works fine in my machine, spreads out over the record perfectly and when we run out of Vodka we have another option:-) |
I think there is way too much variation between vacuum machines to make a blanket statement. I'm a bit confused. You said the record did not fluoresce but the rinse water did. The stuff that did not fluoresce on the record now fluoresces in the rinse water. I'm having trouble with that. My goal is to remove all the debris and contamination from the record. It is not to not leave a residue. As a matter of fact I want to leave a very small residue to combat static. The Tergitol is like water soluble oil. It is slippery stuff. This may be psychological but it seems to me that the background noise present in all records is quieter after cleaning and I question a lubricant effect. |
Like I said, psychology is a powerful complicating factor especially when it comes to subtle differences. I just started using a new formulation with very small amounts of Tergitol and BAK, much less than I was using before. So far the stylus has remained clean. I hate to tell you this but the ethanol destroyed the seal in the water pump of my machine with obvious results. I took it apart, dried it out and fashioned a new seal with spicket packing. We are back in business. I also have a spare pump but I hate to use it. I exposed the packing to 150 proof ethanol and it dissolved. I have to reformulate. Any Suggestions? I switched back to Isopropyl 10% and increased the Tergitol to 4 drops plus 2 drops BAK which kills the static even at this low concentration. |
It is a Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro. The pump has no markings that would identify the manufacturer. It is a gear driven pump. The pump and the motor form a single unit. The motor shaft drives the primary gear passing through a seal made of some type of rubber. If the seal leaks the motor shorts out and the electronics detect this and prevent operation. I replaced the seal with sillcock packing rope and it has been working fine for over a month. I have a spare pump in reserve if this one fails again. I am now using 10% isopropyl alcohol with 4 drops Tergitol which was a real PITA to source. I have 100 cc which will last me three lifetimes. This formula seems to work well and so far has not destroyed the packing. |
Shaft is about 1.5 mm in diameter. It was a single lip seal probably about 6 mm in diameter, I am not going to take the pump apart again until it fails. The packing is working great so far. There is nothing to keep me from rebuilding it indefinitely. The brushes are huge and will certainly outlast me. |
There is only one motor shaft. There is a stub shaft that the secondary gear spins on. The motor shaft exits the motor cavity through a bearing then a seal into the pump cavity the seal is 6 mm in diameter and captured by a plastic rim. Pressure within the pump cavity presses the seal down against the bearing tightening its grip on the shaft. https://imgur.com/a/1C1KB5p Here is a picture of the pump. |