The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"

@rich121 

Why do you continue to bring up Tergitol 15-S-9, when my formulation calls for Tergitol 15-S-7?

I offered to provide truthful and scientific answers to questions and I will do so.  Our power in our County is being turned off for an update in service.  This will be for another scheduled 10 hours in the next 8 minutes.

Till later!

@antinn 

Thank You for asking me not to waste any more time on you - I won't!

First, before I continue, I should state to those who submitted posts and anticipated prompt responses, allow me to inform you that very often I am unable to do so, and, I appreciate your patience.  I have an extremely rare auto-immune condition that interferes with my life and my intentions.  It does not permit me to function as I would like.

Fewer than 25 in Canada, and fewer than 300 people in the U.S.A. have this condition.  It is somewhat comparable to ALS only much worse.  Besides being unable to function, significant portions of my body become paralyzed or semi-paralyzed associated with intense pain.  I am able to be alive and contend with this condition with regular IVIGG treatments.  I consider myself extremely lucky because I am still alive, most of those afflicted do not respond well and die within a year or two.  I needed to state this before I continue further.

@lewm 

cc: @jasonbourne71 

Forgive me, but I am going to jump ahead and respond to Lewm before responding to JasonBourne71 and others.

As I stated at the onset, my posting was a post about Scientific Facts.  Truthful and absolutely correct in all aspects.  It was not an invitation about expressed opinions or initiating debates among others.  I clearly stated that I was prepared to answer questions and provide explanations.  I also stated that if there was an interest in the initial posting, I was willing to provide "Facts and Truths" about other subjects with which I am very familiar and qualified.

Lewm, you had asked a very pertinent question about. the exclusive use of Ethanol, and why not use isopropyl alcohol or propanol, and, I appreciated that question, and was very willing to respond in detail, and, I did in a hand written presentation to be posted when I was able to do so.

But, you then proceeded to "drift".  You asked if I was serious.  The answer is YES I AM! You then took the opportunity to somewhat respond to someone else's question using my post which is for the facts and the truth only.   You made a somewhat definitive remark "like 300 pounds pressure" rather than ask me, which is the objective of my Post.  "Facts not opinions or beliefs"  Truth not lies or B.S.

But then again on 5 June 2023 at 10:54 AM, you took the liberty to make additional definitive statements for others to read.  With your self-appointed authority you made an absolutely idiotic statement about a subject that you obviously know nothing about.  And, this is on my site that was initiated to exclusively provide factual and truthful information only.  Allow me a partial quote of yours,"By the way, the ethanol will evaporate away over time on a shelf at room temperature.  Wizz didn’t mention that.  So if you’re anal about ethanol concentration, you’d best make a fresh solution for each cleaning session.   Etc. …".

Let me address. That very last statement first.  If you new anything, as I do, you would know that due to the Hydrogen Bonding characteristics of ethanol you would know that ethanol is hygroscopic and to a significant extent, and, that ethanol readily absorbs water (as moisture) Fromm the atmosphere (air).  This is why "Wizz" (actually Wizzzard) did not mention it - because he knows only the facts.  And, it may surprise you to discover that over time the ethanol does not evaporate and you would not need to replace it.  In fact, the exact opposite occurs, the ethanol absorbs more water from the atmosphere.  However, at precisely 22.000%, which is the primary transition point concentration, it would remain very stable and would not be noticeable.  Some detection may be noticed at the secondary transition point of 41.500%, but more likely at 95.60%.  If you happen to be referring to me as "anal", I suggest you first look in a mirror.

Now to the first point that you stated with "some convection" and misled JasonBourne71 and possibly others.  Stating 300 lbs. as a stylus pressure on a record.  This was terrible to "state" on a forum devoted to truth and accuracy.  This is exactly where absurdity enters an area where a statement is made based on nothing.  This is something that can easily be calculated and presented with precision.

At the onset I stated you can ask questions.  If you were to inform me of the phono cartridge that you have, and the type of stylus affixed to the cantilever, and the weight you apply for proper tracking, I, or or others, can calculate the exact amount of force applied to the record.  It would take me less than 2 minutes to calculate, and I would be willing to share the mathematics with you if you are so interested.  The pressure I provided to JasonBourne71 was based on an average of the 6 basic stylus types (because he did not mention his particular stylus configuration) but the information was necessary to provide an answer the his primary concern.  Assuming he was using a tracking force of 2.0 grams, I had determined in less than 3 minutes that the force was 10,811.7 pounds per square inch.

Again, a factual, correct calculation that can not be disputed or debated.  Simple mathematics, nothing more.  But that was the intent of this posting!

As mentioned earlier, I prepared a good and clear explanation for you as to your excellent question as to why only Ethanol, and why specifically 22.000%.  Not 20, or 21, or 23, or 25, but, 22.000%. And that no other alcohols be used or even considered.  But, I determined to use my allocated time to others that appreciate me and my efforts, and my intentions.

But, I will keep my word, and honor my position and answer your question, however, to a minimal degree only.

All materials including resins and resin blends, whether natural synthetic, have many characteristic parameters.  I have correctly restricted myself to include the parameters that are of relevance.  Because we are using solvents (and diluents) one of our primary objectives in not to alter or damage the substrate (vinyl recording).  We want something that will clean the record the very best without causing harm, hence, "The Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation".

The parameters are:  Hildebrand Parameter , Dipole Moment, Dielectric Constant, Polarity, Fractional Polarity, and Hydrogen Bonding (van Der Waals forces).

As we review ALL the alcohols available and other ingredients, only 2 ingredients have NO detrimental effect to vinyl records, and they are, distilled water and ethanol.

And why 22.000% exactly.  If you recall from High School Days, you will recall doing graphs.  You may remember several types, if not, you should surly recall "Inflection Points". And, the various slopes and their meanings.  Some graphs represent only two slopes, others as many as 2 (secondary) or three (tertiary).If you plot Surface Tension versus Ethanol concentration, you will obtain a very severe slope, and, two relatively gently slopes.  The first is the primary an is exactly 22.000%, the secondary exists at 40.500% and is relatively insignificant (most, would even ignore it).  It is for this reason that 22.000% is determined.  Another reason it the advantageous azeotropic characteristic exhibited at 22.000% which is very desirable.

For others reading this:  Isopropyl alcohol is also known as 2-rpopanol and dimethyl carbinol, and propanol is correctly known as 1-propanol, propyl alcohol, ethyl carbonyl, and n-propanol.

Dr. S.N.W.      BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc.                                                                                                                                              

@lewm  a@jasonbourne71 

Forgive me, but I am going to jump ahead and respond to Lewm before responding to JasonBourne71 and others.

As I stated at the onset, my posting was a post about Scientific Facts.  Truthful and absolutely correct in all aspects.  It was not an invitation about expressed opinions or initiating debates among others.  I clearly stated that I was prepared to answer questions and provide explanations.  I also stated that if there was an interest in the initial posting, I was willing to provide "Facts and Truths" about other subjects with which I am very familiar and qualified.

Lewm, you had asked a very pertinent question about. the exclusive use of Ethanol, and why not use isopropyl alcohol or propanol, and, I appreciated that question, and was very willing to respond in detail, and, I did in a hand written presentation to be posted when I was able to do so.

But, you then proceeded to "drift".  You asked if I was serious.  The answer is YES I AM! You then took the opportunity to somewhat respond to someone else's question using my post which is for the facts and the truth only.   You made a somewhat definitive remark "like 300 pounds pressure" rather than ask me, which is the objective of my Post.  "Facts not opinions or beliefs"  Truth not lies or B.S.

But then again on 5 June 2023 at 10:54 AM, you took the liberty to make additional definitive statements for others to read.  With your self-appointed authority you made an absolutely idiotic statement about a subject that you obviously know nothing about.  And, this is on my site that was initiated to exclusively provide factual and truthful information only.  Allow me a partial quote of yours,"By the way, the ethanol will evaporate away over time on a shelf at room temperature.  Wizz didn’t mention that.  So if you’re anal about ethanol concentration, you’d best make a fresh solution for each cleaning session.   Etc. …".

Let me address. That very last statement first.  If you new anything, as I do, you would know that due to the Hydrogen Bonding characteristics of ethanol you would know that ethanol is hygroscopic and to a significant extent, and, that ethanol readily absorbs water (as moisture) Fromm the atmosphere (air).  This is why "Wizz" (actually Wizzzard) did not mention it - because he knows only the facts.  And, it may surprise you to discover that over time the ethanol does not evaporate and you would not need to replace it.  In fact, the exact opposite occurs, the ethanol absorbs more water from the atmosphere.  However, at precisely 22.000%, which is the primary transition point concentration, it would remain very stable and would not be noticeable.  Some detection may be noticed at the secondary transition point of 41.500%, but more likely at 95.60%.  If you happen to be referring to me as "anal", I suggest you first look in a mirror.

Now to the first point that you stated with "some convection" and misled JasonBourne71 and possibly others.  Stating 300 lbs. as a stylus pressure on a record.  This was terrible to "state" on a forum devoted to truth and accuracy.  This is exactly where absurdity enters an area where a statement is made based on nothing.  This is something that can easily be calculated and presented with precision.

At the onset I stated you can ask questions.  If you were to inform me of the phono cartridge that you have, and the type of stylus affixed to the cantilever, and the weight you apply for proper tracking, I, or or others, can calculate the exact amount of force applied to the record.  It would take me less than 2 minutes to calculate, and I would be willing to share the mathematics with you if you are so interested.  The pressure I provided to JasonBourne71 was based on an average of the 6 basic stylus types (because he did not mention his particular stylus configuration) but the information was necessary to provide an answer the his primary concern.  Assuming he was using a tracking force of 2.0 grams, I had determined in less than 3 minutes that the force was 10,811.7 pounds per square inch.

Again, a factual, correct calculation that can not be disputed or debated.  Simple mathematics, nothing more.  But that was the intent of this posting!

As mentioned earlier, I prepared a good and clear explanation for you as to your excellent question as to why only Ethanol, and why specifically 22.000%.  Not 20, or 21, or 23, or 25, but, 22.000%. And that no other alcohols be used or even considered.  But, I determined to use my allocated time to others that appreciate me and my efforts, and my intentions.

But, I will keep my word, and honor my position and answer your question, however, to a minimal degree only.

All materials including resins and resin blends, whether natural synthetic, have many characteristic parameters.  I have correctly restricted myself to include the parameters that are of relevance.  Because we are using solvents (and diluents) one of our primary objectives in not to alter or damage the substrate (vinyl recording).  We want something that will clean the record the very best without causing harm, hence, "The Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation".

The parameters are:  Hildebrand Parameter , Dipole Moment, Dielectric Constant, Polarity, Fractional Polarity, and Hydrogen Bonding (van Der Waals forces).

As we review ALL the alcohols available and other ingredients, only 2 ingredients have NO detrimental effect to vinyl records, and they are, distilled water and ethanol.

And why 22.000% exactly.  If you recall from High School Days, you will recall doing graphs.  You may remember several types, if not, you should surly recall "Inflection Points". And, the various slopes and their meanings.  Some graphs represent only two slopes, others as many as 2 (secondary) or three (tertiary).If you plot Surface Tension versus Ethanol concentration, you will obtain a very severe slope, and, two relatively gently slopes.  The first is the primary an is exactly 22.000%, the secondary exists at 40.500% and is relatively insignificant (most, would even ignore it).  It is for this reason that 22.000% is determined.  Another reason it the advantageous azeotropic characteristic exhibited at 22.000% which is very desirable.

For others reading this:  Isopropyl alcohol is also known as 2-rpopanol and dimethyl carbinol, and propanol is correctly known as 1-propanol, propyl alcohol, ethyl carbonyl, and n-propanol.

Dr. S.N.W.      BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc.                                                                                                                                              

@jasonbourne71 ​​​​@lewm 

 

Good day sir,

 

Your had made posts to my submission. Although your posts somewhat deviate from my intended purpose, I am very willing to provide you with information that will properly guide you with your concerns.  You had touched on 4 separate issues and I intend to address them individually as well as indicating a potential caution for you if it happens to apply.

 

1.). You mentioned the "LAST factory" and my familiarity and specifically you use of "Stylast".  I am aware "Last". I recall when I purchased my first AR-XA Turntable in 1969 that I wast provided a sample of "Last". I do not recall if I ever used it or not. I was impressed with the AR Turntable that I decided to buy 6 others as presents. I was informed that if I purchased 10 I would receive a 35 % discount. And, that is what I did. I gave five away and sold the others to acquaintances at the price that I paid which. They appreciated. I was given significant quantities of "Last" cleaner and stylus brushes. I do not know why I mention this, but your question precipitated old memories.

I was unfamiliar with your product "Stylast", so I went to their website and did some further investigating.  Their website about this product is extremely misleading. It can not be interpreted any other way other than as it is presented. And, I feel sorry that you were misled. I had thought that they had a commendable reputation, and, again I find myself disturbed by some entities in this industry.

 

There are two separate parts to the knowledge that I will share with you, actually, three.  The stylus is made of diamond, the hardest substance known to man. Other than a soft brush to remove accumulated debris, I do not see a need for a "Stylus cleaner". If you feel compelled to "clean your stylus" I can recommend the "Very best Record Cleaner Formulation" I provided, or, a product similar inn approach to the "Stylast" that you are using, only, that it is much better, much cheaper, and can be used for many other applications that you may come across.  Your operative words and statements were:  "claims", "apparently", and "some scientists.

 

Let me address your first question - "Does the application of Stylast to the diamond stylus actually reduce wear?" Answer, "Absolutely NOT!" Thank you for a good question and you have a precise answer. Now you share your practical experience about lubricating a drill bit - and, you are absolutely correct in your thinking. I am a member of STLE (Society of Tribologists and Lubricating Engineers), as well as previous involvement in Argonne National Laboratories and continuing interests. A Cutting/Drilling fluid is applied continuously, or, as frequently as necessary. And, you are correct, it is not only for cutting but for cooling as well, however, a "one-time" application of anything means nothing in relationship to this analogy.

 

I do not know what cartridge you have mounted on your tonearm, so I will make some assumptions. The following list is a number of styluses and their configurational dimensions:

 

   Micro Line             2.5    x     75   Microns

   Micro Ridge          3.8     x     75   Microns

   VanDenHull          4.0     x     70   Microns

   FritzGeiger           5.0     x     70   Microns

   SAS                      2.5     x     75   Microns

   Paratrace              4.0     x     70   Microns

 

I could have selected just one Ortofon Stylus, but I thought it best that a full cross section well better demonstrate my point.

 

Using these dimensions as an average, it can be determined that if you use 2.0 grams to obtain your desired tracking. Force the pressure exerted by the diamond stylus on the record is 10,811.7 pounds per square inch.  Your application of Stylast or anything else for that matter is GONE within the first few millimeters.  There is NO further cleaning effect.  The Stylast presentation is extremely misleading, even absurd.  I am as. Disappointed in them as you may be.  This is a terrible abuse of marketing ethics.

 

Further investigation reveals that Stylast is more than 90%  perfluorotributylamine, and they claim about 10 % proprietary ingredients.  Which is nothing more then a deceptive method of implying the necessary solvating ingredients and covalent ingredients.  At least they supply a S.D.S., give them credit for that for supplying information which is a commendable 95 % accurate Data Sheet.  Most. Of the "charlatans" do not even trouble themselves, or simply supply a two page "Proprietary Data" sheet containing nothing.  Do not ever purchase anything from a company that does not supply a proper S.D.S.

 

What this product is a very common intermediate compound, 3tributylamine, and substitute the Hydrogen atoms with Fluorine atoms.  It makes an excellent agent for specialized soldering techniques, and an excellent electrical contact cleaner.  It has recently found a important medical imagining material that allows itself the be encapsulated in lipid microspheres thereby cheating an image enhancing compound for echocardiograms.  A specialized individual must inject this in you blood to present an ultrasound image that is far superior to a typical echocardiogram.

 

But that is of no interest to you.  The CRC corporation uses perfluorotributlyamine in their premium contact cleaner along with other superior electrical contact cleaning ingredients that is superior.  If you insist on sticking with Stylast type materials, I suggest that you rather purchase the CRC material.  It is better as a contact cleaner and has many other uses at home, your computer, your automobile.  It is available at Industrial supply houses such as Grangers, and Fastenal, or at automotive supply houses such as NAPA.  It is expensive, it costs about $50.00 for a 13 Fluid Ounce can.  Although expensive, that is ridiculously cheap for what you were paying Stylast for almost next to nothing, relatively speaking.

 

Also, on a very serious note!  If you a re a smoker, or someone in the household is - DO NOT use either Stylast or the CRC electrical contact cleaner while smoking.  IT is Extremely Dangerous!  Depending upon your genetic make-up, it may even be Deadly,  And, I am NOT exaggerating!!!

 

Using a simple brush on your stylus is all you really need to do.  But, that is only to remove the debris from the stylus.  If you need to clean your records, I suggest you use my formulation

@duckmanst3 

 

 

I do not know if you are being a "Smart Ass" with your mention of two drops of urine, nor, do I know who you are addressing.

 

If you are addressing me , I do not care what you use.  I provided a formulation for "The very best record cleaner", and am willing to answer questions about it, and I also offered to to provide other scientific based truths and knowledge about about other areas such as record mats, lubricants, contact materials, dampening agents, etc., if such interests exist.

 

Proper etiquette requires that I allow myself to believe that you have some interest however you may have expressed yourself.  It does not address any questions, therefor, I will make some assumptions and address your posting.

 

Distilled water at 20 C. Exhibits a surface tension of only 72.72 dynes/centimeter.  Dawn is a very powerful surfactant and is excellent for washing cooking and eating utensils, as well as being mild enough to wash your vehicle.  However 2 drops only reduces the surface tension to 42.82 dynes/centimeter.  A very far cry from the 28.5 dynes/centimeter of the formulation presented.  It is also intended to be a high-foaming surfactant - the exact opposite in what you are looking for in a record cleaning formulation.

 

Dawn should absolutely not be used on records.  It contains 8 ingredients in addition to water.  A significant portion of the surfactants are "Anionic" surfactants which are forbidden in such applications.  I will gladly supply you the list of ingredients if you are serious and how they behave.  The addition of two drops of urine is the puzzle!  If you are meant to be serious, it offers no benefits.  Most people realize that urine is sterile upon release, however, it is also that aspect that eventually makes it conducive as an excellent bacterial and mold growth medium.  Its addition offers no benefits only potential problems.

@rhg3 

Thank you for your significant, detailed, and meaningful submission.

 

Although it somewhat deviates from the intent of my Forum Post, it, nevertheless captures the spirit of my post, and, is very detailed and meaningful and an appropriate ADDITION to my post for those who are interested in a somewhat different approach to my exclusive designed selection method. My intent was to  present only one formulation that is determined to be "The very Best", and to present a document that entailed 5,239 words supporting that determination.  Which, as of this writing, and, on the response posts I have received, I am glad that I did not squander my time doing that presentation.

 

However the document you presented only substantiates my initial intent, and also demonstrates the complexities of developing meaningful products.

 

I sincerely appreciate your post of this comprehensive publication that permits others to review very viable alternatives.

 

Thank you very much!

 

Dr. S.N.W.      BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc.

@dogberry 

The use of the Vodka is excellent, and is less than if you purchased or ordered the Ethanol alone.  However your calculations require some minor modifications because "Proof" is expressed as parts by volume, as is normal for most Algol concentrations.  And the formulation is in parts by weight (not volume).  Also, you need to adhere to the exact 22.000% parts by weight expressed in the formulation.

 

I gave some explanation the lewm, but it should be more detailed for you.  The 22.000% represents the exact primary inflection point.  I have never posted on any websites in the past.  This is my first time which explains my errors that I attempted to correct.

 

I will prepare a graph, and find some way to post it and that should convince you why the 22.000% is important.  I will also adjust the corrections for you regarding the volume versus weight.  I hope to provide you with this tomorrow. If all goes well.

 

The selection of Ethanol is the only correct selection.  I actually am the author of the first book written about the calculations of "Solubility Parameters".  This boob is somewhat exclusive unfortunately. I can also state that I have authored actually two books, however, the one still remains "Classified", and is the property. To the U.S.A. Department of Defense, and none of that information can be discussed, and it is actually not absolutely necessary in this particular matter.

 

Till a later date then!

 

Dr. S.N.W.      BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc.

@mijostyn 

Good day Mijostyn,

 

I will address your four most recent posts at the same time.  First, I need to make some adjustments.  You have presented very good and clear questions, however, there are a few very minor deviations in the formulations you presented.

 

My first assumption is that you stated that you are using "Triton X" as a surfactant.  I believe that I am correct to assume that you are using "Triton X 100".

 

Triton X 100 is the most commonly used Triton surfactants manufactured by Dow Chemical.  You may not be aware of this trivial bit of information and history about Triton X 100, but, sometime around 1960, TritonX 100 was the Reference Standard of nonionic surfactants.  It was the base to which all other nonionic surfactants were compared.  In fact, to this day, it is the "Medical Standard" that is used in Medical experimentations.  Even if other surfactants are used ( and, they mostly are not), Triton X 100 is also used.  This is very important because Medical Research that is done today can accurately be compared and judged to studies that were done more than 63 years ago.  This is very important in Medical Research.

 

Nevertheless, the selection of Triton X 100 for cleaning vinyl records is a good choice, not the best or close to the best, but a good choice.  And, if you already have access to Triton X 100, I do not see any reason to make a change unless you are interested in making the "Very Best".  Stick with the Triton X 100, but you proportionally need to incorporate more into your formulation.  I thought that I would first alter what you are using and make it more relatable to the "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation" that I initially presented, and then I though to also provide a comparison, and then make comments about the ingredients in question.  I decided to refer to your formulation as "Mijostyn’s Good Record cleaning Formula"

 

                                          "Mijostyn’s Good Record Cleaning Formula

 

                    Ingredients:                                             Parts by Weight (Grams)

 

                 Distilled Water                                                   779.772

         

                 Ethanol                                                               220.000

 

                 Triton X 100 (Dow Chemical)                               0.228

 

                 Benzalkonium Chloride                                         0.000

                                                                                       

                                                                                          1,000.000

 

Now, if I were to take my formulation and relate it to what you have been using it would read as follows for comparative purposes only.

 

                    Ingredients:                                              Parts by Weight (Grams)

 

                Distilled Water                                                      941.499

 

                Denatured Alcohol                                                  50.900

 

                Benzalkonium Chloride                                            7.600

 

                Triton X 100 (Dow Chemical)                                  0.001

 

                                                                                            1,000.000

 

You should not be concerned with the "Distilled Water" that you purchase at a supermarket, or drugstore, or Walmart.  As long as it is stated as distilled and not deionized.

 

I do not know if your intent to use Benzalkonium was as a "antimicrobial agent" or as an "anti-static agent", or both?  Nevertheless, you do not need an antimicrobial agent.  Also, the selection of this agent as an anti-static agent can only cause problems, also, if intended for such a purpose, the amount used is extremely excessive.  There are much better and easier ways to control static, and, they should never be incorporated within a cleaning formulation.

 

Now to the denatured alcohol versus "Pure Ethanol" aspect.  In one respect using denatured alcohol is LESS DESTRUCTIVE than using another alcohol such as, isopropanol, because it first depends upon the concentration of ethyl alcohol in the denatured.  The Ethyl alcohol concentration can be as low as 60%, or 90%, or most often 95%.  The majority of the denaturant is "Methyl alcohol".  And, I mentioned that ethanol has NO EFFECT on vinyl records, methyl alcohol does, but, although it is destructive - it is the least destructive of the more common alcohols.  However, you should use Ethanol purchased at a liquor store ONLY.  It is not worth saving a few pennies and progressively damaging your records over time. The other ingredients used to make alcohol denatured are copper sulphate (used for coloring only, and not a big problem), Methyl Ethyl Ketone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, and denatunium (to make it bitter tasting), and pyridine (to make it smell to high heaven).  There are also others.  The exact quantities are no longer governed and benzine has been banned.  But it is important to note that even in very minute quantities they are extremely effective.  Please, please use only ethanol for numerous reasons.  I will be preparing a graph for all to see why the level of 22.000% is important, and not just a number I picked out of a hat.  The graph will (or should) make it clear.

 

So, scrap the BAK, feel confident in your distilled water purchases, purchase and use only ethanol, and significantly increase you level of Triton X 100 by a factor of 5+.

 

I noticed that many use volumetric methods of making their formulations, I intend to convert my presented formulation in a volumetric format as well very shortly.

 

I hope this has cleared some things up for you and has been helpful.  If you follow what I have stated, you will no longer have any residue problems.  Also, Triton X 100 is not as low foaming as the Tergitol 15-S-7, but it is manageable and will not produce unnecessary spotting and quickly dry spot-free.

@jasonbourne71 

Did you find my comments helpful or do require more information?

@antinn 

Why do people continue post things that they know absolutely nothing about?

What are your academic qualifications?  In the mean time be also cautious that your glass of wine does not "blow-up in your face while you are writing your response!

Sincerely,

@antinn 

@drkingfish 

@lewm 

I intend to get back to you later after I respond to others who have posted earlier.  I do promise to get back to you, it is simply a matter of priorities.  But, I have read Drkingfish's post to me, and I do not see any reference to his specific purchase of an ultrasonic cleaning machine, only his possession of an AR ES-1 and a Thorens 160.

I did no insult you as Lewm suggests, I merely asked what your Academic Qualifications were, and suggest that you relax.  However, you very emphatically stated that ethanol/water "does not form an azeotrope" !  Really? In the interim, please refer to any High School Chemistry book.  For that matter, I believe that this subject is now covered in Grade 8, and possibly Grade 7.  If ethanol and water do not form an azeotrope, you have just eliminated all the distilleries in tho world actively producing Liquor for human consumption, and ethanol for chemical reactions and other uses.

I stated my background at the very onset (perhaps, you missed that).  As I stated I will get back to you later.  Suggest, you relax, perhaps have a massage, but don't forget to warn the masseuses (male or female) not to rub to vigorously because rubbing alcohol usually contains anywhere from 70% isopropyl alcohol to 75% with water( which has a Flash Point that is more than 2 degrees lower than ethanol and burns at a considerably higher temperature than ethanol) , and you do not want to explode on the massage table.

In the meantime, stay safe till later.

Thank you for your comments!

@mijostyn 

I have already prepared a detailed response for you (hand written) including the graph I promised for all.  Unfortunately today I am entering a "cycle" corresponding to my autoimmune condition, and, I will probably not be able to post my response until much later today, or, most likely tomorrow.As a Physician you most certainly understand.  So, please bear with me, I will respond as soon as possible.   You are first on the list.

@ mijostyn

 

I have prepared a detailed response including the graph I promised for all for you (hand written). However, I am entering a cycle related to my autoimmune condition, and will not be able to post my response until later today, or, most likely tomorrow.  As a Physician I am certain you understand.  You are first on the list. 

@ drkinkfish

I am sorry I did not understand your use of the word "us" believing that it somehow related to an Ultrasonic Cleaner.  I have never come heard this expression before.  I am very familiar with Ultrasonic Cleaning baths.  I first used one is in 1961, and in every lab I have involved with has always had one or two baths available.  Today I have two at home (one is in storage), but they are not for record cleaning.  Please do not be concerned with other thing you may have read.  Reviewing charts and graphs is one thing. Understanding  what they mean is another.  The azeotropic effect mentioned does not even initiate until a Temperature of 173.3 degrees F.  I will respond in detail to your post most likely tomorrow du e to related medical issues that are just initiating.  Please be patient!  Thank you!

To all others I will respond to your to all you'r questions, and correct the errors of others who have decided to confiscate my forum, rather than creating their own.

But then again, my is based on truth, facts, and Science only.

I appreciate your understanding and having to wait longer for answers that you expected sooner.

Thank you again for your understanding!

@lewm 

You just caught me as I was turning off my Computer and preparing myself with my wife's assistance for an anticipated difficult period that will incapacitate me for a considerable time.  I just wanted to clarify a few things.  From my perspective no hostilities exist on my part.  and, yes I read what Neil Anton had prepared and presented in January of 2022 immediately after it was brought to my attention by someone else some time ago.  I assure you there are vast differences that you may not be aware of, and, more differences exist that similarities.

I was willing to point out his inconsistencies at a future date, but he no longer has any interests in what I have to offer.  And, that is O.K. by me.

I simply asked what his Academic Qualifications were, and, he never responded.

If he took offense because of my request that is unfortunate.  However, when someone makes a statement, such as, "the earth is flat".  By nature I feel compelled to respond, and, if that somehow comes across as an insult, because of my method of responding to such statements and those of comparative implications, I am truly sorry.

I have no ill feelings, nor, should I towards Anting.  And if others can not see that as well, I am sorry.  And, I was hoping that those contributing to these posts understood and appreciated somewhat humorous and sarcastic remarks.

I will not change however, simply because that is my nature, and. the way I respond to certain statements.  Perhaps others appreciate my remarks, in that case, they can stay tuned in and expect many others.

I hope you understan. And, now my "medical.demon" is demanding my presence.

Farewell for now and thank you.

@richmon 

On the surface the product you have been using called "Shaklee Basic H", which I previously have not been aware of until you mentioned it in this post, appears to be a very good product for what you have been using it for, especially as a car wash because it is pH balanced as well, which is very important.  Many car washes sold, unfortunately, are not pH balanced properly for use as a car wash.  But, that again, is yet another story.

And it only contains nonionic surfactants, and, is truly safe for the environment.  My complements, an excellent choice of cleaner, and, thank you for making me aware of its existence.

And yes the surface tension achieved by its’ use is no were near as low as the formulation I presented.  Keep in mind, that the concentration of "cleaning agent" in my formulation is established to clean the minor concentration of contaminants that a record  would acquire.

Not saying that you keep a dirty car or have dirty widows, but, even though the surface tension is less the prepared solution you will use will become contaminated more rapidly, and you may simply need to apply more, or, perhaps not.

I am interested in the results you will achieve.  Please keep me informed.

 

Thank you,

@moonwatcher 

Thank you for trying.  I can assure you that by abandoning the isopropyl alcohol you will not be prematurely de destroying your records, and you will discover that the ethanol does provide better cleaning.  You may not be able to discern this at. first, but I believe you should begin to notice improvements.

Thank you for your input and trying the formulation.  Best wishes

@elliottbnewcombjr 

Your comment of 7 June 2023 ended in ....

May I finish your statement for you.  After they overcame the smell from the pyridine, and the bitterness due to the denatonium, they became blind due to the high (about 4+%) of methanol that was incorporated.  After becoming blind they died within a matter of time.  Depending upon how much and how often they drank.

Not a pleasant way to go!

@rich121 

Not only store bought distilled water, but also laboratory grade distilled, and laboratory grade double-distilled.  

But store bought distilled water is just fine.  Deionized water is no where near the purity of distilled and will affect the surface tension as well. as likely also leaving residue behind.

Thank you! 

@mijostyn 

I tried copy and paste and everything else I could think of including singing several different applications.  Nothing seemed to work.  Never heard of Dragon Dictate -  will investigate.  I am committed to Dvorak (Left Hand), however, because it drove me crazy switching between keyboards, and I gave that up several years ago.

Appreciate the typist humor!  We all must need to retain our sense of humor.  And, I  am sorry that nefarious forces have overtaken my forum posting. However, there is nothing that I can do nor do I intent to.  I mention this at this point because it relates to the necessity of humor which is apparently lacking in the "nefarious force group", but provides amusement to those who do not belong to the group.

Soon!

@waytoomuchstuff 

Sorry, I do not understand, please expound.  Thank you!

@mijostyn 

You are at the VERY TOP of my list no respond to, however, I have been waiting to hear from the administrator on how to post graphs and pdfs.  I have yet to hear back from him.

I believe I will need to respond in a different way.  Your response has been written by hand many, many days ago.

I should inform you that I do not have the ability to use use ten fingers as most, for the simple reason, that I have only 5 and a half fingers to key with.  I write all my "lengthly" responses by hand first, and then it takes me a considerable time to keyboard my responses.  I can not use dictation. because I have to use a Dvorak (Left Hand) keyboard on my Mac.  When dictating, the system defaults to QWERTY, which results in a bunch of gibberish.

I also needed to adapt to writing with my left hand.  I am originally a right-handed individual.  But, on the "Bright side" 5.5 fingers represents a majority - so I have nothing to complain about.  As in "Brian's Song", "Always look on the bright side of life".  But I do need to apologize to you for the delay.

I will try to respond to you today, if not, then Wednesday, because I am going to Hospital to have an scheduled MRI tomorrow.

Till later!  Thank you very much for your understanding.

 

@mijostyn 

I tried copy and paste and everything else I could think of including using several different applications.  Nothing seemed to work.  Never heard of Dragon Dictate -  will investigate.  I am committed to Dvorak (Left Hand), however, because it drove me crazy switching between keyboards, and I gave that up several years ago.

Appreciate the typist humor!  We all must need to retain our sense of humor.  And, I  am sorry that nefarious forces have overtaken my forum posting. However, there is nothing that I can do nor do I intend to.  I mention this at this point because it relates to the necessity of humor, which is apparently lacking in the "nefarious force group", but provides amusement to those who do not belong to that group.

I resubmitted because my Dvorak spell-check took over again.

@mojo771 

I do not mean to sound as  derogatory or evasive, but drying depends upon many factors.  Temperature, Relative Humidity, Air movement, etc.  But the simple answer is that " when it is dry "

You need to make a judgement call.

But, it is always better to error on the side of waiting "a bit longer", than being eager.

Does that answer your question.  I hope it does, if not please post back, I will try harder and better if necessary.

Thank you.

@lewm 

With regard to your most recent post 12 June 2023 at 8:28 PM.  Sorry I did not get to your earlier post that I had read, but I just logged on to submit my answers to @mijostyn  and others and noticed the above post, and thought to respond immediately rather than later.

You are correct in mentioning that I diid not intend to mean that deionized MUST be avoided.  I am highly recommending distilled water over deionized water.  On the other hand you can assume correctly that all the other alternatives such as rain and tap water, etc MUST be avoided.  As I interpreted you previous post, and I hope I got this correct.  Is that you did not have the same confidence level in your distilled water supplier, but, felt more comfortable in your deionized water supplier.

If you have a higher level of confidence in the deionized water to you, then by all means choose the deionized water source.  Your confidence in what you are doing may not have a tangible value, but it is important, and continue to "follow your gut" in this matter.  In the interim seek out a distilled water supplier that you can be confident in using.

I hope this clarifies my position to you and others.

 

        

@mijostyn   

 

       @drkingfish  @recklesskelly   @whart ​​@lewm 

 

I initially thought it would be best to resolve the selection of ethanol and the specific concentration of 22.000% before discussing other matters.  And, I thought the best and easiest way was to prepare a very accurate and detailed graphs demonstrating the transition points.  One being extremely significant and the others less so important.

 

And, that is exactly what I had done, however, I am unable to post this graph or a pdf.  I contacted the Administrator on how to proceed, however, I have not as yet received a response.  So, I am going to ask you to prepare your own graphs on either graph paper, or quadrille paper, or a simple sheet of 8.5 x 11 paper.  I will provide you with only the 4 key points and describe how to prepare the graph to see the significant slopes related to the 22.000% value.

 

If you choose the 11 inch vertical side as you y-axis representing the Surface Tension at 20 degrees C and expressed as dynes per centimeter into 75 segments, and then select the horizontal 8.5 inch bottom to represent the x-axis indicating the percentage of Ethanol from 0% to 95.6% at 20 degrees C in parts by weight into 100 segments, we can begin.

 

At 0.00% Ethanol on the x-axis, the corresponding Surface Tension is:  72.72 dynes per centimeter on the y-axis.

 

At 22.00% Ethanol on the x-axis, the corresponding Surface Tension is:  30.28 dynes per centimeter on the y-axis.

 

At 41.50% Ethanol on the x-axis, the corresponding Surface Tension is:  27.59 dynes per centimeter on the y-axis.

 

At 95.60% Ethanol on the x-axis, the corresponding Surface Tension is:  26.63 dynes per centimeter on the y-axis.

 

(I will explain the reason why the values are to two decimal places rather than my original three decimal formulation a bit later).

 

You can immediately see the very steep slope between 0.00% Ethanol concentration and the 22.00% concentration.  At 41.50% Ethanol you notice a slight decline, and, at 95.60% the additional decline is even less significant.  Many people, would have considered only one   inflection point, but, I choose not to deviate from established mathematical guidelines.

 

From 0.00% Ethanol to 22.00% represents a drop in Surface Tension of a phenomenal 42.44 dynes per centimeter.

Going to than 41.50% represents a rather meaningless drop of only an additional 2.70 dynes per centimeter.  And going the max of 95.60% represents a drop of only 0.93 dynes per centimeter.

 

Now, I hope EVERYONE on the Planet understands the selection and significance of 22.000%

 

This data is available from many reference sources such as "The Handbook of Chemistry and Physics", "Lange’s Chemical Handbook", etc.  However, I choose the most comprehensive study of alcohols and water starting at 20 degrees C to 50 degrees C, at 5 degree. C intervals, and the Surface  Tension done at 20 C.  The slopes of the 25 C graph are identical only the values are different.  They presented their representations in two decimal places, and, that is why I conformed to their numbers.  Other resources clearly  establish 22.000% , that is why in is in the formulation.

I do not take any credit for any of the values stated.  The credit need to be given to Dr. Gonzalo Vazquez, Dr. Estrella Alvarez and Jose M. Navaza that was recorded in "The Journal of Chemical Engineering".  All products were supplied by Merck Laboratories and all solutions were prepared to 4 decimal places on identical Sartorius Analytical Balances, but the results were chosen to be represented to only 2 decimal places.

 

 

Now @mijostyn we have established your reasoning for your selection of BAK.  Thank you for making that clear, and, in your case, it is TRULY a VERY SIGNIFICANT matter, and one that can not be ignored.  You asked if the BAK is detrimental in any way.  The only detrimental effect is the resultant residue, but more significantly, your level of 7.600% parts by weight is "off the charts" so to speak, which now leads to a more significant level of residue resultant.

 

But most importantly you need something that will not only will kill the mildew and mold, but also something that will prevent it from further happening.

 

I have the PERFECT solution for you, and, it is something with which you are very familiar.  The additive is:  2-phenoxyethanol.   It is a hand antiseptic for surgeries, and is in some hand antiseptics, and, is used as a preservative in IV medications and vaccines.

 

A 1.00% addition is over kill.  A 0.500% represents a 87.5% potency of a 1.00% addition.  (It is non-linear).  Therefore if you were to use 0.500% of 2-phenoxyethanol, it would be much less than the 7.600% BAK you were using.  But you would have NO residue, and the effectiveness is even difficult to compare because the 2-phenoxyethanol is so much more effective.

 

"I wold like to continue but my "medical demon" is summoning me."  The rest  will have to wait until Wednesday.

In the interim, find out how easy it is for you to obtain the 2-phenoxyethanol.  It is commonly used in labs as well, my wife has some here at home, but. Its’ best before date has long passed.  It is still good and effective but not to the same degree.  Good Luck!  Till later…

@rich121 

What is RO/DI water?

And, a problem exists?  I was not talking down to @lewm  

How did you ever get that impression?  I was agreeing with him and encouraging him to be confident in his suppliers.  And, that confidence is important.  (I sometimes question myself as to why I respond to such posts.)

I do not NEED to PROVE that distilled water is better than deionized.  And I do not NEED to PROVE that double distilled water is better than distilled water.  I have not voiced ANY OPINIONS.  I only present facts and well established data.

I posted this forum to present "The Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation", and any other technicnical areas if requested.  Ant to answer questions about my formulation, and not what other people say to each other.  Please discuss that amoung yourselves, and, perhaps discuss it at a better and more appropriate location.

Good Evening!

@mijostyn 

Off for my MRI now.  I will continue to answer you, most likely on Wednesday, late in the day.  And, address others as well, but you remain my top priority.

Yours truly,

@lewm 

Perhaps fewer words spoken/written is best!

"I, S.N.W. (Wizzzard), have no problems or issues with deionized water"

@mijostyn 

"Brilliant!" response.

Thank you.

To all involved parties with sincere interests, I would like to say.

 

            " It's Alive! "   I felt the need to express the words spoken in "Young Frankenstein" by Gene Wilder from Mel Brooks' version in 1974.  (please do not make any efforts to remind me of earlier versions).  I like Mel Brooks.

Yes, Wizzzard is alive, and as well as can be expected, and he is back.

This forum has seemed to "go down a rabbit hole".  I hope to bring it back inline.  First I will need to apologize to @mijostyn once again and then proceed to get a few matters out of the way.

Again I am here to answer any serious related questions that I am qualified to answer.  Unfortunately, I need to remind all that I have limited "windows of opportunity" to respond to any questions, and, I ask for your understanding with regard to this matter.

I also promise to read every post before pressing the post button to make certain that my computer and / or application, and the use of a Dvorak keyboard does not post weird typos.

@mijostyn 

Please forgive me Mijostyn, but I hope you can wait a litter longer for my response to you.  Your questions and your issues have pressed many buttons, and, as I have stated, I have prepared your response some time ago in handwritten format.  It is long, it is detailed, and it also relates to many other issues that others also have expressed an interest.

But I feel compelled to address the nefarious forces that have overcome my forum, and sort of clean up some other matters in order that it does not get further out of hand. I hope you understand.

And, I thought that I could do this in some orderly manner, however, that will not be the case unfortunately.

Well, I did not get very far.  The "Medical Demons" are demanding my attention much sooner than expected.  I expected at least 2 more hours before they would make their demands upon me.

I guess you all will need to wait, I hope I have time later today.

However, at least, you all are now aware that Wizzzard is alive.

Till Later!  Thank you.

@thecarpathian 

I believe your statement was intended as a compliment.  I take it as a compliment.  And I appreciate it as a compliment.  And, I sincerely thank you!

I am back!

@jwillox 

Regarding your post 13 June 2023 at 8:13

I am glad. Thank you.

@cleeds 

Your Post 11 June 2023 1:02 PM.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.  I stated this post's intention is to avoid opinions. 

Your last sentence is absolutely uncalled for. A specific level of Ethanol has absolutely nothing to do with contamination, or levels of contamination.  It is related to design, balance and to obtain the best and most desirable surface tension, and related to the substrate to be cleaned. In this case it is related to the resin portion. of vinyl records which is composed of polyvinyl chloride and polyvinyl alcohol.  A vinyl record is normally 75% to 80% polyvinyl chloride, and 20% to 25% polyvinyl alcohol.

 

@dogberry 

Your Post 13 June 2023 at 12:07 PM

I totally agree, however, the administrator must monitor the site, and, it is at his / her discretion what is printed and what is not.  And, we must all need to conform.

Perhaps, the administrator could be a bit more lenient.  I, for one, am satisfied with the monitoring and are adjusting accordingly.

@lewm 

Regarding your remark 11 June 2023 at 6:06 PM

You are absolutely correct.  BASF is not known to utilize that secondary alcohol, or if they have something close the moles of Ethylene Oxide are not the same.  And, yes companies have particular bases that they adhere to, however, there are always also exceptions.

I intend to phone an old friend who is retired, but, was the V.P of R&D of BASF in Germany at my earliest opportunity and before he goes on vacation.  He last phoned me just before Christmas.  It is time we caught-up, and I will try and remember to ask him if BASF makes an equivalent to Tergitol 15-S-7. 

I will share the info when I have it, and, if I have it.

Yes, the site went done a "rabbit hole".  It was intended to provide a formulation for the "Very Best Record Cleaner Formulation", and to answer questions about the formulation or any other subject with which I am very knowledgeable and experienced in.

It deviated to discussions about degrees issued at particular universities, and, who is a Doctor and who is not a Doctor.

You probably never thought that I would contribute any answers to those posts.  However, I stated I would respond to questions with with I am very knowledgeable and experienced.  Therefore, I find myself qualified to end this discussion once and forever.

At the time, I recall 27 Colleges at Oxford of the 44 total that offered Degrees to become Practicing Physicians.  It did not matter  if you went to Balliol College, or Christ Church College, or Corpus Christi College, or Saint Peter's College, or any of the other Colleges, the Degrees were the same.

So, if you graduated from an Oxford University College with intent to practice Medicine, and, you were male, your signature would be as follows:

  Mister  Oliver Oxford  M.A., B.M., B.Ch.        The M.A. stands for Master of Arts (not Master of Anatomy, although much Anatomy is obviously studied).  The B.M.  stands for Bachelor of Medicine.  And the B.Ch.  stands for Bachelor of Surgery.  (not Bachelor of Chemistry - the Ch. is in reference to the old Latin terminology).

So, there you have it.  A person graduating from, let us say, Christ Church College at Oxford, is technically not a Doctor.  I chose Christ Church College because it undeniably is the best College for Medicine at Oxford.  You will not find disagreement with that statement.  No PhD. (Oxford does not award PhD's), No DPhil., no M.D.

Now with regard to Schools for Chemistry, I guess I am suppose to say Corpus Christi College is the very best College.  But, I also stated that I would be truthful, so I must admit that Jesus College is the very best College at Oxford for Chemistry.  Many people would say that Jesus College at Oxford University is the very best School in the entire World for Chemistry.  And you would find no disagreement from me about that statement.

Now with regard to Cambridge University, I believe that here in North America that is normally referred to as Pre K.  Do not quote me, I certainly would not want to upset someone who had attended a College at Cambridge University.  I understand that you can receive a Toop-Notch Educashun there.

Yes, I made certain that I read my remarks before posting.  And, this should end this entire subject matter and we can now move on to audio discussions.

 

@rich121 

Regarding your post 13 June 2023 at 12:26 PM

 

Oy Vey!

@eryoung2k 

Regarding your post 13 June 2023 at 10:52 AM

I made myself familiar with the Tergikleen product ( by the way, the "Terg" in Tergikleen most likely comes from the two Tergitols they have chosen to use.  And, yes, I agree in this case, a rinse is necessary.  But, I suggest you rinse with my presented formulation and not just distilled water.  If you have some concerns, perhaps you should just rinse with a 22.000% Ethanol and 78.000% Distilled water and avoid the Tergitol 15-S-7.  You will be more pleased with the results.

 

@mijostyn 

Your 12 June 2023 at 7:34 AM post only.

In keeping with many of the posts that have been placed on this forum.  I would not be surprised that the "Technical Consensus of Opinion" about your tennis ball when you dropped it would most likely go "Up".  I am certain that there is even an "expert" out there that could even prove that.

Your concept of listening to music, rather than spending your lifetime simply washing records for the remainder of your life is the correct position to follow, however, I am confident that many disagree.  Other than my involvement in this forum, I prefer to listen to music as well!

@whart 

Regarding your post 13 June 2023 at 2:52 AM

AGAIN, more "Technical responses, and expressed in a somewhat definitive manner, from an individual who defined himself as a 'student of intellectual history' before becoming a Lawyer"

Please Note!  I have made no Legal remarks, nor, do I ever intend to.  I am NOT QUALIFIED to make any Legal statements!

@pindac 

Response to your post 11 June 2023 at 4:01 PM.

You used the expression "very experienced".  If you had used the expression "very knowledgeable", or, "extremely knowledgeable", than you would be referring to only one individual (so far). 

To all, again I must apologize.  It has not been a great day, my Medical Demons are summoning me again.

Farewell for now, and all please stay safe.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

 

A very special Thank you to Dan H. For his kind and gracious words and encouragement.  And, I hope, in one of my typical digressions, I did not upset him in any way most recently.

 

Thank you Dan H.!