Vinyl Care

@richardbrand,

ultrasonic cleaning is the best way to dig contaminants from deep in the groove

UT cleaning is but one way to clean a record.  As the book says Chapter XII about the manual-sink process that uses 3 chemicals with one being a weak acid, The incorporation of the acid chemistry does manually what ultrasonics can do with power; their convenience notwithstanding.  But the book in the Forward also states:  All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. In the final analysis, the best cleaning process is the one that is best for you.

I also think static charges are created in the groove when it is rubbed by a diamond stylus. 

In the book (Chapter VI) it states:  The article Phonograph Reproduction 1978, James H. Kogen, Audio Magazine May 1978 (Audio-1978-05.pdf) goes into some detail on static; what causes it and what does not – the needle in the groove was not a source of static. The article indicates that static is not uniform, but exists as islands on a record. Additionally, once the static gets high enough to discharge to the cartridge it only reduces to about 4200 volts. A static charge on the record of 4200 volts will not create noise by itself, but it can by electrostatic attractive forces cause a transient increase in cartridge VTF as much as 0.375 grams leading to distortion and premature wear. So, managing static has many benefits.

The book also addresses the shortcomings of anti-static brushes such as carbon fiber and Thunderon, as follows:  How effective are conductive brushes in removing static – only partially effective. In the paper SealezeTM SSG515AT2D Static Dissipation Brush Performance in an Operational Environment (Microsoft Word - SEALEZE_WHITE_PAPER_Final dam.doc) Thunderon™ bristles in a grounded metal frame were only able to reduce the static charge developed during a plastic film manufacture to about 4000 volts whereas the brush with an ionizing device was able to reduce the static charge to less than 300 volts. As previously stated, reducing the static to 4000 volts will be sufficient to prevent static inducted noise, but not enough to prevent affecting the VTF.

@puptent, 

Tergikleen is like Kodak Foto Flow, a wetting and flow aid, non detergent.

Actually, both are nonionic surfactants which at low concentration reduce the surface tension of water ergo wetting.  But at higher concentrations, nonionic surfactants act as emulsifying agents (breakup oil); ergo a form of detergency.  Tergikleen at the manufacturers recommended concentration will acts as both a wetting agent and as a detergent (oil emulsification).  But these are nothing like Dawn which is very different and is most people's perspective of a detergent.

@orthomead,

  It works by creating an ozone layer above the LP which eliminates static. 

Just to clarify, what neutralizes the static on the record is the ionized air that the device produces when it creates the blue-arc.  The same concept of ionizing the air is how the Milty Zerostat™ 3 Anti-static Gun works.  When air is ionized, there is a chance of producing ozone, but in this case very little ozone is generated.   Industry uses ionizers to remove/prevent static in small and large scales with bench top units readily available such as TB-3043__tmp68163ca4.pdf, but note that the ozone produced is <0.05-ppm.  

The issue of room air cleaners based on air ionizers or ozone generators has some significant health issues - What are ionizers and other ozone generating air cleaners? | US EPA.

@billstevenson, 

Thank-you for the acknowledgement but let us not forget the contribution that @whart (Bill Hart) made in publishing the book and making it available for free through his site The Vinyl Press -.  

Otherwise, please remember what the book says in the Forward:  All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. In the final analysis, the best cleaning process is the one that is best for you. All methods/procedures specified here present opportunity for experimenting with different cleaning agents, different cleaning brushes, different drying cloths, and different cleaning equipment.

@faustuss, 

If you are curious, here is the patent for LAST - 1499067499117143667-05389281.  It’s nothing more than a perfluorinated oil dissolved in a perfluorinated solvent.  The fluid is applied, and the solvent evaporates leaving behind an oil film.  However, it does not ’bond’ with the record.  Perfluorinated products are some of the most stable products known, which is why they are now also known as "forever chemicals".  However, there should be no health concerns with using LAST provided you do not drink it.  The oil definitely plates out on the record, and it does not evaporate (perfluorinated oils are used in satellites) and once on the surface, as you have experienced, is not easily removed.  Forget ultrasonics, multiple applications of a fairly aggressive detergent and vigorous brushing are what it takes to remove.  

@dogberry,

No, GruvGlide is nothing like LAST.   If this is still the ingredients of GruvGlide - Gruv Glide Ingredients Revealed- Vinyl Engine, it's an antistatic spray.  Quaternary ammonium compounds (QUATs for short) are cationic surfactants which are very hygroscopic.  When the solution evaporates, a film (residue) of QUATs is left behind, and being very hygroscopic pulls moisture from the air and the ionic solution neutralizes any static.  They have limits and tend not work very well below about 30% relative humidity.  QUATs are used in every hair conditioning product to prevent hair frizz.  QUATs are also anti-bacterial and with the right amount of solution and residence time can kill bacteria and viruses.  Most of your home anti-bacterial cleaners have QUATs; although as cleaning agents, cationic surfactants are poor.  

@richardbrand,

The quote from book is from THE WEAR AND CARE OF RECORDS AND STYLI, by Harold D. Weiler, 1954.  

The diamond dust is of no consequence - it is very fine sub-micron that really has no impact to record playback.  As I say in the book (Chapter VI).  This has to exist as a very, very fine powder and the finest diamond powder you can buy is 100,000 grit which is 0.25 micron. So, the diamond wear powder on the record is probably less which in the end becomes inconsequential so long as there is no cleaner residue.
If whatever wear byproduct powder that is produced by the diamond and the record is kept dry and free of oily and sticky residue, the stylus should move through this without any effect – not unlike a light coating of very dry powder-snow, it just blows around.

Now the jagged silica particles are something else, and its origins are likely natural aerosols that the book addresses in Chapter IV and can be very fine Sahara Desert sand - you can read further about aerosols at NASA.  

Fundamentally, the electrical resistance of PVC is report as about 10^16 Electrical Resistivity of Polymers and Plastics - Table while diamond is reported as 10^16 to 10^18 Resistivity of Carbon, Diamond - The Physics Factbook.  This similarity would tend to minimize any triboelectric effect and support the reports that the diamond does not cause static on the record.  Otherwise, if you carefully read Chapter VI, Table IV, you will see where the triboelectric series is better quantified.  Standard HDPE record sleeves are close to PVC which is why they are used, but they are far enough apart that if you quickly pull the record from the sleeve, there is some risk of developing a static charge on the record.