The Link has very respected pointers to attaining a Purified LP Groove.
What is the best way to clean Vinyl?
TIA
143 responses Add your response
I tried a few things before I purchased Ultrasonic. You may think your records are clean but run 3-4 batches through the ultrasonic and look at the dirty water and clumps of dirt on the bottom. Ultrasonic is not fun and easy in any way. Mine cleans 9 records at a time and if you are cleaning a lot it takes a lot of time and space. But it is worth it. |
how much do you want to know about record cleaning? this thread will answer any question. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/timas-diy-rcm.26013/ personally i use the KLaudio RCM and am very happy with the results. my opinion is that as a substitute for obsessing about perfectly cleaning records, a great anti-static device such as the CS Port IME1 or the DS Audio ION-001 will actually lower noise more than the cleanest record cleaner assuming the records are reasonably clean. i own three turntables, and use one of the those devices on each one. |
| Post removed |
@mikelavigne , Very true accept you can do exactly the same thing with a $30 Hudson sweep arm and remove any incidental dust out of the stylus's path. The problem with most ultrasonic cleaners is the drying cycle if they even have one. This is where vacuum machines have a big advantage. I bought a Clearaudio Double Matrix because after doing a lot of research I believe it is the best record cleaner out at this time. It is fully automated, cleans both sides at the same time and has a very strong vacuum cycle producing a perfectly dry record. The longer the record stays wet the more pollution it will pick up from the air. Evaporative drying is bad news because it will leave any residue from the cleaning fluid on the record along with any atmospheric pollution it collects. I have a record cleaning solution that prevents the record from accumulating static as long as the turntable is well grounded. It leaves an extremely small residue on the record and is for use only with machines that have a vacuum cycle. I have a few more pictures to take but it leaves very little residue on the stylus after ten sides. The anti static effect lasts at least 9 months and counting. Initially I though records cleaned with this solution sounded better. But ABing digital files disclosed that to be wishful thinking other than the total absence of static. An interesting story aside but in keeping with the topic. I got $1000 off the price of the Double Matrix Sonic Pro because it was "lightly used." It came with a full factory warranty which I verified with Musical Surroundings. About six months into it the water pump seized. Musical Surroundings sent me a new pump and coached me online. On taking the machine apart I discovered the water filter and supply tubing was full of this white gunk, the obvious cause of the pump's failure. God knows what the previous user put in there. I took everything apart and cleaned it all using denatured alcohol and spray gun cleaning brushes. The water tank was full of the stuff as was the discharge tank. New pump installed and everything back together you would never know it was apart. I can attest to it being an extremely well designed and built unit. The moral of the story is that you should only use approved record cleaning solutions and carefully check out any machine you buy used. My pump was probably already destined to fail. The funniest part of the whole story that in working on the machine I accidently disconnected the water return tube from the tank and did not catch it. The first time I used it it put at least three times as much fluid on the record as usual and made quite the mess. I had to take it all apart again to find the problem. Other than my time, no harm done. |
@jjbeason14 , the single best way to clean vinyl is not to let it get dirty in the first place. |
Based on the OP's experience/existing setup, a $150 Spin Clean is all that's needed, or MAYBE one of those MIC budget US's now available. Unless the OP is buying used LP's US isn't likely to needed. I have a collection/setup to justify purchasing a proper RCM, but have managed to get by Spin Clean for many years. Hearing my used Spin Cleaned LPs on UBER setups confirmed my thinking finding good condition LPs to start with is paramount.
|
disagree. a brush only gets larger pieces. a brush cannot dramatically reduce static. in fact the friction from a brush increases static which holds mirco-dirt to the groove. negative ions from anti-static devices reduce noise. but agree the brush from the Hudson sweep arm does have a positive net effect. just not nearly what anti-static is able to do. |
Unfortunately, US cleaners have really increased in price. You can just get 6 liter US tanks for a lot less and do a DIY rotisserie to spin the records in the tank. There are YouTubes. I got the first cleanervinyl system in the beginning (looks like prices have gone up there as well) and use two US tanks so one is a filtered rinse, then fan dry still spinning on the rotisserie. It still seems like a crazy amount of money to most, but way less than the all-in-one machines and nothing to really go wrong. |
@mikelavigne , In the center of the Hudson brush is a 1/16" carbon fiber element that is essentially a straight wire to ground. Assuming the record is clean the only thing the brush has to do is catch any incidental dust on the surface of the record. None of the devices you are using create a direct short to ground. There is no more effective way of discharging static electricity. Everything else might be a little more than wishful thinking but not much. Get yourself a static charge meter. A cheep one is about a grand. My ESDgun cost $2400. |
"Best"? I’m not sure there is such a thing. Apart from budget, there’s the time and effort factor, the condition of the records (I buy older copies 10/1 over new) and your ability to evaluate results meaningfully. My "best" results come from a combination of manual cleaning, vacuum on a big Monks and and additional step into a KL ultrasonic machine. Not a cheap point of entry. Tima did a very good job taking on the challenge of a high end version of DIY after buying a cheap Chinese US bath and advanced to an Elma, filtering and other improvements. His objective wasn’t to do it on the "cheap" (though there are plenty of cheap ultrasonic machines out there) but to achieve best results (I think Tima had and may still have a Loricraft, which is similar to the Monks in overall design). Neil Antin’s "book" on Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records is an encyclopedic reference that combines materials science, chemistry and other disciplines. It is not an easy or "light" read but Neil’s knowledge and willingness to answer questions is unparalleled in my experience. I was honored to publish the first several installments of both Tima’s work and Neil’s, now in its Third Edition. The funny thing is, those two got together and exchanged some ideas which are captured on the thread from What’s Best that @mikelavigne posted upthread, so that is as good a place to start as any. |
Here we go again with the cleaning fetish. Last iteration was only a month or two back. Once again, I say I rarely hear surface noise on my records. If I do, I clean on my Nitty Gritty I have had for 40+ years now. Then I put the disc in a new Nagaoka inner, so I know it's been cleaned. I have cleaned perhaps 15-20% of my 4,000 odd collection, judging by the number of new sleeves I have bought.. I can only recollect VERY few times I have heard noise again on a record I have cleaned, so re-cleaning is very rare. So. How much noise do people hear? It might be suggested that failing to clean a record before playing it allows deposits to cause wear on the LP in play (or on the stylus). Well, with some discs in my collection 60+ years I have not heard this. Nor do my stylii wear prematurely; indeed with my parallel tracking arm running typically at 2.5g (a bit less for the van den Huls) they mostly outlast constructor's life estimates. There are those here who clean every record before play. I regard this as truly obsessive behaviour, but I wonder if repeated cleaning (especially wet cleaning and brush/pad contact cleaning) causes damage? |
@lewm- in fairness, the very first response in this thread was the suggestion to read Neil Antin's work, which is available for free. Yes, it is voluminous but explains the chemistry and steps, the fairly minimal equipment needed and why the steps Neil outlines work. The total cost is far below the OP's budget. I prefer to use a vacuum type rcm as part of my process-- I used a VPI 16.5 (which started life as a 16) back in the early '80s-- it was still operating fine when I gave it to a friend in 2017. I don't have experience with other wand type vacuums that may be available (or the clones of the Nitty Gritty that either don't have a motor or allow you to use a small household vacuum cleaner). Some here have suggested other equally inexpensive alternatives. @clearthinker - I don't regard this as a fetish but a practical reality given that I buy mostly older copies. Often, the contamination comes from previous, "bad" cleanings-- some spray that might have been applied. Once I have effectively cleaned a record, I have found little need to re-clean. There are easy quick ways to do a "touch up" for any dust, lint, etc. that attaches to the once cleaned LP surface in handling and playing. Since many of the records I've bought are hard to find, expensive or both, they often need to be cleaned properly to play quietly. There are countless ways to approach this--but I'd say there are good practices that are generally observed by archivists, which is a good starting point. Beyond that, some of the cost involved in the cleaning hardware is aimed at convenience and minimal effort. There's a happy medium that each person can choose based on budget, time, effort and results. |
@whart Thanks for your reply. I've got a lot of respect for your postings on vinyl replay. They are a well-balanced view of the issues. I can't argue with cleaning discs that need to be cleaned. I am questioning the need to clean those that have already been cleaned or do not require cleaning. As you rightly say, a happy medium is best - for the listener and the LPs - pun intended. Yes, I bought some discs that had been cleaned with unsuitable materials and I had to clean them. Pre the ultrasonics, this was not always successful and I would be interested to know if ultrasonic cleaners can clear all the gunk some people have put on. I used to think they had eaten dinner off some of them. Having been around a long time, in the shop I soon learned to avoid the sticky messes and examined surfaces carefully with my short sight or even a magnifying glass before buying. Yes, with ultra rare discs at bargain prices there is of course a temptation, but by 1989 I had pretty well bought all the used titles I wanted from the 1950s 60s golden age and then I could pick and choose as everyone was outing vinyl, including of course stocks of unsold unopened records. Glory days they truly were; nothing cost more than £1 a disc and everything was on offer. WOW. I was buying nearly hundreds a month that are the backbone of my collection of 4000+. For the last 30 years I have mainly bought special pressings, very few now and only from the one or two manufacturers that make consistently reliable discs.
|
@clearthinker - thanks for the kind words. It’s been a learning experience for me. I bought some of the harder to find Vertigo Swirls that didn’t clean up in the then relatively novel Audio Desk ultrasonic, and that took me back to manual cleaning and vacuum. I had to work on some of these albums. They were obviously not owned by audiophiles, but by "heads"-- deep prog rock from the period. I found that the combination of manual cleaning/vacuum/ultrasonic/pure water rinse resuscitated these-- what sounded like "groove chew" (damaged record grooves from kludgey old turntable/arm/cartridge) turned out to be contamination. Some records were simply damaged and no amount of cleaning would bring them back. I then took a trip to the Packard Campus of the Library of Congress- and spent the day with their preservation specialists. Had a blast. Got to hear Les Paul lacquers cut on a homemade lathe that LP used to make overdubs- this was before he got his hands on a tape machine. The sounds were visceral, especially the early, foundational tracks. I then started to learn a little more from archivists and spent some time researching. Lots of people have contributed to this knowledge base, from Rush Paul’s article on DIY ultrasonic made easy, to Tima’s efforts to up the game on DIY, to Neil Antin’s engineering/cross disciplinary approach. I still buy old records because I’m constantly discovering "new to me" music on records that were made back in the day, most of which have not been reissued or reissued well. I too have bought old stock. I run into warps--I did invest in the Furutech version of the Orb DF-2, which has been a lifesaver for me. I’m at a point now where I’m just chasing special, obscure records-- I’m pretty much over the "audiophile" stuff- largely because I already have all those warhorses. I have been recommending Bobby Hamilton’s Dream Queen- unobtanium as an OG, but recently recut from the tape by Bernie G. I got rid of over 12,000 records before I left NY. That left me with around 5,000 when I got to Texas, and since then, I’ve accumulated maybe another 1,000? I’m a big fan of some of the Tone Poets and think Chad’s Verve/uMe line is a good deal for folks who don’t already own some of those jazz classics. I tend to go for early heavy psych/blues/rock (now called proto-metal). Lots of great obscure bands from the UK and elsewhere. These are not records I’ll find at my local stores. So, I’m buying from dealers or private sellers all over the world. It’s fun. On the contamination, who knows what some of this stuff is. I cleaned one of those early Vertigo’s and orange gunk came out of the grooves, fouling my stylus. That record went back to the seller. I don’t obsess about this, because I have a bunch of other things to obsess about too. Keeps me off the streets. Best, Bill |
| Post removed |
With a $500 budget you have three options: The best one is the one that is best for you. How much convenience do you want, how quiet do you want the process, how long do you want it last, what are you cleaning - only new records, or are you going to be buying used flea-market. But let me emphasis one item, any of these can achieve a clean record BUT, BUT, BUT the devil is in the details. 1. For about $250 with all materials and cleaning agents, manual clean using a record label protector such as the process specified in Chapter 5 of Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press. This process can clean any record of any condition. But it is fully manual, and the success is based on your technique but it's a short learning curve and there is very little to wear out. 2. For $500 you can purchase a vacuum-RCM. There are a number of variations available, you want one with the suction tube/wand on top of the record - they are the easiest to use. Vacuum-RCM at this price point will be very noisy and they are still manual clean - the chemistry you use and brush you use and how you use the brush will determine how well the record will be cleaned. The benefit of the vacuum-RCM is speed - faster to dry. However, if you dry too-much you will develop static - it’s that devil is in the details (but short learning curve). The durability at this price point can be 3-5 years but choosing one with good OEM support will allow long term use. The suction wands and the Velcro heads need to be periodically replaced. Vacuum-RCM can be used to clean used records with the right chemistry; pre-clean, rinse, final clean, rinse such as specified Chapter XIII - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press. 3. For $500 you can purchase the HumminGuru all-in-one ultrasonic vinyl record cleaner. This is not a bad unit when used correctly (remember, the devil is in the details) with this being the best procedure to date: HumminGuru - an inexpensive desktop RCM | What’s Best Audio and Video Forum. The Best High End Audio Forum on the planet! (whatsbestforum.com) - see post #62. The durability of the HG is unknown, it’s still relatively new but with light use, 2-3 years should be appropriate. The OEM is in China, but support appears so far to be decent. There is an active thread over at Interesting All-in-One Ultrasonic Cleaner - HumminGuru | Steve Hoffman Music Forums. The HG is not great for used records. You will need some form of pre-clean step and people often use a Spin-Clean. However, the HG is very convenient, and is relatively quiet and very compact. 4. For $500 you can put together a DIY ultrasonic tank cleaning system starting with the cheap 40kHz UT now available - Amazon.com: VEVOR Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner 6L 40kHz Vinyl Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine Knob Control Record Ultrasonic Cleaner 4 Records Vinyl Sonic Cleaner Stainless Steel Tank w/Mechanical Heater & Timer : Industrial & Scientific. To make these work, there is a lot of details, and they will not work very well unless you nail the details. The PACVR Book Chapter XIV has some 40 pages discussing all the details. Beyond what is addressed above, and what is written in the PACVR Book, there is no lack of information on the web with some 50 different cleaning products all saying theirs cleans the best. There are those that swear-by PVA-wood glue method, and some even use steam cleaners. It’s a carnival of options, but I will end this as I started it, the one that is best is the one that is best for you, but most any of them can be made to work effectively but make no mistake, the devil is in details. Good Luck! |
Thanks for your further response. You have clearly been in this a lot deeper than I. I am really lucky (deaf?) because I get no surface noise issues with my playback once I have cleaned the records that need it on my Nitty Gritty. The reason for posting again is your mention of the US Library of Congress. You will probably know that Simon Yorke supplied transcriptor players to the US Library of Congress that were used to make digital copies of a large number of analogue discs of all sorts of dimensions and specifications. I came across Simon in his earlier years in County Durham, NE England. I had acquired an S2 Zarathustra that is a truly rare hi-mass sprung turntable. Simon says he made less then ten. I visited him in the late 1980s to acquire some spares for that and to audition his S7 with unipivot arm. I bought that. As you will know, it was Michael Fremer's reference player for some eight years before he travelled way upmarket, boosted by discounts available. It was a very good player, miles ahead of his S2 that in turn was miles ahead of my early Linn that it replaced. The unipivot arm was said to be the S7's weak point but I never moved to replace it. Simon had become a friend and he spoke over a long period of his development of a parallel tracking arm. He let me know when he had it in production and I visited him, now in Spain, for a few days to chew the fat, enjoy the local Spanish cuisine and beverages and audition his S10, a development of the S7 and, most importantly, the Aeroarm. Well, if you have never heard it, this combination is wonderful as long as you choose a lightweight high compliance cartridge. Matches made in heaven are Ortofon A90, 95 and now Verismo. It is also very good with van den Huls and the AT1000 This truly is a world class player and far less costly than the blingy $000,000 heavyweights that purport to populate the high end of the market today. Simon is a really nice guy but over the years his negative marketing traits have not been kind to his business. So I was lucky to get in on the ground floor with Aeroarm #003 the first customer piece. There are only a handful of customer Aeroarms and will be no more. Simon is out of the business now but we keep in touch from time to time.
|
Yes, indeed @clearthinker the engineer working on the Les Paul tracks was using a Simon Yorke and there is a photo of some of his set up in this article:
|
Lots of great knowledge and experience have been mentioned in these many responses to the problem of cleaning records. I'll add my method that's a bit time consuming, but effective, and stays well below the cost goal of $500. For the price of a Spin Clean, and maybe $10 in plastic, felt, and wood (plus a shop vac), I clean about 6 records an hour, with them completely and immediately dry afterwards. I use a Spin Clean first, then vacuum it dry with a PCV wand made with a wood dowel for the center hole, a slit made with a dremel tool extending from just inside the label to just outside the record edge, and felt (I think) around the slit for the record to rest on. Attach a shop vacuum to the end of the wand (other end taped shut), and anything loose left behind by the Spin Clean (including the solution) comes right off. Care is needed to not drop or scratch the record while handling of course (almost happened a few times) but it is obviously effective as my wife complains she can't hear any clicks or pops, while I love how silently they play (usually can't hear the lead-in groove). Started just with the Spin Clean, but could only do two or three albums before the towels were all too wet to completely dry all the albums I wanted to clean that session. Just another alternative method to consider. |
The least expensive vacuum unit is probably the way to go. There are numerous ways to put fluid on the record and brushes to use. It is drying the record and removing all the residue that is critical. Air or fan drying is a bad idea. Regular distilled water is not no residue water . It is lower residue water. Put a puddle on clean glass and look what is left after it dries. Nobody is going to get laboratory water to use in their record cleaning fluid, too expensive. Many of the additives used in cleaning fluids do not evaporate, they have to be removed. Most of the noise on records is from contamination in recycled vinyl or just plain bad pressing. It will not clean out. Those of you who think even 50% of the records out there are noiseless must be listening at low volumes only. On a wild guess I would be lucky if 10% of my records are state of the art pressings. On the bright side the only real danger to records is physical, scratches, heat and so forth. It is very hard to hurt vinyl with the fluids commonly available to consumers. I have exposed records to 99% alcohol, denatured alcohol, lacquer thinner, brake cleaning fluid, mineral spirits, Naphtha, and gasoline. None of these had any audible effect on the record. I soaked 5 analog production records in brake cleaning fluid for 24 hours. All five including the labels are in perfect shape and it has been over a year since I did it. The cheapest cleaning fluid you can use effectively is one cup 99% isopropyl alcohol in a gallon of distilled water with three drops of Tergitol (a surfactant). The Tergitol functions as a wetting agent and keeps the water from beading up on the vinyl. If the water still beads up add a few more drops. Tergitol does not evaporate so you want to use as little as possible and should be used only with vacuum drying or you will see a wad of Tergitol form on your stylus. It won't hurt anything but you will have to clean your stylus after every play. The more you clean your stylus the higher the risk of you damaging it. One rum and soda will do it.
|
"Most of the noise on records is from contamination in recycled vinyl or just plain bad pressing. It will not clean out. Those of you who think even 50% of the records out there are noiseless must be listening at low volumes only." I've also noticed some records will not play silently, no matter how many cleanings, and attribute that to the pressing. But luckily most do run quiet. By the way, I was wrong in my previous post about using felt around the wand slot. I used velour there. Used felt under the label to keep in from scratching. |
Ultrasonic is head and shoulders above any other method. I previously used Recor Doctor vacuum with wet wash. But it is unbelievable how quiet my LPs became after ultrasonic. Ultrasonic even removed a lot of vinyl scraps from the grooves of brand new, never before played LPs of mine.
Do an ultrasonic cleaning and you will never bother with any other method. |
Just beware that "wall wart" powered Ultrasonic machines like the Humminguru and all of the even cheaper knockoffs you see on Amazon do NOT provide in any way, the same level of small bubble formation and cavitation and cleaning that "real powered" ultrasonics do. Try one if you want, but if your results are "so-so" don’t blame it on ultrasonic cleaning not working, but rather on the lackluster properties of said machine. It’s like if you want to take photographs. You can do "ok" with a cheap cellphone or you can buy a DSLR and get much better results. |
@mijostyn My numero uno recommendation is to clean the stylus after every LP side is played. I’ve been doing that for 45 years with a brush, liquid every 25-50 plays and using a Magic Eraser occasionally now for 15 years. My Benz Ruby3 lasted nearly 2500 hours and tracked beautifully, but it lost all it’s dynamics at the end (on a modified SME IV arm). I have 28,500 LPs. Most were purchased used. Most are very quiet. A scratch does sound. Pops and clicks sound (sometimes subtle, sometimes obtrusive). Bad vinyl in my system and several friends systems has various levels of low noise but the music overwhelms the background noise that it is generally irrelevant (guests frequently comment is it a CD we are listening to). I used to have considerable record noise prior to obtaining a high end analog system. Four friends own Dynavector cartridges and I went back to that company’s 20X2L which is a perfect match for my Zesto Allesso SUT as well as directly into my preamp’s 100 ohm input for MC. I first recommend a less expensive alternative (not cheap) which I’ve used for 31 years, the VPI RCM 16.5 (upgraded from a 16). Now using Disc Doctor fluid, multi-step wash and dry (3 minimum). or I purchased a Kirmuss Ultrasonic (but do not change the water daily. I over the unit and unless there is debris from dirty old LPs, I continue using it for about 25 LPs). I noticed that it also cleans out gunk in damaged grooves, exposing noisy damaged surfaces as well. It typically enhances the sonics, even when there is increased noise. However, the noise level of bad vinyl does not intrude on the music. Example-I have several jazz Metro (MGM cheap label) LPs which are pressed on crappy vinyl with noisy surfaces. In my system, the music is so present that the noise is confined to a low level, unobtrusive shhhh. You’ll known it’s not digital or a CD but it will sound great (just heard The Mitchells Red, Whitey, And Blue* With Guest Artist, Andre Previn* – Get Those Elephants Out’a Here). So, my most important recommendation is keep your stylus spotlessly clean. Next, clean your records without creating any residue which contaminates your stylus. Then, choose what you can afford to clean them. |
Wow! That is an incredible number of albums. I have been collecting since the late 1960’s . I have 2,000. I remember about 35 years ago making nearly daily trips to a record store next to campus (after college… I had money) and then 25 years ago taking a year and a half off and riding my bike down to what was then thought to be the best used record store in the country (it was in Tucson) and buying a couple records every few days. I have come to realize that it is going to be difficult to listen to all my albums once before I die… but 28,000. Wow. 40 hours per week would take 18 years to listen to them all… and that is not including the cleaning time. That is a really impressive collection. |
@ghdprentice I've sold/given away 18,000 records over the last 35 years. I have a rule I made up, if I don't want to hear a record at least 3 times annually, out it goes. I only have so much storage room. I inherited from several friends and and two deceased listeners about 3,000 classical vocal and opera LPs. When I go through them, I will eliminate duplicates. Also, I have another 2,000 to hear once. As to 7,000 CDs, 5,500 are stored in order in stacked Can-Am metal storage drawers. The 78s occupy bottom shelving in my adjacent storage room and a storage building in the rear. Better than IKEA Kallex, I had custom built 13" h X 22" w melamine finished MDF wall shelving for records in both the rooms and some rolling metal racks behind the Can-Am units. Like Steve Hoffman, I began collecting/listening at 3 years old and had 300 records by 5, 1,000s by 10 and probably 3,500 by 13. Just as odd, when offered ice cream, candy, whatever while shopping with my parents until 5 years old, I would ask for a record (apparently annoyingly) so my parents stopped taking me shopping from 3 to 5. They made up a story about my uncle bringing records to my mother when I asked from 5 to 10 (he had 300 and I loved going over to hear his Heathkit/AR/6 driver 5' X 5' mono speaker). My mother would tell me she would call him and 5 or 10 minutes later she would open the bedroom door and present me with 1 to 3 records. Even at 10 when I knew that was impossible (he lived 6 miles south), I made believe because I wanted the records. After 13, I was purchasing my own records with money I made in the stock market from the $300 Bar Mitzvah money (I put it in the stock market because I received about 7X to 20X less than my friends-it was Hong Kong flu season in 69' and I had few friends and cheap relatives). In the 1970s, I was haunting the local record distributors for cut-outs and returned LPs (especially the direct discs at $1 a piece). That was the beginning of being known as a collector of records (and reseller of them as well). |
| Post removed |
When I had found the LAST system it couldn’t be shipped in the US. It wasn’t til the late 90’s I was able to purchase and receive it (shipped). It was their record preservative that had caught my eye. The statement of the temperatures hit with stylus dragging around the vinyl and the ability of this preservative to lower the temperatures considerably. I use their cleaning solution and brush/ applicator as well. It has kept the vinyl in good shape. I am using a Technics 1200 and grado cartridge. Which when I got it in 92 sounded better than all the cds in our collection and still does. |
