Just for clarification on this. If you read the Dow Tergitol 15-S-9 SDS this is what is says for ingestion and inhalation: "Moderate toxicity if swallowed. Small amounts swallowed incidentally as a result of normal handling operations are not likely to cause injury; however, swallowing larger amounts may cause serious injury, even death." "At room temperature, exposure to vapor is minimal due to low volatility. Vapor from heated material may cause respiratory irritation and other effects. Excessive exposure may cause lung injury." And the above applies to "Alcohols, C12-14-secondary, ethoxylated" which is actually a whole category of many non-ionic surfactants including Triton X100. Of course, G-Sonic which has to be fairly concentrated provides no Safety Data Sheet (SDS), and any assumption of safety is premature, and is likely not much difference except it's likely diluted 4:1 and the quantity is much less. However, whenever working with concentrated products common sense and safety applies. But, compared to common 91% Isopropyl Alcohol - one SDS states: "Exposure to solvent vapor concentrations from the component solvents in excess of the stated occupational exposure limits (400 ppm) may result in adverse health effects such as mucous membrane and respiratory system irritation and adverse effects on the kidneys, liver and central nervous system. Symptoms include headache, nausea, dizziness, fatigue, muscular weakness, drowsiness and in extreme cases, loss of consciousness". Keep things in perspective and large companies like Dow Chemical are very conservative with their SDSs.
Thanks! It's not that I don't trust using Tergitol 15-S-9, it's just that the HG bottle (same/similar as G-Sonic?) seemed more easy to use, and I like the results it gives. It really makes most of my used records more quiet, and from the ones that don't improve significantly I have good reason to believe it's rather the quality of the record (like groove damage) than the surfactant I'm using. And I really appreciate all the experience shared here in this specific thread (and on SHF in general!). I've already learned so much, I just take it step by step. When the HG bottle is empty, I sure like to try something like the Tergitol 15-S-9, but for now I think I'm fine.
At this point I have cleaned and played a few records with the HG. Still forming my final opinion, but the results are mixed and highly dependent on the situation with the record itself. A few records were improved noticeably even after I previously cleaned them using a vac-RCM and strong enzyme cleaner. That said some stubborn records did not really improve at all. I considered those records FUBAR before and they remain so. Bottom line for now is that not every old record is a good candidate for this thing. BTW if you're expecting the noise to be less intrusive than a vac-RCM I can confirm the noise is lower in volume. It is very annoying though and sounds like an ultrasonic dental scaler during the cleaning cycles. The tank draining just before the fan kicks in is also quite loud.
Loudness is relative. Compared to my old VPI 16.5 this machine is relatively quiet, plus the draining cycle is not annoying at all, as it lasts but a minute or so. If one is expecting the HG to bring back a G- or even a VG+ record to a Mint condition, then one is deceiving oneself! Nothing can do that. OTOH, if you want a simple US machine that is not priced to gouge---then consider the HG first and foremost. With the addition of surfactant (mandatory IME), this little US machine is a boon to most collectors.
Agreed, compared to my shop wetvac with a squeaky clean, at least this I could do late at night and not wake the house up. Also the biggest improvements I've heard are old records that I thought had groove damage, like distortion on vocals and rough spots like that, where a trip or two through the Humminguru noticeably improved things I'd already vacuum cleaned.
My wife hates the sound it makes and says it sounds like a Keurig in a dentists' office. I don't mind the sound it makes and use it while I'm listening to records. What did you decide on for a surfactant?
All of this is true. Not every dollar bin record emerges in a state of perfection. However, many do clean up well enough to assess how much noise was attributable to grunge versus physical damage.
I generally do not buy dollar bin records. A record can look nice and still have invisible damage that makes it basically trash. I don't expect any cleaning method to work miracles. Not possible.
I'm not shy or ashamed to admit I do. The HG has been a huge game changer for collecting on a budget. Until every store invests the time and money, my $500 investment is arbitrage for dirty records they are ashamed to put in the bins at retail.
If people find records they like in dollar bins, great. I haven't found anything worthwhile in years. Generally they are full of stuff I have zero interest in or records in very poor condition.
I found two Elvis Christmas albums at the huge Brimfield, MA flea market several years ago for a buck each. The covers were falling apart but after a good cleaning with a Spin Clean followed by a Record Doctor RCM they played fairly quiet. I break them out every Christmas. Still debating whether to buy Hummin Guru to add to the cleaning regiment with some of the tax return $$$
Agree. I was in a record store last week that had a number of dollar bins( well in this case— $3) Nonetheless, the records were as you described. Interestingly, the other bins also had poor condition records. I asked the owner how they graded records, she told me she doesn’t do this…instead offers a return if the record skips in the groove! Now, the fact that a G- condition record doesn’t skip in the groove…is of absolutely zero interest to me, but I guess to her usual customers?
For people using the HG fluid, are you rinsing this stuff off with a separate cleaning cycle using plain distilled water? Or just leaving the record as is?
Is it okay to play records immediately after the dry cleaning? Someone told me to wait a day because it's still not completely dry and since the vinyl is softer after a wet cleaning, it may wear out faster. I've been playing them right away with no issues
I’m using the groove washer GSonic in very small amounts. I do not use a pure DW wash cycle after the original clean. Part of the reason for this, is that I find the more you dry the record, the more likely you are to have static problems. I do a purely sonic cycle with no drying and no record in the machine as my first step. This tends to help with the cleaning cycle. Also, I don’t think that what was told to @TakiJones makes much sense, unless you are using way too hot water in the first place, which is a no no.
They're good to go as long as they're visibly dry (no water droplets remaining). The vinyl is definitely not softer from a HG cycle.
I would hate to think what any US machine has done to a record IF the vinyl can be felt to be softer after a US cleaning!! YIKES!!
Yes, I do rinse afterwards (and use plain DIW). First a couple of (manual) spins through a Disco Antistat with some Walviswater (local "brew") and than spray it off with DIW. This way I have zero residue on my records (and due to the relative humid climate of The Netherlands, I have no issues with static...most of the year). It is a bit more labor intensive, but it keeps my stylus free from gunk.* Also because I found 4 drops of the HG bottle works better than 3 (they recommend 2-3 drops). * I wonder, is this why Huminnguru also offers an ultrasonic stylus cleaner...?
