Just a reminder on the concentration to use which differs depending on the application. As I addressed previously (and in the book): 1. Manual Cleaning with Spray (or wash) Bottle: 0.1% which is 1-ml/L. 2. Ultrasonic Tank Final-Clean w/rinse: 0.015% which is 0.15-ml/L or for your 10L ultrasonic tank, = 1.5-ml. Good Luck, Neil
I find the combination of Liquinox, Citranox, and Tergitol to work extremely well with older, used vinyl. I’m use all three cleaning methods: Vacuum for Liquinox and rinse Manual for Citranox and rinse Vacuum for Tergitol and rinse Final rinse in ultrasonic It can be time consuming but I don’t think I could get my records any cleaner.
Good morning @pacvr Thank you once again for all of your genius, kindness and help. The Tergitol has been working out much better than I expected. For manual cleaning and in my UCM, the results have been great and more effective than the product I was using before. I'm most impressed with how much more effective my UCM sessions have been. 15-S-9 is THE one. I was wondering evaporation of the UCM solution that I didn't see in the 3.0 edition. I apologize if I missed that! I'm unsure of how to go about topping off the UCM bath when it starts to evaporate. Should I be making an equivalent solution and adding it back to the UCM bath, or should I be simply adding more DW?
The Tergitol will not evaporate with the water, so there is no need to add Tergitol to the UCM bath because of evaporation; just add DIW to restore UCM liquid level.
I always make another gallon batch of UCM cleaning solution for such purposes. That way when I top things off in the machine now and then, I am putting the same cleaning concentrate in as was originally placed in there. It seems to me if you just add DIW, you'll be diluting the existing cleaning mixture that is in the tank.
If you are only using surfactants, as the water evaporates, the surfactant concentration increases. Surfactants are not volatile. However, depending on how long you use the bath, over time (i.e., weeks), the concentration of the surfactant can deplete. If you are filtering the tank, and monitoring TDS, you are unlikely to get much more than a month of use of a bath before refresh is required. Also, toping-off can be affected by the initial surfactant concentration. If the concentration is only enough for wetting, then topping off with some added surfactant (25-50% of normal concentration) will be required if using the bath for long periods, and if you do not you will generally see the deterioration in wetting. But, if the bath has excess concentration for wetting and detergency, there may be enough to allow extended bath life with only adding DIW to make-up water evaporation. One caveat, if you are using isopropyl alcohol, and extending bath life, then as is written in the 3rd Ed, VIII.8.8 Alcohol Evaporative Losses: Ethanol and IPA at low concentrations (<50%) are not azeotropes and can evaporate separately from water; and this is quite evident when reviewing the applicable vapor-liquid equilibrium diagram that when boiling shows the vapor vs the liquid concentration. At low concentrations, the alcohol vapor concentration is much higher than the liquid concentration. At higher concentrations when an azeotrope forms, the alcohol concentration in the liquid and vapor are the same. For those that may use Ethanol or IPA at low concentrations in an ultrasonic tank (use only at concentrations that are not flammable); over a period of time, the alcohol will evaporate from the water faster than the water evaporating. Unless the alcohol concentration is monitored (alcohol hydrometers are available), the concentration will drop if the tank bath life is extended.
If I'm understanding correctly, as I'm using the CleanerVinyl Micron Filter & only Tergitol, I should probably get in the habit of refreshing my UCM batch every month or so in order to maintain proper Tergitol efficiency. Thank you, Neil.
Yes. Also, you may want to monitor the bath for total dissolved solids with a TDS meter, and as long as you are rinsing, refresh the bath at about 25 ppm; if not rinsing, refresh at 10 ppm. Some are very inexpensive - such as Amazon.com : tds meter amazon, accuracy at the low levels is variable. A more accurate unit is COM-100 – HM Digital and available Amazon.com: HM Digital 716160 COM-100 WATERPROOF PROFESSIONAL SERIES Combo Meter, 7", White/Purple : Industrial & Scientific plus other dealers.
Excellent. I always tap > DW rinse after UCM/manual final clean. I have this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07H578WWT/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_image?ie=UTF8&psc=1 I was wondering at what ppm I should refresh the batch...thank you again!
I happened to stumble on this thread, and what a great read! Thanks Dave and all contributors. Looking forward to reading the PACO:VR book. Just a quick question, and sorry if I missed this or if it’s in the book. Anxious to order the chemicals to clean a few vinyls that my le art du son is not quite doing the job on. Is Triton X-100 the same as, or close enough to Tergitol 15-S9 to use instead? Thanks!
There are a couple of varieties of Tergitol I believe so check the book to make sure it is the 15-S9 but if so, Triton and Tergitol are similar. The Tergitol might actually be a little better but I use the Triton myself because I got a gallon and still have plenty left. Both will do the job as the 2nd clean. Triton X100 is banned in the EU but still available in the US. I will probably switch to the Tergitol when my gallon runs out but that could be a long while.
This reply was in regards to using in an ultrasonic machine, but still on point: Interesting All-in-One Ultrasonic Cleaner - HumminGuru
Hello! I live in Brazil and it's pretty difficult (if not impossible) to find Liquinox here. The 3rd edition of the guide recommends laundry detergent as a substitute to Liquinox. I found out a fragance-free and clear product. However, I am not sure that the detergent components are adequate to the pre-clean. Are these ingredients adequate to the pre-clean mixture: water, sodium lauryl sulfate (common surfactant), decyl glucoside (non-ionic surfactant), sodium chlorate, sodium citrate, glycerin, citric acid (as a pH controller), 1,2-Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one, 2 metil 4 isotiazolin 3 ona, protease, amylase and mannanase (enzymes). From what I have learnt the glycerin would be irrelevant to the pre-clean. Does the sodium chlorate or citrate interfer in the pre-clean process? The enzymes will help the pre-clean process, right? Also, if I use the laundry detergent, should I use the same proportion rate that applies to Liquinox?
What is the complete name of the product? Please advise so I can check for the product SDS. If you easily purchase this laundry detergent ZERO Laundry Liquid | Fragrance Free | Ecover, this would be a good pre-cleaner. The Ecover ZERO NON BIO SENSITIVE LAUNDRY DETERGENT only has a limited number of ingredients and no enzymes - Ecover-Laundry-Liquid-Zero-Non-Bio-Laundry-Liquid-COSSH-Sheet.pdf. I just looked at this product for someone in the UK, but not sure you can purchase in Brazil. Otherwise, the glycerin is an enzyme stabilizer, the sodium chlorate is a bleaching agent, and the 1,2-Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one and 2 metil 4 isotiazolin 3 ona are preservatives. The sodium citrate is a pH stabilizer. Laundry/dish detergents can contain many ingredients. Do they interfere with the pre-clean process - they are there as supporting members of the products doing the cleaning. As far as proportions - general guidance is provided Chapter III III.AU/EU/UK Prepare the CLEANER Spray (or Wash) Bottles: which pretty much is dilute 10-ml/L.
Book discusses the differences between Triton X100 and Tergitol 15-S-9 in Chapter IX. They are both nonionic surfactants, but the in-use concentrations are very different. Tergitol 15-S-9 is a much higher performance and does not need as much - Triton X100 requires about 4X the concentration to get the same cleaning and depending on how you will be using the product - manual cleaning or machine cleaning that affects what concentration to use and note that Triton X100 foams more than Tergitol 15-S-9. However, Triton X100 and Tergitol 15-S-9 are simply nonionic surfactants and are mild cleaners, but they rinse well. If you have some hard to clean records you generally would want to use a more aggressive pre-cleaner followed by a rinse then final clean with Triton X100/Tergitol 15-S-9 followed by a rinse.
Hello! The name of the product is "Sabão Liquído sem Fragrância Sétima Geração" (available at: lava roupas sem fragrância - Google Shopping ) As far I have searched, Seventh Generation (the translation of the product mark) also exists in english-speaking countries.
I've been reading the 3rd Edition with great delight. I'm listening to an inherited RCA Red Seal 1974 recording of Jelly Roll Morton (ARL1-0504) for the first time, which under the Alonefire blacklight has all the swirls of Fig.10, said to indicate the use of recycled vinyl. I've cleaned it as best I can with my Loricraft, but the swirls remain unchanged. Yet the record is pretty damn quiet. The blacklight shows all sorts of detritus, which disappears after cleaning, but presumably it's daft to expect swirls of dissimilar vinyl to change after cleaning - do you agree, Neil? Or have you abolished the swirls?
The kaleidoscope-colored swirls are permanent 'in' the record and cannot be removed. Once cleaned they can play very quiet. However, as I wrote in the book, IV.5 Figure 10 is the worst record observed with staining from using repressed vinyl. Given the amount of staining, if there is any virgin material there is not much. However, after cleaning, the record played quiet, but with for want of better words - a hardness or edge to the music that is likely the consequence of the repressed material not having the same properties as virgin material. In the article Disc Phonograph Records by Dr. A. M. Max, RCA Engineer Magazine 1966-08-09 it’s noted that the record material deforms slightly under the pressure of the stylus. The deformation is not permanent and recovers after play. But if repressed material has stiffer properties, not as much ‘plastic’ deformation will occur and playback response will be different.
This should be the product you can buy Sabão Líquido Sétima Geração: fragrâncias naturais | Sétima Geração (setimageracao.com.br) and this is good product. It does not have sodium chlorate (bleach) which is good but does have some sodium chloride which is commonly used to adjust the product thickness. This is a very similar product sold US SDS-FM000017-00-10+13-Laundry-Detergent-FreeClr-EN-2021-04-21 (seventhgeneration.com); SDS-FM000017-00-10+13-Laundry-Detergent-FreeClr-ES-2021-04-21 (seventhgeneration.com) and the product should be about 25-30% active ingredients and proportioning 10-ml/L should be fine for pre-cleaning.
Is it possible that anyone point me to information on albums that were previously played wet? I do wonder whether some of the issues with records I run into that are horrendously noisy (to the point of distorting) may be so due to having spent their lives being wet played. I've done a little research but have found opposing perspectives. That is, some will insist wet-played records stay clean/quiet for subsequent dry playing while others insist wet played albums must be wet played going forward. I do wonder whether the methods have anything to do with it. If a product intended for wet playing was refilled with tap water and used repeatedly on the same album, I can imagine a substantial amount of surface noise if one were to attempt playing the record dry. Question #1. Neil, is it possible to make comparisons between the cleaning strength of the Liquinox mixture you recommend, and something like 409? I know 409 may not be appropriate for cleaning albums by the standards of many, but I have used it and am familiar with the degree to which it attacks the toughest groove concrete. I'm wondering whether the Liquinox would be even stronger or similar or any ideas? I'm not opposed to ordering the Liquinox but this is a hobby that sucks dollars out of my pockets at an alarming rate, I'll just stick to the 409 for these tough cases if the Liquinox isn't necessarily a stronger cleaner, and not worry too much about the damage I'm doing to free/$1 albums.
I haven't priced 409 lately, but I can make a 32 oz. bottle of Liquinox cleaner for about $.50 - and that includes the distilled water.
Sure but that first 32oz. bottle requires you purchase the Liquinox, whereas we always have 409 on-hand. For the occasional album that grades mint- visually but plays poor, I can get it clean with 2-4 cleanings with 409 at the sink separated by playing. If the Liquinox would reduce that to perhaps 1-3, I'd be a happy guy.
Phil, This is what is in Clorox 409 - CPID (whatsinproducts.com), not much as cleaner, it has surfactants, but its mostly anti-bacterial, it has no anionic surfactants which are the big hitter detergents but also high foamers. The EDTA in large concentrations can act as descaling agent, but at lower concentrations is mostly used to allow use with tap-freshwater water - Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid - Wikipedia. The MEA is a corrosion inhibitor. This is the SDS - Microsoft Word - Formula 409 Multi-Surface Cleaner JW 2015-11-09 (thecloroxcompany.com); it is mildly alkaline. The Liquinox is not anti-bacterial, it's blended to be strictly a broad-based cleaner, with anionic and nonionic surfactants and is formulated to allow working with tap-freshwater. Its 50% concentrated. The record store I buy used records does not clean the records - you get what you get. I buy the $3 and up records that have no deep scratches but most are pretty filthy. Two cycles of the Liquinox used as specified in the book has been good to clean-up all but maybe 10-15% which need the Citranox acid. But, the brush that I use and how I use the brush are just as important as the cleaner. The price of Alconox Liquinox at Amazon varies daily Amazon.com: Alconox - 1232-1 1232 Liquinox Anionic Critical Cleaning Liquid Detergent, 1 quart Bottle : Health & Household, but there are other sources such as Alconox 1232-1 $25.39 Detergent, 1 qt. | Zoro.com, not sure of the shipping. Otherwise, maybe @psulioninks can provide the detailed list of ingredients, detailed sources to purchase the various raw materials and a detailed blend procedure. Take Care, Neil PS: No knowledge of wet cleaning, but the risk to damaging the cartridge should give one pause. Most inexpensive cartridges use aluminum cantilevers, and I doubt they are anodized. Then any debris that does form mixes with the water to form sludge; and the same sludge will get up into the cartridge. As a one-time use with a DJ spherical diamond or titanium stylus cartridge for the purpose of recording some rare beat-up album to digital - maybe; but routine play - lets just say I am very skeptical.
Thank you Neil, I guess I'll give the Liquinox a shot. In terms of the wet playing my question was only in relation to cleaning records that had been wet played, not advocating the wet playing of vinyl.
