Phil, for what it is worth, when I visited the Library's intake center in Culpeper, they had cleaned acetates that were being digitized; one was a flat transfer, another was EQ'd and probably "cleaned up" digitally. I know they did conventional cleaning of these discs.
Thanks, Bill, those look impressively clean from a photographic as well as as digital perspective for certain. I'm still trying to figure out what was done to these most challenging records I run across. They seem to have so much in common with one another in how they react to various approaches I've used, I'm beginning to wonder if they all belong to the same subset, like vinyl that was repeatedly played wet by someone using their own concoction, using tap instead of distilled water. I figure if I can figure out the common trait, I can figure out the best way to clean them. But I could be fooling myself.
I spent a little time thinking about identifying what contaminants are on a record to better determine how to clean, but at least for me, a fool's errand. I just decided, in the case of "challenged" records, to do a pre-clean to eliminate the surface crap and then do a deep clean using a commercial fluid, AIVS #15, which requires agitation. Neil has pointed out that enzyme cleaning is more for organic contamination, and what we are dealing with isn't that, I think. But still, after that a pure water rinse, then I go into the ultrasonic. I think most of this can be accomplished using manual cleaning. Take a look at Neil's acid wash step, which he added in the 3d Edition as a substitute for ultrasonic cleaning. FWIW, if somebody wet played a record and didn't use some sort of demineralized water (distilled, R/0, D/I or some process), there would be mineral content left on the record once it dries. This is what it can look like in the wild: I've cleaned records that looked worse, and now play fine. Sometimes, it is about multiple methods, and also about multiple cleanings. At a certain point, you'll decide the record is unsalvageable. The problem, of course, is that we rarely know the provenance and handling history of old records. Bill
@Phil Thien The old DISCWASHER™ 1976 U.S. Patent 3,951,84 Phonograph Record Cleaning Composition is a biocide, nonionic surfactant, propylene glycol, alcohol and water solution. Think about this, in years past people 'brushed' their records every play with this stuff. Over years of play, layer upon layer of biocide, surfactant and polyglycol residue builds up. Over time this is going to form sludge (close to a grease type soil) that will not be easy to remove. If the residue was just minerals, distilled white vinegar would remove it. But, if its layers of DISCWASHER - and its a grease type soil, the acid will not touch it. In corroded metal cleaning, the 1st step is always degreaser and then the acid is applied to remove the corrosion. The Citranox does have anionic and non-ionic surfactants, but not at the same concentration as the Liquinox. The Citranox is intended to remove thin oil type films; it does not have the same cleaning/foaming power that the Liquinox has. FYI - this grease type sludge from the older surfactants that are not bio-based, are likely to be immune to enzymes that target bio-based organics such as body fluids. Enzymes are really good for clothing because fabric is a very porous intricate/lattice like structure; very tough to clean. Take care, Neil
@pacvr I think there was some confusion to my post... I am not "making" a version of Liquinox...I was simply stating what it cost me to blend a 32 oz. solution with distilled water from the Liquinox concentrate after purchasing a one quart bottle of it.
Liqinox Citranox (for a older records and new LPs that are filthy) Tergitol Combine them with ultrasonics and it works like a charm
Bill, thank you so very much. Appreciate well reasoned, thorough, scientific, research based articles like this one. This is what this hobby needs more of. The SHF at it's best. Should be stickied.
My pleasure, particularly when somebody like Neil is doing the heavy lifting. I'm always interested in expanding my horizons rather than simply repeating common wisdom.
They sell this brand in germany, but with a different list of ingredients: Flüssig-Waschmittel ZERO - Ecover DE Would this be good to use as well?
to Ecover has wide range of ZERO products. The product you referenced has five different enzymes; enzymes are proteins. Enzyme cleaners can be very effective, but they need to soak to be effective. Some people can have allergic reactions to enzyme products (because of the proteins) so it you purchase and use, wear gloves when cleaning and if you apply to the record by using a spray bottle, if you have any beathing irritation stop use. Alternately, this product is very similar but without the enzymes - Woll- und Feinwaschmittel ZERO - Ecover DE and would be much closer to what I originally recommended.
I found a safety datasheet: https://cdn.bueromarkt-ag.de/downloads/produktdatenblaetter/418293.pdf Could you tell me how much of it one should use? I've been diluting 4ml in 200ml DIW until now. Is that too much?
The safety datasheet shows it to be about 25% active ingredients, so 4-ml/200-ml will give you about 0.5% which is right where you want to be for pre-cleaning. You did fine. How is it working?
Ha, that's great. It's working well for me. I rinse aftere using it, then use a final cleaner (Ilfotol and DIW) and rinse again (using a different brush), all on a RCM (Pro-Ject VC-S2). The DIW in the final rinse step is not wetting the record well. I have to press it into the grooves with the brush, so I guess this process is removing the cleaning agents well enough. I rarely do a before/after comparison, but on the last record I checked it made a significant difference. I have no idea how the results compare, though, as the only other cleaner I used was the Pro-Ject Wash It that came with the RCM and I didn't use it long enough to get a feel for what it can do. Some records don't clean up as nicely as others. Not sure if the clicks and pops are permanent groove damage or if a different cleaner – or repeated cleaning – would improve things. Some visible residue on the record surface is difficult to remove with this process, but I guess that's normal. And I haven't tried the acid wash yet. Some records come out perfectly quiet, so I don't think my current process is causing any new issues.
The one problem with the Zero detergent is that its 10% ethanol and 10% surfactants. The Liquinox is 50% surfactant and no alcohol. With a dilution of 4ml/200ml, the dilution ratio you are using is 50:1, so in use diluted, the ethanol is (10%/50) = 0.2% and the surfactants are the same 0.2%. At 0.2%, the ethanol is not doing much, and at 0.2% the surfactants (especially the anionics) may not be at the optimum concentration. So, to get this in a better concentration for pre-cleaning, increase the concentration 2X, so use 8-ml/200-ml for a 25:1 dilution. That will yield 0.4% ethanol and 0.4% surfactants. This is perfectly safe and should provide better detergency. Try it out and let me know. PS/Some records have physical groove defects that no amount of cleaning will ever fix - the book PACVR Chapter IV Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press has a list of just some the reasons.
I just tried that on a record that looks much better than it sounds, but there was no significant improvement. The crackles and pops are still louder than the music. I should try it on a couple more records, though. I only buy used records, so groove damage is something I have to expect. Would it be possible replace Liquinox with Alconox powder? I found a dealer in Germany who sells 15g packets. EDIT: I just saw you already answered that a couple of pages ago. Maybe I should order a bottle of Liquinox from the US..
As someone who has dozens of old LPs with some degree of DW contamination, is there any hope of stripping the gunk out of the grooves short of following the process set forth in the cleaning guide? I'm hopeful that ultrasonic will not be part of the answer.
You can buy Liquinox from the UK - Alconox Liquinox 1232-1 Critical Cleaning Liquid Detergent; 1 QT Bottle from Cole-Parmer United Kingdom (coleparmer.co.uk). But, based on what you are saying, I would be surprised if the Liquinox does a miracle. Buy used records is always a bit of a roll of the dice. However, try the acid. Just buy Distilled White Vinegar (5% acidity) from your local grocery/produce store (the cheap clear vinegar) and you use with no dilution but add about 2-ml of the Ilfotol to each liter of acid so the acid will 'wet' the record and get into groove.
The cleaning guide Chapters II, III and V detail a manual process that uses a record label protector and a sequence of chemistry that will cut-through and clean pretty much anything except of dried glue and paint. But it's a manual process, and some people are OK with others are not. And for really dirty records you need some form of pre-clean to get the heavy junk/grit out even before going to ultrasonic which has its limitations.
Cole-Parmer is charging €50 for shipping. Ordering from the US would probably be a little cheaper, even considering the taxes that come on top. I'll get some record label protectors for the acid wash..
€50 for shipping - that's crazy. Check this site (they are also a big international lab supplier) to see what they may charge for shipping Liquinox® phosphatfreier Flüssigreiniger 947 mL packs | Sigma-Aldrich (sigmaaldrich.com) Otherwise, you can easily purchase a record label protector for manual cleaning with acid - Amazon.de : vinyl record label protector. While you are at Amazon.de, you may want to buy Polysorbate 20 Polysorbate 20 (Solubilser) - 500g : Amazon.de: Health & Personal Care which is a concentrated nonionic surfactant that for the acid you would 5-drops/500-ml, and for final cleaning you would add 1-ml/L. The Polysorbate 20 (which is addressed in the PACVR 3rd Ed) would replace the Ilfotol. And, if you do not have the Kinetronics Tiger Cloth - its good to have one - Kinetronics Anti-static cloth ASC: Amazon.de: Home & Kitchen. Lots uses, book addresses many. This concludes my action as your personal shopper - LOL.
I already did that. It's the same problem They take €40 for shipping and handling. Shipping from the US is just under €23 Are there any advantages in using Polysorbate 20 over Ilfotol? I bought one months ago for drying the area around the label. With the original velvet strips, the rcm couldn't get it dry enough and I sometimes ended up with wet labels. Thank you. I also found the shopping lists in your book very helpful. You may want to consider adding affiliate links..
