1. This day in history: January 12, 2002. 9:49 AM, California time. The Steve Hoffman Music Forums officially launched with this thread. Thank you for 20 years of music, discussion, and great memories! Join our "Thank You!" thread, and we'll see you in the forum!
    Dismiss Notice

Neil Antin's Aqueous Cleaning of LPs- 2nd Edition

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Bill Hart, Mar 2, 2021.

  1. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    @pacvr Neil, quick question. You’ve been super helpful in the degritter thread, and you’ve been helping me continue to fine tune and tweak my process. I just realized that I’m using cold tap water for my rinse - by changing to warm water, how impactful will that be on the effectiveness of rinsing off the tergitol?
     
  2. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Warm water helps, it will improve the rinse and worthwhile doing since it should be so easy, and the book does say in Chapter 5 the manual process to use "lukewarm to warm tap water".

    Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving,
    Neil
     
    recstar24 likes this.
  3. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    Clearly I’m a very dense reader lol. Thanks Neil and hope your thanksgiving was great!
     
    pacvr likes this.
  4. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    Hi Neil @pacvr

    A while back you had recommended I try using the alconox liquinox as a pre clean step according to your manual for used records/records that need something more robust then just tergitol. At the time, i didn’t follow up on that advice as I primarily buy newer reissues, but one of my locals has been getting some great used stuff and I’ve been picking up more of it. I got a Lennon Imagine OG that looked great - I ran it through my tergitol based manual process with rinse and final degritter, but it played with a pretty good amount of static and tics/tacs.

    I got some of that alconox from Amazon recently, made a 1% solution with DIW and ran the Lennon through it as a pre clean, rinse, followed by tergitol, rinse/DIW rinse, PVA sponge dry then run through with Degritter (changed my tank just to DIW from before).

    Wow, stuff works man lol. The Lennon plays so much quieter. I’m sold! And apparently the alconox makes a great cleaner for around the house stuff - kitchen countertops, food spills and stains, should come in handy.
     
    pacvr likes this.
  5. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Let me confirm you bought the liquid - techbull_liquinox.pdf (alconox.com). Otherwise, if you mix about 2.5% and add some bleach it makes an excellent deck cleaner.

    For others reading - Liquinox easily bought in 1-quart container from various sellers. Be careful with Amazon, their prices are changing hourly but here is the link - Amazon.com: Alconox - 1232-1 1232 Liquinox Anionic Critical Cleaning Liquid Detergent, 1 quart Bottle : Health & Household. The 1232-1 is a designation for 1-quart size.

    Neil
     
  6. psulioninks

    psulioninks Forum Resident

    Location:
    KC Chiefs Kingdom
    pacvr and recstar24 like this.
  7. Jenn

    Jenn Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Neil,

    May I please ask your opinion if the cloth below would be acceptable to lay the record down on while patting with the sponge ?
    Kinetronics does not have a 13x13 inch cloth unless you buy the kit, and the cloth is different than their Tiger cloth.
    ilford antistaticum anti-static cloth - 13 x 13
     
  8. The Curator

    The Curator Forum Resident

    145 pages on cleaning records. Yes, this is where I'm meant to be!
     
    Budley likes this.
  9. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    Yup - liquinox. I purchased last week at $10 cheaper then what it just boosted up to
     
    pacvr likes this.
  10. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    That is what I have. I don’t use it often though. Please check back on Neil’s previous posts to me, as he already chimed in with excellent comments regarding the above.
     
    pacvr likes this.
  11. Jenn

    Jenn Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Thanks recstar24. Sorry about that Neil... missed that. Cotton is not ideal with the Ilford.
    I can't find a Kinetronics equivalent Anti-Static cloth large enough to place the entire record on it and that is more absorbant.

    I wish the timeout for editing was longer in this forum.
     
  12. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Jenn,

    Why are you trying to place the record on the Tiger Cloth? How do you plan on using it?

    Recall what I wrote;

    "V.Step.11 Second Dry: Using the Kinetronics™ Tiger anti-static cloth, with very little pressure, final dry the record in a circular motion after which there should be very little moisture left and the surface will be free of static charge. Then, away from the sink, give the record a good two (2) shakes to dislodge moisture that is under the edges of VinylStack™ Vinyl ‘1’ Stack Record Label Protector. Wipe away any visible drops. This will minimize wetting the label when the record label protector is removed."

    I also state on the next page (37) in the information note:

    "The Kinetronics™ Tiger anti-static cloth is mostly lint-free, but the cloth edges are not finished or sealed, so some lint may be produced during use. Avoid exposing the cloth edges to the record. Otherwise, lint from the Kinetronics™ Tiger anti-static cloth is visible in normal lighting and is easily removed by lightly brushing the record with the cloth. When using the Kinetronics™ Tiger anti-static cloth to remove lint, periodically shaking the cloth during use (away from the record) will minimize transferring lint and particles from the cloth onto the record.".

    The Tiger Cloth has conductive threads and the fabric is very dense/soft which allows it grab/pick up lint, but it does not hang-on to the lint/particles; so, a quick shake is all it takes to dislodge the particles - easy to keep clean. Otherwise, the PVA sponge removes most of the water, and the Tiger Cloth is then used to remove/spread-out what is left while not creating any static. The Tiger Cloth is not very absorbent. I want a very thin film of water left on the record so I do not create static. My records cleaned this summer with 50% humidity were dry in 5-6-minutes. With winter low humidity, they are dry in just a few minutes.

    The drying process I use is the best I have figured out that is practical (for me). I researched "vacuum drying" and identified sources for all the necessary components - feasible, but it was not practical. I researched using a HEPA air filtered box with high pressure fan and low wattage silicone heaters. Again, feasible but not practical. They all were complicated, would take up too much space and take too much time.

    Although my process is manual and has many steps, they all flow naturally and quickly - all very time efficient. I generally clean a batch of about 6-records; spend about 8-min/record; of that about 1-min drying it, and onto the drying rack it goes. After cleaning all records, all the records are dry; and each record gets a few swipes with the Tiger Cloth to remove lint that has fallen from the air, and into a new anti-stat sleeve it goes. I am good for total cleaning, drying, sleeving 6 records in about 1-hr.

    Drying the record(s) after wet cleaning is a challenge, and maybe you just need to experiment and figure out what works best for you within your budget. The ILFORD which is a cotton cloth impregnated with an anti-static 'ingredient' is not something I would use, but for how you may use it may work for you.
    Good Luck,

    Neil
     
    Budley and recstar24 like this.
  13. Jenn

    Jenn Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Neil,

    I am following your instuctions with great success. My inquiry was in hopes of finding a replacement for the 'Spin-Clean' cloth that I place the record face down on while patting dry with the sponge, non cotton, with the same anti static abilities as the Tiger cloth, at least 13"x13", and that doesn't shed. I couldn't find such a cloth that's what prompted me to ask if you know of a cloth like that.

    Cheers.
     
  14. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Jenn,

    Now that I understand what you are asking, there is none that I am aware of that you can buy ready to use. Kinetronic makes the Panther Cloth that likely is more absorbent than the Tiger Cloth - Anti-Static (Tiger Cloth) (unitedmfrs.com) but is still only 10"x18".

    However, if you are handy, you could fashion a cloth-surface from Burlington C3 anti-static fabric. It's not absorbent but it is anti-static and is used in electronics industry cleanrooms (and the NASA blue cleanroom clothing). You can buy a large piece - White Antistatic Static Dissipative ESD C3 Fabric Water Repellent 60" BTY | eBay, its cheap. I bought a piece play with for a record mat - fabric is too thin and the edges fray very easily. But for your application you could easily just fold into a thicker cloth and then heat-seal the seams that would on the bottom - Amazon.com: 2 Pack Fabric Fusing Tape Adhesive Hem Tape Iron-on Tape Hemming Tape Seam Tape for Pants Hem Tape No Sew No Iron Each 27 Yards (White, 3/4 Inch) : Arts, Crafts & Sewing.

    Neil
     
    Jenn likes this.
  15. psulioninks

    psulioninks Forum Resident

    Location:
    KC Chiefs Kingdom
    @pacvr Hey Neil, would something like The Absorber (a synthetic variation of the leather chamois) work for @Jenn2021 for placing her records on? I don't believe they transfer any particles and would actually assist in drying the records after washing. I have used these for car care (drying after washing) and they work very well.
     
    Jenn likes this.
  16. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    It may. The claim of lint-free can be dubious, and color fastness can also be an issue. Many of these are essentially PVA sponge type material. The same company that sells the PVA sponge sells a large PVA towel - The Sammy Cool N Dry Sport Shammy and Body Rag Towels (super-cool-products.com) and its available in white. But while the PVA sponge holds moisture easily to store wet without drying and with limited but exposed surface area is not as susceptible to bacteria, I am not sure with the towel - Microsoft Word - Sport_Towel_Instructions (super-cool-products.com). The towel is a large surface area and when folded can provide a breeding ground for bacteria, and if it dries which is easier, now you have to resoften and if using DIW, that can be a bit cumbersome. It may work, just not sure of the day-to-day practicality.

    Neil
     
  17. Budley

    Budley Forum Resident

    Location:
    TX, USA
    Would a "car detailing" towel be adequate for what @Jenn2021 needs? I'd defer to Neil's opinion, of course, but it got me thinking. My wife has been using the same "waffle weave" microfiber drying towels on her car every week for over a 2 years. Despite continuous use and regular washing, (sans fabric softener), They're still soft and in great shape.
     
    Jenn likes this.
  18. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Car detailing towels are generally microfiber, and they come in different weights/naps - Microfiber by Tasks - Knowledge Base (microfiberdirect.com) and they are very robust. It's a matter of lint-free. Lint-free can mean different things for different applications. For a record where lint-free is fibers less than 25 microns, a car could be <100 microns. So, what is good for car, could be a disaster for a record. Before switching to the PVA sponge, I was drying with a 'lint-free' medium-nap microfiber towel - it was not lint-free.

    Neil
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2021
    recstar24 and Budley like this.
  19. Budley

    Budley Forum Resident

    Location:
    TX, USA
    Thanks for the response, Neil. Your experience and scrutiny is greatly appreciated.
     
    recstar24 likes this.
  20. Joe Spivey

    Joe Spivey Your friendly neighborhood Spivey-Man

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Thank you for your contribution on this subject @pacvr . I've been manual cleaning records for awhile now. I've tweaked my routine based on discussions here. I'm now using Liquinox and Citranox and like the results. Especially the Citranox soak which has really cleaned up a recent basement find from my father-in-law and an especially noisy new release.

    I also appreciate the discussion regarding the tools you use, too. I've now moved on to using the Record Dr brush and PVA sponge which I think are great recommendations. I've been using the same GrooveMaster label protector for some time as well.

    I picked up these spray bottles recently from Amazon to try out. (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08SMCWJL5?ref=ppx_yo2_dt_b_product_details&th=1). Nice 300ml size with a fine mist/spray. I little pricey but I find them much better than the large spray bottles from Home Depot I had been using. And they are nice for my indoor plants too!

    I've paired this updated brush cleaning process along with a new ultrasonic cleaning machine when the situation calls for it.
     
    Budley, pacvr and recstar24 like this.
  21. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Thank-you for the feedback. Similar to yourself, I have had good luck with the Citranox soak on some noisy records; I just wish it didn't take 30 min - what we will not do for the love of music :laugh:. However, once you realize just how quiet and revealing the records can be, it becomes addictive. Although once I have gone to the Citranox soak, if the record is still not to my liking, I declare uncle and stop.

    Thanks for the spray bottle tip.

    Take Care,
    Neil
     
    Tommyboy, recstar24 and Joe Spivey like this.
  22. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    Your process basically mirrors mine down to the tee! Weird to be fellow chicagoans as well lol. I was using an amazon knock off label protectors but when I realized the groovmaster label option was only a few bucks more then i paid amazon, I ordered one from ebay and gladly returned the amazon one. The groovmaster came in Monday and the quality improvement and easier ability to hold, grasp, and rotate is worth it.

    Not sure if you noticed the PVA sponge people are local to us in Elmhurst!

    I follow our manual process with a degritter to finish. My nitty gritty vacuum RCM is at nitty gritty central, waiting to be serviced/repaired. When it does, I might throw it in after the manual process and before the degritter to see if that vacuum step offers any extra benefit.
     
    Joe Spivey and pacvr like this.
  23. Tapp

    Tapp Active Member

    Location:
    MS
    Neil, Thanks so much for your expertise on cleaning records! I have implemented the cleaning process with alconox and tergitol. I recently got some citranox and will implement. I am cleaning per your instructions with the disc doctor brush and it's working really nice! My rinse/dry process is a little different. I am using a squeeky clean platter with a small wet/dry vac as a simple vacuum system. When I complete the tergitol step and rinse with tap water in the sink, I shake off excess water and place the record on the squeeky clean lazy susan platter. I then use a spray bottle rinse solution with distilled water and 10% (91 IPA). I spray once and vacuum. I spray a second rinse and vacuum. Each side gets this and record goes to drying rack. I have had good success with this process.

    A question though....I have some new records that have pops and was wondering if Citranox may clear this up? I was under the impression that Citranox was primarily for used records that have deposits that the regular detergents will not dissolve/clear. I wasn't aware that new vinyl could have these issues??
     
  24. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    First - be careful with 10% of 91% IPA and vacuum machines. 10% of 91% IPA (in water) = 9% has a flashpoint of about 110F which is getting very close to being classified as 'flammable" by the NFPA; see Figure 31 of the book. For liability reasons I will not recommend more than 2.5%, but if you review Figures 31, 32 & 33 you may see where a concentration less than 9% could be a good compromise for flammability, boil point (which helps drying) and surface tension (which is of limited benefit - you are just diluting/removing the tap-water).

    Citranox is an acid cleaner. Its use in the process - after Liquinox and before Tergitol - is to remove/dissolve very fine particles that the Liquinox can miss. In some ways it's the cheap alternative to what ultrasonics can do. Used records benefit the most but 'some' new records can benefit. Ambient air naturally contains very fine aerosols made up of various types of mineral salts and if present these can deposit during pressing & handling. So, for me, to keep it simple, I use just one basic process for all records

    -tap-water rinse,
    -Liquinox 1%,
    -tap-water/brush rinse,
    -Citranox 1.5%,
    -tap-water/brush rinse, (the Citranox needs a good rinse, it does not rinse as easily as Liquinox)
    -Tergitol 0.1%,
    -tap-water/brush rinse
    -DIW spray rinse
    -dry

    To those reading - let me emphasize - do not use Citranox with a vacuum-RCM. There is the corrosion risk to the machine and there is not enough rinse water used to fully remove and dried residue from the vacuum removal will be very tenacious and difficult to get off the record. Use of Citranox is for manual cleaning where there is lots of rinse water to remove. What little may be left is fully removed by the Tergitol step noting that in the manual process, once the process starts, the record (both sides) remains wet throughout the process until the very last drying step.

    Neil
     
  25. Tapp

    Tapp Active Member

    Location:
    MS
    Thanks, I'll try it then on some noisy new records. For most of my new records the 2 cleaners have worked great.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine