I do recommend the Squeaky Clean for those who want a simple vacuum system that works really well and costs much less.
To those reading, there are two commercially sold vacuum-RCM that are relatively low-cost and are based on using (purchase separately) an external wet-vacuum cleaner. As @Tapp addresses - the Squeak Clean: Squeaky Clean Vinyl Record Care and then the VinylBug: VinylBug Vinyl Record Vacuum Cleaning Machine. The Squeak Clean is closer to traditional vacuum-RCM like a VPI since it has a platter that the record sits on. If you are scrubbing a record, the platter is beneficial since one can bear-down if they wish. The Squeaky Clean has the vacuum pickup above the record which is the preferred location - you can wash/rinse the record and then immediately vacuum. Note - the video showing the use of flammable 25% IPA right next to the electric shop-vac is not the safest thing to do. The VinylBug does not have a platter - the record surface is suspended, but the vacuum pickup is above the record, which is the preferred location, you can wash/rinse the record and then immediately vacuum. If you are manually cleaning and then only going to do a light-rinse/vacuum dry, the VinylBug is likely the better device since there is no platter to transfer debris or be kept clean. The above is provided for info only, and for full disclosure, I use neither of these devices. As I will always say, there are many ways to clean a record, ultimately the best one is the one best for you. Neil
If you are addressing the 2nd Ed Vinyl Record Manual Cleaning Process (thevinylpress.com) which added 60-pages to the 1st Ed, then then the document Forward summarizes the changes for each Chapter. Otherwise, the 2nd Ed has a lot of new info. One error, VI.9.2.a, change "electron" to "ion" Otherwise, since the 2nd Ed, the manual procedure now does an acid-wash with Alconox Citranox after the Liquinox pre-clean, and before the Tergitol 15-S-9 final clean. The details are addressed in these posts: Neil Antin's Aqueous Cleaning of LPs- 2nd Edition Neil Antin's Aqueous Cleaning of LPs- 2nd Edition Neil
Hello Neil, I while back you mentioned you were working on a newer procedure and to stay tuned. Was the Acid-Treatment the procedure, or is there a work in progress ? Thank you.
Hi Jenn, This is not the acid wash which is done; this is a work in progress and is not associated with the cleaning procedure. I am using a new method that is neither a brush nor a cloth to remove incidental lint/particles before play - not perfect - but better than the Kinetronics Tiger Cloth and also appears to be able to neutralize static. It's intended for records that have been wet cleaned. The function is so contrary to conventional wisdom, that it will take a bit to explain, and I will probably wait to detail it until the 3rd Ed of the book. I have begun writing the 3rd Ed of the book and it will be included along with the acid clean procedure and a number of other changes. I am hoping to get the 3rd Ed out by end of January-2022. Take Care & Thanks for the Interest, Neil
I have begun to incorporate principals from your publication into my record cleaning routine. While completing the final rinse of several discs recently, I observed that, on a few of them, the water beaded up and ran off almost completely. But on some others, the water didn't bead up at all, and laid on the surface of the vinyl in a thin, almost uniform sheet. One particular record beaded on one side but not the other. Does this lack of beading indicate that the rinse was not complete, or perhaps another issue?
If the rinse is with a DIW spray, then absence of beading is generally evidence that there is a surfactant residue on the surface. Part of the surfactant is water loving and the other part is oil loving. The oil loving part wants to stick to the record leaving the water loving part essentially sticking up. So, when water is applied, the water loving part of the surfactant absorbs/grabs the water causing the water to 'wet/sheet' across the record. Some surfactant residues (such as anti-static sprays) can be very tenacious, and multiple pre-clean steps (depending on the chemistry of the pre-cleaner and how applied) may be required. If the final DIW rinse is with a steady stream of water, and the record is positioned so that gravity assists with rinsing, you may not see the beading, but when you stop rinsing you should see the water run off the record quickly as the water follows the grooves. A uniform sheet of water is evidence that there is still some residue on the record. Neil
I have experienced the same thin non-beading, at 1st and subsequent tap water rinses. I found that if the water is too hot, a temporay slight warping occurs. This is visible if I view a cross section of the record immediately after removing from the 'too hot' tap rinse. The record apparently returns to it's original shape, but one side of the record will exhibit the thin, almost uniform sheeting. When the record cools and returns to it's shape and when I turn down the temperature, there is no 'sheeting'. This makes me wonder now if I've permamently warped the record, it appears to be OK after cool down. Cheers
If you review the book Figure 14 you will see that the tap-water rinse will wet/sheet-across the record. This occurs because the solid stream of water dropping from the faucet can develop enough 'shear-force' to overcome the record inherently low surface tension. Applying too-hot water enough to cause the record to 'temporarily' warp should not cause permanent damage if it returns to its original shape when it cools. However, when you heat the record enough that it does warp - the record has softened; and you could damage during cleaning depending on the brush and technique you apply. For the record to soften, it needs to be heated to >50C/122F, and that is well above warm. Recalling that in the book for every rinse it does specify "Using lukewarm to warm tap water...". The vinyl record is remarkably robust, and pretty immune to most aqueous based cleaning products that are not dangerous and used with any reasonable care. But the two environmental factors that can degrade the vinyl record are sunlight (intense UV) and heat. Once the record is over about 55C (131F) it begins to release hydrogen chloride gas. The record has stabilizers to scavenge the gas during the heated pressing process and there will be some stabilizer reserve left. But once the stabilizer is exhausted the surface will harden, embrittle and micro-cracks form. At this point, the record does not stand a chance against that stylus. I suspect that records that contain repressed material are more susceptible to heat degradation because there may not have as much stabilizer reserve. Neil
I knew it was above lukewarm and It was not warm enough to make me withdraw my hand from the heat but It didn't strike me it would be enough to soften the grooves to cause possible damage in the brushing process. Now I'm really worried. It warped under the tap, when I removed, sprayed and brushed the record quickly returns to shape and has returned before brushing. If the brushing technique is per your instructions, are there any 'typical' symptoms of groove deformation apparent in the sound to identify damage ? Also, would you know of a preferred digital water temperature meter that reads quickly ? Thank you.
From what you state, it does not sound as if the record is warping from heat, it may be bending from the weight of the water. You will see this with some very thin records. Do you see the same 'bending' with a 180-gram record? Otherwise, if you want, you can purchase a simple digital thermometer -Waterproof Digital Thermometer | 9842FDA | TAYLOR Food Service – Taylor USA. They are convenient to have anyway and are widely available <$20. Measure the water temp based on what you consider warm which then 'calibrates' your sense of temperature with gloves. Otherwise, if you are using the Record Dr brush, which is nylon and softens in water, and will not deeply penetrate the groove - no damage. For DoD 'robust' processes are developed to some handle human error. So, the PACVR manual cleaning process which is based on DoD cleaning processes follows that same methodology. Its robust; a single error is not going to result in damage to the record. Take Care, Neil
Hi Neil. I understand what you are saying about different record weights, however the ~ 20 records I cleaned bent when I turned up the heat to (unknown). Do I understand your educated guess of probably 'not' damage is because I am using the Record Dr brush and the unknown temperature (if > 120 F) would be too hot for me to hold my hand under, therefore not hot enough to cause groove distortion while using the brush ? Thank you for the link for the thermometer, I was just about to order: Etekcity Infrared Thermometer 774 (Not for Human) Temperature Gun Non-Contact Digital Laser Thermometer-58℉~ 716℉ (-50℃ ~ 380℃) Blue because the temperature of the water may be different than the temperature of the surface of the record. Best 2 U.
Jenn, If you were only using the Record Dr brush for cleaning, you did not damage the groove - the book: XII.4 The Record Doctor™ Clean Sweep Brush with clusters of 0.05 milli-meter (0.002”) wide Nylon bristles (260,000 bristles total) or the OSAGE™ Nylon record brush with 0.004” wide Nylon bristles should not deeply penetrate the record groove. Additionally, Nylon absorbs water and softens during use (but returns to original properties once dry). Furthermore, the bristle width is near equal to the top width of the record groove and when combined with the low surface tension of both the Alconox™ Liquinox™ and Dow™ Tergitol™ cleaning solutions should form a hydraulic wedge to force the cleaner deep into the groove. The back-and-forth brushing action should then develop the fluid agitation (a combination of shear force & cavitation) necessary to deeply scrub/clean/flush the groove. But, since a new Record Doctor™ Clean Sweep Brush (or OSAGE™ brush) does not deeply penetrate the groove, there should be very little risk of record harm. Additionally, use of the Nylon brush ‘wet’ mitigates developing static that could occur if used ‘dry’ because of the strong triboelectric effect (recall Figure 25) that would occur between the positively charged Nylon and the negatively charged record. WRT to temp, the record will be less than or equal to the temp of the water - you do not need to over-think this. Keep it simple. Neil
Here you go, chew on this: Tribo-electric charge affinity. Instead of trying to avoid static - use static. The static voltage on the material is only part of the property and the voltage can increase to maximum at which point it dissipates to air. The triboelectric series is based on charge affinity which is nano coulombs transferred charge per joule of friction energy. One of the basics of triboelectric charge is the difference in the two insulating materials. You do not need to have positive and negative materials; both can be negative so long as there is a big enough difference in the charge affinity. So, find the right material (Teflon) in the right configuration, geometry and mechanical properties (a simple Teflon rod), and if its charge affinity can be raised much higher (rub the Teflon with nylon felt), then the record, then it should (and does) attract any surface particles or static that is at a lower level. So, if you want to try this: buy: -Amazon.com: Sur-Seal PTFE-0.50x12-RD PTFE Teflon Rod, 1/2" Diameter x 12" : Industrial & Scientific. Take a nail file and round off the sharp cut-edge of one end. -Wrap 4.5" with self-sealing silicone tape: Amazon.com: Bond It F4 Emergency Self-Fusing Silicone Tape, Repair Plumbing Pipe & Radiator Hose Leak, Electrical Insulation, Permanent Bonding, Waterproof, 1" x 36' x 20mil, Black : Everything Else. You can buy cheaper self-sealing silicone tape from off-shore. Self-sealing silicone tape sticks only to itself and insulates you from the rod and provides a secure grip of the rod. -You need the Kinetronics Tiger Cloth - Kinetronics KSASC Anti-Static MicroFiber Tiger Cloth KSASC - Adorama to wipe the Teflon rod after use to get the particle off. Then shake the Tiger Cloth to displace the lint/particles - the cloth being anti-static will not hold on lint/particles. Put the record on the platter. Rub the Teflon rod with the nylon cloth to charge up the rod - you will hear the static forming. You want a nylon (or wool) cloth with some nap. Start the platter. Place Teflon rod crosswise right-to-left at about a 45-60deg angle on the record. Do Not Press Down, just let the weight of the rod sit on the record, and while the record is spinning rotate the Teflon rod - I am rotating counterclockwise. The Teflon rod is in contact with the record for 3-5 sec. When the Teflon rod first contacts the record you may hear a static-type crackle, there is no evidence that it's charging the record. The Teflon rod round and is softer than the record so I see no issue with damage to the record. Take the Tiger Cloth and tightly wipe down the Teflon rod to remove the particles it picked up from the record. This will only partly remove the charge that is on the rod, making it easier to recharge. If you wash/wet the Teflon rod. all charge will be removed, and it will just a bit more effort to recharge with the nylon cloth. Yes, it counter intuitive, it's not snake oil, there is some science. But it's not perfect. The Teflon rod is intended for records that have been deep wet cleaned and is intended to remove incidental lint/particle that deposit as part of normal record play. The 'anti-static' capacity is something that was not expected, and I will have to see what happens when the background humidity drops really low. Otherwise, I tend not to have any big static issues, but I notice that after play (and using the rod) some records slide into/out-of the HDPE (so called anti-static) sleeve easier, which implies that is may have reduced some low-level static. Note that the Teflon rod may be specific to my setup with grounded 2" thick AL platter and DIY ESD mat (details book Chapter VI). Good Luck, please no death by 1000 questions (further details, photos will be in the book). Neil
Whew... calming news, thank you Neil. I've made changes from your help... a) I now 'only' use the Record Doctor brush b) I only use slightly more than lukewarm water c) Nitrile only gloves d) Switched to non O-ring nitrile label protector: WEWU ROUNDS LP Vinyl Record Label Saver e) Faster, shorter scrubbing motions f) No respirator, increased the ventilation g) Deceased drying time to 30 minutes Thank you, take care.
The Triboelectric Series - AlphaLab, Inc (alphalabinc.com) Triboelectric Effect of Polytetrafluoroethylene Fibers to Improve the Filtration Performance of Air-Purified Materials (sagepub.com) Note that I can see the lint/particles removed with the 10W UV light I use. Otherwise, static on a record exists in islands, it's not uniform, that was measure 50 yrs ago.
Hello Neil. 1. Regarding: Drying Rack Are you still using the same drying rack as in Version 2 edition ? I'm asking because I've tried a variety of drying racks but can't find one that has a long enough vertical support (> 4.5") so it will only rest on the label and not the vinyl. I looked at your drying rack and it appears that the supports rest on the vinyl not the label. By any chance have you had experience with something like this ?... Vinyl Record Storage Holder Stand cleaning device drying rack Display 2. Regarding: Record Clamp If I will not be pursuing the custom made ESD with record clamp (Thanks for the link), is a record clamp advantageous over a weight ? I was wondering because I bought a new Bob Marley Hits Edition and it is off center. Thank you.
Jenn, Yes, I am still using the same drying rack pictured in the 2nd Edition - Amazon.com: OXO Good Grips Compact Dish Rack : Home & Kitchen. It works of me and I have tried no other. A reflex record clamp has the benefit of being able to flatten a slightly warped record - the Record Dr reflex clamp is a knock-off of the JA Michell, see videos here JA Michell Record Clamp Review & Demonstration - YouTube. A weighted record clamp cannot do this. Neil
Hi Neil. May you please clarify my understanding on determining weather or not an acid-soak will have benefit ? I have a 1976 Beatles Magical Mystery Tour that I have done the 3 step cleaning process twice. I am unsure how to correctly assess weather or not an acid-soak might benefit or be a waste of time. I notice; a) No fluorescing particles b) Quiet passages exist during quiet passages c) Low output volume despite turning up the volume the same loudness as other records I've played d) Very low bass and a 'screechy' sound in the high-mids (Test song "Strawberry fields forever"). Is the acid-soak mainly to reduce ticks, pops, noise in quiet passages, or can I ever expect any sonic improvements after an acid-soak? I'm not experienced enough to determine if damage from too heavy a stylus or other damage to the grooves may be causing the bad sound, and if so I would stop cleaning any further. Thank you much.
Jenn -First - is this a stereo or mono version? -Some records are recorded low - so you would need turn up the volume more than others; and vice-a-versa, some records are recorded loud and you will need to turn the volume down lower than others. -The screechy sound of the high-mids is generally distortion - and that could be the pressing, your stylus setup, groove damage, but it could also be embedded debris which the acid soak could help. I have had success with the acid-soak removing some mid-high screech, but only when there are some instances, not uniform throughout the record. The acid-soak is not going to cost you anything other than some time; so, nothing ventured nothing gained. But if the distortion is uniform for mid-highs, it sounds like groove damage. Being a popular record, it has likely been played many-many times. -You should review at Discogs the specific version (label,#) to see if there are any reviews to see if your experience is the same. Neil
