Those of you, who are most, you may find this post at VINYL CLEANING GUIDE PT. 1: MANUAL METHOD - The Audiophile Man - by "ASHLEY CARR, 10th May 2022 at 1:49 pm" VINYL CLEANING GUIDE PT. 1: MANUAL METHOD interesting, specifically the statement: "I looked again and couldn’t believe my eyes. The brush had promptly dumped an avalanche of dust back on to my near pristine surface." I have seen the above with UV light; one of reasons I no longer use any dry brush. If you are using a brush - somehow try to keep them clean (don't ask me how, I quit using dry-brushes). Otherwise, I have learned that I can use the Teflon Rod (addressed in the book at the end of Chapter VI) without "charging it". I just wipe it down with the Kinetronics Anti-Static Microfiber Cloth, 10x18-Inch Tiger Cloth before use and then after use (removes dust/lint the rod picks-up); then shake out the Tiger cloth to keep it clean (yes, some dust/lint is recycled - these are not cleanrooms). If you are a bit "queasy" with using the Teflon Rod on a spinning record, it works fine on a stationary record (on the platter). The rod needs to be in very light contact with the record, but as long you do not dig the rod into the record, the Teflon is softer than the record. If you are using the UV light, you can easily see the rod picking up the lint, and I have been able to use the end of the rod to carefully pick-up small particles that are not as attracted to the shaft. The end has a greater attractive capacity (don't ask why; not sure - good question for a PhD). Reiterating, the Teflon Rod is only good for records that have had a full-wet clean. In the meantime, other than using a brush for wet-cleaning records, I have not used a dry-brush for over 6-months, and I no longer use the Kinetronics Tiger Cloth to wipe the record surface before play other than to occasionally wipe the record edge (lead-in groove) that over time builds-up incidental detritus from just routine handling if the UV light shows it. Take care, Neil
My dry brushing experience pretty much mirrors what Ashley was describing. In my case, it's probably poor technique and lack of patience more than anything else. Lately I've been enjoying good results using a Giottos Rocket Blower. Neil, your Teflon Rod method has me curious now. I may have to check it out. Also, the UV light you recommended is a godsend. Thank you!
Good morning! I just looked at my bottle of Citranox and the expiration date is 7/22. Should I toss it? Such a shame as I bought it about 9 months ago and have so much left.
Do not worry about the expiration date. Just keep the container in a cool-dark place (like an under-sink cabinet) and capped when not in-use, and it should last many years. If (and this is unlikely if properly stowed) the product should develop an objectionable odor and/or become cloudy with floaties, then dispose. Companies put expiration dates for a number of reasons - 1. They do not know how you will stow the product - if it's stowed where it cycles between very hot and near freezing and if left opened exposed to the air; these can lead to degradation. 2. If the product is used for "critical" service cleaning subject to QA inspection & verification such as medical equipment the expiration date becomes a QA check item. Over time the product specifications can drift, and for "critical" applications this 'may' impact the cleaning process. Record cleaning does not fall into the category of "critical". I have Liquinox that is a year past expiration and its fine, I have no reservations using it, and I have Citranox that expires in Nov, and I expect to use both for many years until either they are all used up (or I am all used up ) Take care, Neil
Neil, thank you so much for your hard and generous work. I followed your method to the letter, and the results are astounding. My records have never been cleaner, and have never sounded better. In fact, I’m not sure I’ve heard quieter, cleaner, more dynamic sounding records anywhere. You’ve emphasized that your way is only “a” way, and not “the” way. But to my mind, your way is the best yet. To me you’re like the Galileo of record cleaning, and I’ve just discovered that the earth is round. I now have the urge to spread the science to anyone and everyone who cares about their record collection and good sound. I also want to commend you on your written clarity. It’s not easy to do. But I had no trouble following your method, and your manual anticipates and answers just about any question that arose for me. I do have one question: How do we know when we’ve adequately rinsed the cleaners during the tap water rinse step? Based on your writings in the manual and here, I gather that the Liquinox and Tergitol solutions should rinse rather easily—especially when using the Record Doctor brush to sweep tap water into the grooves. And I also gather that the Tergitol would do a decent job of cleaning away any residual cleaner from earlier steps—this is one of many features that makes your process so robust. But you’ve also said that the Citranox is harder to rinse, so I just wonder whether there is a visual indication of when it has been adequately rinsed. For what it’s worth, my DIW does bead readily during the DIW rinse step, so I believe that the Citranox has been rinsed away at least by that point. But it’s hard to know for sure what’s happening in the grooves. (It wouldn’t surprise me if your manual already answers this somewhere and I missed it.) Thanks again, Jason P.S. I plan to make a full video of the core manual process and share on YouTube. I haven’t seen one of them made, and I think seeing the process would help those visual learners out there. It would also show people just how elegant and achievable it really is. Please let me know if you have any concerns with my doing that. I would of course credit the process to you, and I would make the video unpublished, available only by a private link in this thread.
Hi Jason, I couldn't agree more with your praise for Neil's book and methods. Here is a video I did a while back on cleaning records utilizing Neil's process. Since making this video I stopped using the vinyl vac wand, old turntable and basin, and started using the Squeaky Clean and spray bottle of distilled water. Slight changes that make it easier to clean with less prep time required.
Jason, Thank-you for the compliments - consequences of decades writing procedures for a wide range of users with varying skillsets when I worked for the Navy. However, I would not go quite as far as comparing to Galileo. For the most part it follows a tried-and-true process that was developed to clean Navy high pressure oxygen system components 25-yrs ago; and when I briefed people, I made it clear, that this was not about some new technology, it was an exercise in common sense and just getting the details right. As far as cost to performance, the manual PACVR procedure is hard to beat. But its manual and that is not everyone's cup of tea. The convenience provided by machines can be very appealing. As far as when to tell when the cleaners are rinsed, there are few clues: 1. When first rinsing, the tap-water tends to sheet across many grooves, and there are some bubbles. 2. When rinsed, the tap-water wets the record but breaks up into smaller widths and there are less bubbles and when the rinse drains from the record, it follows the grooves much closer. 3. The Citranox does take a bit more rinse water, but as you point out, that is another reason for the Tergitol final clean step - it protects you it you fail to fully rinse the Citranox. Again, it's that military goal to develop 'robust' procedures that can accommodate errors. Take care, Neil PS - you may find this of interest - Do I need to clean my LP's? | Page 2 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum - see post #31.
Hi Neil, I am curious if you've tried the Osage brush. After using the Osage and the Stasis, I find the Stasis much better, The bristles are very soft. The Osage brush feels like porcupine quills in comparison. Thanks!
Careful, bristles that are too soft may not move the fluid as well as one with stiffer bristles. But both of those you mention are good brushes and highly recommended, one being stiff as you described is no reason to overlook it.
I was thinking the same thing but the Stasis/Record Doctor brush seems to hit the sweet spot between soft and stiff. It's a brush that Neil uses. I'm not a fan of Osage. I have two. I have tried products from Disc Doctor, Okki Noki, Osage, Loricraft, and two different brushes from Nitty Gritty. I like the Nitty Gritty and Disc Doctor and I'm eager to give the Stasis/Record Doc. a good test. My least favorite were Osage, Okki Noki & Loricraft. The Loricraft is way too abrasive. The bristles of the Okki Noki fell out after a week. Osage also feels too rough to use on records. Nitty Gritty has two brushes: A velvet-ish one and a soft bristle brush. These are both good. The velvet one requires a lot of rinsing, though. And I found the pile of the fabric has a short life. Their soft brush is pretty good but maybe a bit too soft to move the fluid. Disc Doctor requires a lot of rinsing and removing the old felt and replacing it is a pain in the butt.
Neil, I’ve been using your cleaning method with ultrasonics, as well as a VPI 16.5 for just about one year. I’ve never had my records sound so quiet. Thank you! It’s truly been a revelation.
I have not tried the Osage brush. Personally, I am not a fan of wood handles for cleaning with water-based products. The Stasis and the Record Dr Brush with the bristles set into a nylon handle are optimum since there is no degradation - inexpensive but perfect for the job. Note that the Stasis brush with white bristles is the same as the Record Dr Brush with the black bristles. Off-white is the natural color of nylon. Black is produced by adding a permanent pigment. Stasis is now selling a brush with bristles tapered to 10-microns. At, 10-microns, this brush will deeply penetrate the groove. Finely tapered bristles are advertised for some toothbrushes. The problem with the fine taper is how robust will they be and is it beneficial to get deep into the groove? If the bristle is too soft then it will not move the fluid as well, and it's the fluid chemistry and motion that is doing most of the cleaning. If the bristle is too stiff, then the tips will facture and the pieces are now in the groove. So, the jury is out on whether the 10-micron tapered bristle is going to be beneficial, and whether the brush will last as long as the current 50-micron version. Take care, Neil
You are very welcome and thank-you for feedback and thank-you for sharing your knowledge with others. Take care, Neil
Would you mind if a company sent you samples so that you could compare the performance? I would like to hear your professional opinion on the Osage brush and the 10 micron Stasis brush.
t I am no longer retired, I went back to work in March, had 6-week layover this summer between projects and I am now back to work with funding and projects for the next two years. The idea of trying to establish criteria to evaluate brush performance is not very appealing since it takes quite a bit of time to evaluate the various differences be it how easy is it to hold, how to best use to get best results, what to look out for, how well will it hold up, etc. and do so in an unbiased manner and doing so in manner not to harm the vendor. And I am trying to stay neutral so that I am not really endorsing any product other than what I use and why I use it. Otherwise, how I approach things is that they all can work, with the right technique or modifications. It's like the GrooveMaster label protector, I bought one to use for the purpose of the 3rd Ed, but after using, I also provide instructions on how to easily modify for easier use. Otherwise, as the book forward says: "All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. All methods/procedures specified here present opportunity for experimenting with different cleaning agents, different cleaning brushes, different drying cloths, and different cleaning equipment.". So, in summary, I respectfully decline the offer. I now hand-off experimentation to others. Take care, Neil
If I can ask, how would you suggest one could do a brush test? You mention some things above: 1) How easy it is to hold 2) How to use to get the best results 3) How well it will hold up I can see how you can test 1 and 3, but I don't know how to begin to approach 2. Also, do you know of any scientific method to gauge bristle stiffness or softness? Thanks!
I am just going to throw some thoughts for you. I am not writing a test plan. 1. Measure the outside dimensions and weight of the brush. 2. Describe and measure the brush bristles. How many bristles, bristle diameter, bristle tufts # & diameter, bristle length & bristle material. A short bristle will be stiffer, but it also places the brush handle closer to the record with risk for damage (handle scrapes the record). 3. Describe and measure the brush handle - dimensions, material, overhang from bristles and identify sharp edges which can be easily corrected. 4. Calculate the brush stiffness - here is a report with a relatively simple equation (PDF) A mathematical model for predicting toothbrush stiffness (researchgate.net). If you include a goat hair brush you will need to do some research to find a modulus (it's a material property). 5. Use the brush - brushes may be application specific - maybe good for vacuum-RCM where you are not using as much cleaner versus manual/sink where you can use as much cleaner as you wish. 6. How much foam does the brush develop and how much foam develops in the brush. You want foam since it floats detritus out of groove, it verifies that the cleaner is well agitated, and you want the brush to collect foam, so you are not grinding detritus into the record, and it does not build up too high on the record for vacuum-RCM applications. 7. How quickly does cleaner and detritus rinse from the brush. If the brush is holding on to stuff it then carries over and contaminates the next step. When I have inspected (I did this early on to verify rinsing) a rinsed Record Dr Brush with a UV light its free of all fluorescing dust, lint and particles. 8. For very fine tipped bristles that get into the groove, fracturing of the tip is not something you can really measure - the tip may only fracture 5-10 microns - you are not going to be able measure that; yet it could be happening. I have seen the 50-micron Record Dr Brush bristle tips dry start to bloom where they are being worn down, but once wet recover shape. This type of wear takes over a year of use to observe. Above are just some thoughts, they are not conclusive. Most 'test plans' evolve as they proceed and the data is collected and compared. Good luck and enjoy.
I gave the record doctor/stasis brush a try. On the plus side, it's a soft brush. I don't think it could do any damage. On the minus side, it develops absolutely no foam on a Loricraft RCM. It spreads the liquid and there's no foam at all. I don't know how much fluid I would need to use or how fast I would need to brush, but it doesn't do anything to create any foam. The Disc Doctor brush foams up like crazy. I could see this being good for a rince cycle. I can't get it to foam up at all. Maybe over a sink with a liberal amount of fluid, brushing faster than hares hump. I don't see how to get this brush to make foam otherwise. The disc doctor brush - zero effort. Nitty gtitty brush - no effort. The stasis brush might just be too soft. I don't know.
Are you talking about this Record Doctor brush? Click image to open expanded view That is what I use and I get all kinds of foaming. Are you brushing with a fast back and fourth movement? Not a long sweeping motion, but using the wrist briskly while turning the record. It works great for me and that is the type of motion you want to be most effective.
I have this, which is supposed to be made by the same company, but they look different. I tried the motion you suggested and it was a little better. Not nearly as good as the disc doctor, but maybe I need to work on my technique? Thanks!
Don't you find the foaming interferes with the vacuuming? The pump nozzle seems to draw more fluid in when there aren't a lot of bubbles suspended in it, IME.
I apply the solution with a spray bottle so it goes onto the record with a good deal of foam already.
Not at all! The Loricraft removes everything. It's a big step up from other machines I've used. I just wish I could get my brush to really kick up some foam. I found it a bit better when I soaked the brush in fluid and followed the directions above but it still wasn't that great.
The foaming helps the particles break up and dislodge, allowing you to vacuum and/or wash them off the record.
