so how do you clean your vinyl albums?

aunitedlemon said: ↑
I've had very good results using the Audio Technica 6012 "sonic broom" before play. I mist the pad with a mixture of 3:1 distilled water/99% isopropyl. The moisture helps to neutralize the static and simultaneously lift any surface dust/lint off the record. Very simple and effective.
---------------

OK, so with this, record comes out of the sleeve, and no dry brushing at all - no anti-static cloths, nothing - just the sonic broom and mix of distilled water and 99%iso - and thats it, static killed and its ready to play? Thats an extra step for me more stuff to buy - but I might try it if other methods arent getting the results I want - so thanks to both of you for this.

 

Very low thickness (less than 0.1 micron) of residue may not be apparent on the stylus. But, based on experience that I have accumulated from working with people and their cleaning processes and cleaning agent concentrations, persons with very sensitive hearing can hear viscous residue when it reaches about 0.03 to 0.04 microns thick (this is a conclusion of Chapter XI of the book, but it's very technical), others may not hear the viscous residue until it becomes apparent on the stylus. Non-viscous residue is much easier to hear - ticks & pops.

There are many variations of PVA glue with some very acidic, others not as much and some with other ingredients to assist with drying. You and I have conversated in the past, and your experience may be very specific to the PVA glue YOU are using. But when you discuss the use of the glue in this thread, you leave out the nitty gritty details. The Devil is in the Details.

 

Ive had a VPI 16.5 cleaning matching for 18 +/- years now. Its performs and operates as good as it did right out of the box. Its more than doubled in price from then til now. I’ve countless albums purchased from garage sales with tons of grime, mold, etc and this machine has always come out of a cleaning session victorious.

 

Great product. I use it on every (previously wet cleaned) record right before putting the needle down.

 

I heard something very interesting Friday and I wanted to post it on the SHF, but where? There are probably hundreds of threads on cleaning records. I decided since this is the most currently active thread on record cleaning I would start here.

On any cleaning thread sooner or later the question of whether people clean new records usually comes up. I clean any record before it goes on my TT for the first time. One of the reasons I always cite, along with many others, is left over mold release compound, used to help the records release from the stampers. This usually brings a slew of replies from nay-sayers who insist there is no evidence this is used, this is a myth etc.

On Friday I was watching the excellent YouTube live stream held by 45RPM Audiophile featuring Kevin Gray and Joe (The Tone Poet) Harley of Blue Note Records. Michael of 45RPM Audiophile asked how many master pressings are usually distributed of a recording? Joe Harley answered: two to each person reviewing the master pressing. This way if the same exact defect was heard on both, the source was probably the lacquer and that would be the first suspect. If the defect was not found on the lacquer, he cited some potential problems that could be found on the master pressings. One of the potential suspects he cited might be mold release remaining on the record surface. The proves to my satisfaction that mold release IS USED, it is not a myth, and it can be a source of surface noise on new records. If anyone knows about this, it would be Joe Harley of Music Matters Jazz fame and Blue Note Records.

That was, and is, why I always clean a new LP before it goes on my TT for the first time.

 

By my calculation a film of 0.1 microns could potentialy produce about a cubic millimetre of accretion on a microridge after ten records. I suspect I would have spotted that.

You may be right that a specific PVA is best. I use Unibond from a red carton. However, if the unidentified film residue which you have hypothesized were common then the webz would be full of people complaining about residues accreting on their styluses, whereas in general it seems that people who try PVA with any care report good results. Maybe this mysterious film mostly isn't there.

By the way, pacvr is an anagram of vacpr ;-)

 

Every record that comes into my possession goes into the Spin Clean, and each side gets brushed before the stylus makes contact. Simple and effective.

 

Spin Clean preclean followed by a drying on a Record Doctor V.

Then I do a final cleaning and dry on the Record Doctor V.

Results in nice quiet playback.

Before additional playback each cleaned LP is zapped with a vintage Zerostat and then I blow off any dust with camera lens air blower. Never had to do a reclean yet or use a brush between plays.

 

Not to beat this to death, I did not say that the PVA glue was leaving a 0.1-micron thickness residue, only that <0.1 micron may not be apparent. What accumulates on the stylus is not 100% of the residue that is on the record surface. It all depends on the residue and its affinity for the surface - the record or the stylus. The stylus may carve/rake it up or it may push it down and/or to the side. Additionally, many people use any number of methods to periodically clean the stylus since the common 'wisdom' is that its normal for the stylus to get dirty. So, unless the residue was excessive, what residue there was could go essentially unnoticed or considered normal.

The ubiquitous carbon fiber brush used dry that many people swear by, is not all the great:

VINYL CLEANING GUIDE PT. 1: MANUAL METHOD - The Audiophile Man, ASHLEY CARR, 10th May 2022 at 1:49 pm: "...However, I have discovered something that has horrified me as I have trodden this pedantic path and that is how carbon fibre brushes undo all your cleaning endeavours, well not all but bear with me whilst I provide a little more context....Previously I have regularly used a carbon fibre brush to clean surface dust but was continually perplexed as to why, regardless of how many sweeps I made, dust just kept on being revealed. My jewellers loupe provided me with the visual evidence as to why this is. Having cleaned a record I used the loupe to see what affect it had had and noticed there was still some loose dust and used the brush to remove it. 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...."

NASA reviewed various brushes to remove dust - NASA/TM—2011-217231, report on Evaluation of Brushing as a Lunar Dust Mitigation Strategy for Thermal Control Surfaces Evaluation of Brushing as a Lunar Dust Mitigation Strategy for Thermal Control Surfaces - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS), concluding “Although there was only one carbon bristle brush tested, it had by far the poorest performance.”.

As far as the pacvr being an anagram of vacpr - you lost me. I use PACVR as an acronym for Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records.

Peace and stay well,

 

I just looked at those brushes. To clarify, those are wet brushes, not meant to be used dry right before a play?

After reading many of these recent threads here and on AK, I’m going to stop using my carbon fiber brush. I was using it before each play.

 

I use an ultrasonic cleaner. It gives remarkably good results.

 

I’m going to throw a wrench into the works here. Prior to this weekend, I was an ultrasonic record cleaning machine guy. But there were a good bunch in my collection, new and used, that I could never totally get rid of the crackles on. I chalked it up to bad pressings on those.

I just tried the glue method on 5 noisy records, some new, some used. I was pleasantly surprised! I’m a glue convert now. Totally silent between tracks and all!

Sorry to derail the conventional train of thought here, and some will take issue with this method, and I expect that. Just sharing my experience, that’s all. Everyone is always free to do as they wish with no judgement from me.

 

I’ve got two disco anti-stat. They are very similar to a spin clean but they have bristle brushes rather than pads. In one I have a art du son solution and in the other one plain distilled water for rinsing. 10 spins each direction in both baths and then air dry. I’ve been pretty happy with this method until now, but I have the feeling it might be only 99% effective.

 

You have a similar set up to me. I did try a Pro-Ject VC-E but the results didn't seem any better than my manual clean. I would like to try an ultrasonic machine at some point, but I don't expect miracles.

 

Ultrasonic Vevor 6L Record cleaner(about 200) rinse with a spin clean.

 

Just goes to show, you never can tell.

 

I used basins for several years, they work well. I think a vacuum between steps helps a lot. I stopped using basins, and switched to the Squeaky Clean with spray bottles recently but not because it cleaned better. It just eliminated filling and emptying basins, cutting down on start up and finish up time.

 

Yes - for wet cleaning only. Dry nylon brush is a sure way to create static.

 

No issue to be taken, ultrasonic cleaning has its limits and there are a lot of details that need to be right to get the best results, but for the benefit of the forum - what specific glue did you use and how long did you let it dry?

 

TiteBond II, overnight to dry +- 14 hours. No temp or humidity measurements taken. Record was first de-static’d with a DeStat III, then dusted off with a parastatic felt brush. No real way to figure out specifically how much to apply either. Just going for a solid coating. Applied to record spinning on junk turntable and smoothed out with fingertip, also with record spinning. It was fully translucent when peeled. If done right, peels off in one full sheet.







I already have the Kirmuss ultrasonic machine. It does do a good job on most of the records I have put through it. It’s especially good on getting greasy finger prints off, something people have wrote that the glue method struggles with. I have some albums that just didn’t seem to improve with several trips though the Kirmuss. Maybe the ultimate process is a few trips through the Kirmuss with a final step of the glue.

 

The Kirmuss is a 35kHz ultrasonic machine with about 180W power from three bottom firing 60W transducers and about 6.7L volume. It's not very powerful - theoretically 27W/L. In comparison, the KLAudio unit is 40kHz and 200W and 2.4L for 83W/L. A 40 kHz UCM will produce bubbles about 75 microns diameter. These are not going to get into the record groove. A 120 kHz UCM such as the Degritter will produce bubbles about 20 microns (and more of them) and these can get into the groove. But the larger bubble can produce more energy when it collapses/implodes (cavitation) so there is fluid agitation around the collapsing event that can provide cleaning. How violently the bubble collapse is determined by the amount of power provided by the ultrasonic transducers.

So, the lower frequency 35-40kHz can be good for removing surface fingerprints. But, for the lower power Kirmuss, it will have limits to how well it can clean those small particles deep in the groove. The small amount of IPA that is recommended does not do much. A nonionic surfactant added just for wetting can help cleaning the very small particles deep in the groove, especially for lower powered units. But, with chemistry comes the risk of residue and if used at too high a concentration, the need for rinsing.

FYI - The German made Elmasonic P-series UCM Elmasonic P Series - Elma Ultrasonic Cleaners that some DIY's use for record cleaning is dual frequency 37/80-kHz and very powerful. But the cost is 2-3X the Kirmuss and you have to add a spinner, and most people add a pump/micro-filtration system. But, excellent results are obtained.

Thanks for the details and the photos.

Take care,

 

There are about 50,000 YouTube’s about the glue method. I found a bit of practice is necessary.

If you wind up with tiny islands or shards when it’s dry, those can present a problem.


Those should be scrapped off prior to the big peel because if you try to scrape them off with your thumbnail after the big peel, static will cause them to fly around and stick everywhere.

Another way to deal with those skips of glue is to add a fresh layer at the edge with a more authoritative or robust glue edge and wait some more time.


You are looking for a clean boundary by the label and at the outer edge when dry.


Sorry, I didn’t take any pics of the record edge when dry.

 

If it's used it gets cleaned in my VPI MW-1 Cyclone first using the VPI fluid.

Both new and used get a trip through my Audio Desk.

Light dust gets removed by either my AudioQuest carbon fiber brush or my original 1970's era Discwasher D4 (!)

 

This discussion inspired me to stop putting off and I went to the basement and cleaned 10 or so records this afternoon. It takes me about 10 minutes per record, or 5 records cleaned for each record I listen to. I use headphones and play grade from my collection as I go. I cleaned 2 new records and 8 or 9 used records I'd picked up on discogs. I've still got most of a 100+ collection of classic rock a good friend gave me a few months ago, and 100+ more I picked up at a flipper's warehouse intended to go out at my consignment table at the local vintage shop. The struggle is real. Maybe I'll get down there in get 10 or 15 more done tomorrow.

 

There are a million ways to clean a record in the Naked City.
Neil has done us a service in describing what happens, based on chemistry, physics and practical results. (I published Neil's work so perhaps I'm biased, but knowing what's going on at a micron/molecular bonding level as applied to cleaning vinyl LPs is helpful). You adapt, improve and get a result that you are satisfied with based on how much time, money and effort you are willing to put into this. What Neil offers is a manual cleaning method that doesn't require fancy equipment; he provides explanations for what's happening at each step. Not a light read, but if you are interested in answers, it is the best source I'm aware of. No charge!
I've been down the rabbit hole and back-- I've also found a good balance in terms of process- I'll clean at least 1/2 dozen records in a session. After that, those albums rarely need a re-clean, unless I've judged them wrong.
I use both manual +vacuum and ultrasonic with an emphasis on a pure water rinse step. I find that the combination of manual cleaning + ultrasonic is better than either method alone. The goal is to remove whatever contaminants are on the record and to make sure that the cleaning process itself is not a contaminant.
Each person has their preferred method. I spent a fair amount of time experimenting; I am pretty satisfied with the results. My goal is pristine playback of what's on the record, no residue from cleaning, and to store the record in appropriate inner sleeves, along with whatever paraphernalia came with the release including original inner, such that it is preserved. I can crank through quite a few records in an hour, running a couple machines.
The next owner of any of these records will be happy. Long should that not occur.