Vinyl clicks and pops

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by ZloyeZlo, Jul 27, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. scoutbb

    scoutbb Senior Member

    Location:
    LA
    Been reading through the thread and thinking about buying a RCM in the near future.
    I was wondering if anyone ever thought of using air pressure to clean a record?
    You know, maybe about 15-20psi, coming from an air bottle, regulator, hose and nozzle?
    I have absolutely no experience doing this. This was just a random thought as I was reading through thread.
    Crazy idea or what?
    Thoughts?
     
  2. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Not crazy, but I think you'd need to take some precautions (and no, I haven't tried it though I've thought about it as well):
    air in a can has an accelerant that I wouldn't like to see on my records;
    air from an air compressor might work, provided you had an effective filter to separate water, oil and particles (such as might be used for car detailing- when I worked on my cars, i used a pretty large air compressor to get water out from the various crevices, but that was after the the metal work was wet, washed, and rinsed)
    I'd still be concerned about 'firing' particulates across the surface of the record; I would think that enough pressure to get debris off the surface would have enough force to drive it into the surface.
    I have one compressor in my vinyl cleaning room already, delivering air @ 65 PSI to my tonearm (but it has the oil/water separator and driers); if I add a Vibraplane beneath my turntable, I will have two compressors in that room.
    I guess it could be done, but I'm not sure what the appropriate air pressure would be~ and subject to the above-mentioned risk about 'shooting' debris into the surface of the record from elsewhere on the record.
    I'd also be interested in other responses....
     
  3. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    I haven´t tested it, but my thinking is one could test surface tension on the record, before and after the cleaning process. One would likely then know if the surface is in some way altered. Just in a controlled test, not normally at home.
    Maybe it´s possible just using destilled water to get a feeling for if the surface is altered.
     
    Luckydog likes this.
  4. ClassicRockTragic

    ClassicRockTragic Forum Resident

    Location:
    Australia
    I am new to this forum, and having been in Musical Instrument forums for years, I am impressed this thread has nor degenerated into name calling and death threats :)
     
  5. Luckydog

    Luckydog Active Member

    Location:
    london, uk
    Not for cleaning but for drying. It's a lab method for drying and removing debris/residue so as to leave a surface very 'clean' ie free from non-bonded contaminants after cleaning. It's also the method Robert Pardee used for drying in his paper cited on this thread, where he noted that generally cleaning increases friction. And the method is known highly capable of being effective at clean drying and leaving a super residue free surface. However, based on Pardee's results and my own tests, getting 'squeaky clean' doesn't necessarily get you where you want to be - neither in terms of surface friction nor noise performance IME. Pardee speculates that removing lubricants may be the cause of increased friction. I venture 'clean' is only half of what's needed. But if 'getting squeaky clean' and residue free is the aim, dry clean compressed gas drying seems good to me - I haven't tried it though.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
    missan likes this.
  6. Luckydog

    Luckydog Active Member

    Location:
    london, uk
    Hi Bill, perhaps that example is not typical but anyways perhaps we've all seen clogging after cleaning so here's my 2p worth. Seems reasonable that whatever such clogging material is was previously lining the groove wall and didn't stay put on playback after cleaning. To me, the obvious candidate material might be the groove wall vinyl itself, perhaps altered through age or the cleaning process and no longer hard enough to stay attached under duress of playback. That seems the elephant in the room, and an unwelcome elephant too. Another material might be tobacco smoke residue perhaps. Whatever it might be typically forms a paste of very small particles on the stylus when examined in detail microscopically IME. And particles do need to be tiny to be relevant IMO, dimensions involved are perhaps a few um and not much is that small, otherwise they don't fit where it matters. Not much dust and not visible flecks are that small for sure. So I suspect visible flecks might typically be clumps of material, whatever it is.

    I have a very decent lab microscope and in the past have used it to examine detail of grooves in situ before/after cleaning, and of stylus 'fluff' and clog. Often a likely clog material appears simply to be vinyl IME. Not that there's much one can do about it, so long as it's not the cleaning process itself altering the surface I think. It remains possible IMO that the freshly exposed vinyl then has lower noise I suppose - but it's just speculation on my part. I don't see how we can tell for sure what is really going on after 'successful cleaning'. But I'm convinced it's not as simple as 'was dirty now clean'. I remain optimistic that an explanation for successful cleaning might lie in 'accidentally' conditioning the vinyl surface - or to spin it round 'restoring intended vinyl condition' by whatever means.
     
  7. fab4

    fab4 Forum Resident

    Location:
    France
    Do you think that cleaning or/then applying lubricant can have unpredictable results in removing/increasing noise ?
    I have just the feeling that hand cleaning leave residues or move dirt in the groove; whereas vacuum cleaning, with strong (too strong ?) suction, remove the dirt but could maybe altered vinyl material by removing some vinyl components if they are loosen by particular chemical products contained in cleaning fluids (?), just a thought.
    But we never know how cleaning residues or lubricants are aging in the long term.
     
  8. ClassicRockTragic

    ClassicRockTragic Forum Resident

    Location:
    Australia
    I think we need mythbusters resources to work all this out.
     
  9. Antares

    Antares Forum Resident

    Location:
    Flanders
    Yes, something seems to be a bit off with that TP16 arm. Maybe some play in the bearings, minimal friction will help dampen the cartridge movements. (I've seen some detailed instructions for checking and adjusting the bearings on these arms on the net somewhere, don't have a link without googling first though.)

    If there's enough travel on the shaft to readjust tracking force afterwards, you might also try adding a little mass to the counterweight, say 5 to 10 grams, by just sticking something (a flat washer for example) on the back.
     
  10. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Interesting hypothesis about the groove wall itself shedding- I remember back in the 60's- when we played records, we believed we'd simply wear them out, but the tonearms were kludgey and the styli were little more than those 'needles' on ceramic cartridges. Fast forward a few decades, after the introduction of CD, and the realization that some of these old records sounded great! And had, remarkably, survived. So, playback alone presumably didn't harm the record and I always ascribed records with what I call groove 'chew' to damage caused by bad tonearm/cartridges on fold down record players and cheap console/record changer machines. Now, you've added another possibility: that record cleaning, which in itself might not damage the record, but somehow changes the vinyl so that the cleaned record, when played back, makes it more vulnerable to 'shedding' of the groove wall. Which would argue against cleaning, or at least cleaning using volatile chemicals.
    Cigarette smoke as I've encountered it leaves a sticky, then hardened residue- that's what I often attributed the 'gunk' or black tar to and yes, it seems to act like a glue, in combination with other stuff. Or so I assume.
    I thought some of those microscope pictures upthread that I posted from an old link here were instructive-even though the cleaning techniques used were not 'sophisticated' or necessarily up-to-date: they seemed to show microscopic deposits of foreign matter in the grooves that were eliminated after cleaning.
    As you can gather, I'm certainly receptive to looking at this from a different perspective, though whatever the cleaning process is doing, it certainly has improved the quality of playback. I have many records I have owned for decades, and that as record cleaning machines became available, and improved (along with fluids), have periodically been re cleaned and play beautifully. (I know that they weren't subject to previous owner abuse since I bought them new, and they were played back on good quality gear from the start). What surprises me more, though, is some records that I know had pretty rough childhoods (one example being an old Alice Cooper Love it to Death Warner Green label, which I know I didn't buy- my young sister bought it at the time and played it on one of those fold-up portable plastic record players). It isn't absolutely quiet, and looks ugly- the surface is marred by all kinds of scuffs and hairlines, but the thing sounds shockingly good for its provenance (and it isn't even the best pressing of the thing- that record led me on a couple year quest).
    So, I guess the elephant you've now introduced, in the face of my concern over lubricants, is that cleaning can soften the groove walls. Yikes!
     
    Luckydog likes this.
  11. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    The knitting circle and tea-cup collector sites are some of the worst!
     
  12. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Fab, as I mentioned in my response to Lucky, I have records that I bought new, decades ago, which I cleaned on earlier vacuum machines, using the more basic fluids available at the time, and have periodically re-cleaned them over the years as RCMs, fluids and techniques have changed. For what it is worth, I think these records will outlast me (which isn't necessarily saying much), but still sound great after several decades.
     
  13. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    One other thought, as a post-script to my first response, Lucky. If the playback alone is conditioning the vinyl, then theoretically, replaying the record should sound better than the initial play, without any intervening clean. I know I have done clean-play- reclean-play with beneficial results, which I attributed to the combination of having the stylus act as a dredge and then cleaning immediately thereafter. But, what about no intervening cleaning step? Just play, and play again. With what result? (Leaving aside the need for a 'rest' period between plays, which is another subject).
     
  14. quadjoe

    quadjoe Senior Member

    Interesting post. I'm not sure that the groove walls shed, as I've never heard that, but the possibility exists that some material is removed with every play. However, if that's true, then my Frampton Comes Alive! Lp should have no sound left at all, it has been played hundreds of times since I bought it new. However, it has only ever been played on a good turntable with a Shibata or similar stylus. Personally, I think that in the case of new records, the groove gets burnished by the stylus during its first play, so subsequent plays should be better. Interestingly, I know that a new stylus gets burnished by the vinyl, which is what I think is going on when people talk about "burn in." So there is a lot going on. Finally, in regard to cleaning with solvents that soften the groove walls: Back in the '70s Discwasher claimed that cleaning fluids containing alcohol removed plasticizers from the vinyl causing it to become brittle. Their original fluids, up to and including D4, did not contain alcohol, and left no residue on the record surface. (They conducted tests they said proved this.) I know that in those days I was always pleased with the cleaning results I achieved with their product. Even now it is excellent at removing fingerprints. Nowadays, the thinking is that alcohol does not harm vinyl (do NOT use it on shellac '78s, though), and most record cleaning fluids now contain a small quantity of it.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
  15. quadjoe

    quadjoe Senior Member

    There are people right here on this forum who feel that cleaning is unnecessary at all, other than just using a carbon fiber brush to remove dust and static. That reminds me, a lot of pops and clicks can be caused by static electricity, especially when humidity is low. Just removing the record from its sleeve can induce a charge. I do give every record a pass with a carbon fiber brush before playing to remove static and dust. As far as wet cleaning goes, I only do it once, when I get a record. I then put it in a new poly sleeve, and I generally don't clean it again. In the old days, I used a Discwasher before every play, and I still find it effective for removing dust. It doesn't leave the surface wet when used according to its directions, so it is quicker than the RCM.
     
  16. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Joe- I know Myles Astor has posted elsewhere about 'de-horning' which was apparently done in the old days, but not anymore; thus, the playing actually helps, or at least that's my understanding. I think if you do a web search you'll see some discussion about this, and folks involved in the mastering and manufacture process probably have first hand knowledge.
    I agree that different stylus profiles can exaggerate or minimize noise. As far as cartridge break-in is concerned, I'm not so sure about burnishing the stylus, but I do know that the cantilever/motor assembly loosens up. I'm actually in that process now, having replaced my old cartridge with its improved variant. Right now, the thing seems far less compliant than the old one, but it doesn't have enough hours on it. I'm enjoying the process.
     
  17. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Agree re static and sleeving, etc. Ye gads, I haven't used a Dishwasher since the 70's. There's probably one in a box somewhere here.
     
  18. quadjoe

    quadjoe Senior Member

    I'm not sure exactly where I stand with the whole "de-horning" thing, but it was something I thought I'd add to the discussion. Yes there is a lot of information about the process online, you can spend hours just searching through all the stuff that is out there. I'm almost finished with the break-in of my new AT-OC9 cartridge, and it has really opened up. It sounds fantastic in my system.
     
  19. Luckydog

    Luckydog Active Member

    Location:
    london, uk
    Because there seem so many variables here, about the only predictable thing is inconsistency itself in my book ! Groove wall shedding is mostly based on my own microscopy of what appears to be vinyl in the paste which sometimes cloggs on playback after cleaning, first came to my attention after cleaning coloured vinyl FWIW. I'm not suggesting it always happens, just might be one of the threads in a very tangled web. I'd venture sometimes on initial playback after cleaning, vinyl surface sheds somewhat, and after a few plays surface generally stablises. Seems very apparent to me that normal vinyl surface seems stable and doesn't shed to any notable extent even after extensive playback. But perhaps after certain cleaning sometimes certain surfaces take a few plays to harden/stabilise, perhaps shedding happens as part of a vigorous clean, perhaps it can even be good - but all this is entirely speculation of course. Some of it seems to fit the puzzle though, IMO. But I think we can know so little about what really goes on in any specific case.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
  20. Gabe Walters

    Gabe Walters Forum Resident

    Are you sure you got a Debut Carbon? Those come preinstalled with an Ortofon 2M Red, not an OM10.

    At any rate, assuming your tonearm is capable of swapping cartridges (and if you have a Debut Carbon or a Debut III, it is), then I'd recommend a 2M Red, or for $100 bucks more, a 2M Blue, which has a fine line stylus and shouldn't produce those ticks and pops as readily as you're hearing now. But first and foremost, upgrade your turntable mat to something that doesn't produce static. What you're hearing now is likely the result of static, not necessarily imperfections in the vinyl or objects on its surface.
     
  21. quadjoe

    quadjoe Senior Member

    There are lots of factors here as well. The shedding might not be because of instability of the vinyl itself, but rather because of an improperly installed cartridge, a worn stylus, too much or too little VTF and so on. That's the biggest reason I don't mess with VTA other than to make sure it is within the parameters set by the cartridge manufacturer. Some stylus profiles are quite sharp, and if you present the wrong face to the groove wall, you could end up lopping off high frequency info. I clean my styli after/before every play, but even with the Zerodust, I never get any gunk off the stylus, unless I haven't cleaned the record prior to play. I also have a stereo microscope which I use to inspect styli on a regular basis.
     
  22. Antares

    Antares Forum Resident

    Location:
    Flanders
    In Europe, the Carbon also comes with the OM10 pre-installed. Same difference really, just a heads up.
     
  23. Gabe Walters

    Gabe Walters Forum Resident

    Oh, interesting. Didn't know, obviously.
     
    Antares likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine