Record cleaning- you're doing it wrong!

Discussion in 'Turntables' started by guest110, Nov 18, 2015.

  1. Johncan

    Johncan returning member Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,676
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Can Nexazyme be added to Rushton's formula and used in an ultrasonic cleaner? I have a 10L US unit.
     
  2. RainDog911

    RainDog911 New Member

    Messages:
    36
    I was wondering something similar. I've recently built USRCM with 80 kHz US clean and 80 kHz US rinse tanks and a heated, filtered drying cube. I use Rushton's recommended proportions of X-100, H-256 and IPA scaled up for 5 gallon batches (the size of my cleaning and rinse sumps). However, some records seem to need stronger cleaning solution. I'm considering building a non-ultrasonic pre-treatment enzyme solution soaking tank for the stubborn records.

    Can anyone recommend a DIY enzyme based solution like what was created for US cleaning?
     
  3. AlexA6404

    AlexA6404 New Member

    Messages:
    15
    I also use Rushton's formula. I have added an Enzyme step before US cleaning. I spray the Enzyme solution on the record, or get a fabric brush really wet, and use a lint and a bristle brush to scrub the record for about one minute. I think adding this mechanical scrubbing action to help loosen stuff in the grooves before US cleaning is a good thing. For Enzyme solution, I just switched to using a home made solution that I read about in a post. The solution is very simple: just mix the contents of one Nexazyme with one liter of water. You can get Nexazyme at Pharmacies or on Amazon.
     
  4. Rentz

    Rentz AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    165
    Location:
    Texas
    I'm trying to gather the ingredients for the reg Williamson peel and does anyone know a source for Cyastat SN ?
    Elvanol is on chemical store and everything else is amazon just can't find Cyastat SN
     
  5. dfunghi

    dfunghi AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,574
    Location:
    Central Coast California
    I used to do a pre scrub with a discdoc brush but found no upside. What did make a difference was allowing the LPs to sit still in the US for a couple minutes rather than in continuos motion. I doubt any brush, even a record brush, can get down deep into the grooves. No bristles on any commercial scrub brush would be small enough in diameter. Even lint brushes won't get deep into a groove.

    I switched to doing an after scrub / hard rinse following US with better results than when I did a pre scrub. I also find my Discdoc brushes do not wear out as quickly scrubbing an already US'd LP.

    Not sure where I read this but I thought 80K was more likely to cause cavitation o vinyl, especially some of the softer formulations. Also a drying cube absent a vacuum may not add much to the process other than speed drying. The vacuum and then into a drying rack for an hour or so sucks out debris if left behind and also removes swirls and water marks.
     
  6. totem

    totem AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,897
    Location:
    Vancouver B.C.
    Perhaps your referring to damaging effects of the cleaning process @80 versus 40K since basic cavitation is the cleaning
    process.

    As to using US running @ 80 I thought the subject was put to rest regarding damage occurring on records.
    A smaller cavitation with the higher freq seems IMO the way to go other than the increased cost of the units.
     
  7. ripblade

    ripblade Super Member

    Messages:
    2,403
    Location:
    Toronto
    My understanding is that higher frequencies produce smaller bubbles which implode with less force, therefore are safer. 40kHz is a sort of GP frequency that is high enough to do the job safely but low enough to produce cheaper transducers.
     
  8. dfunghi

    dfunghi AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,574
    Location:
    Central Coast California
    Is any of this ever really put to rest?

    When I referred to "cavitation" I meant cavitation of the vinyl as in leaving pocks, I understand that cavitation is also the process of "breaking" the water to deep clean.

    I guess it is and always will be a YMMV thing. I used a ton of trial and error before I landed where I did, forgoing automation for better cleaning results. Yes, I do a lot more manual labor but have seen (heard) LPs take several steps in the correct direction via this process.
     
  9. phantomrebel

    phantomrebel Serial Tapist Subscriber

    The Cyastat SN is just a quat surfactant (Stearamidopropyldimethyl-2-hydroxyethylammonium nitrate). We've discussed many of it's relatives in this thread that you can substitute. I've made hundreds of these PVA masks playing around with many different formulations and can say they just don't produce the results I am after.
     
  10. phantomrebel

    phantomrebel Serial Tapist Subscriber

    The Nexazyme protocol was discussed early in this thread, post 61, but the link page was taken down. Anyways, it works well, just be sure to empty and discard the sticky capsule. Also, never let the solution dry on the record surface during incubation (which should be more like 15 min).
     
    ~librarian likes this.
  11. Rentz

    Rentz AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    165
    Location:
    Texas
    thanks, i did use search for cyastat and most of the info i found was from a few years ago. i'll did through this specific thread some more.
     
  12. RainDog911

    RainDog911 New Member

    Messages:
    36
    Thank you for the information PR. And for all your contributions to this thread.

    I'd like to confirm that the contents of one capsule of Nexazyme in 1 Liter of RODI water (or better) is the correct ratio.

    In the future, I'd like to find a liquid concentrate of pure enzymes instead of breaking apart capsules. Many enzyme cleaners contain other surfactants, detergents, alcohols, glycol, etc. which I'd like to avoid. Any thoughts on sources?

    I've read that enzyme cleaners are most effective at slightly elevated temperatures like 98 Deg F. I'm planning on making a temperature controlled soaking tank as a pre-clean step.
     
  13. AlexA6404

    AlexA6404 New Member

    Messages:
    15
    I guess one question is if Nexazyme needs to be applied as a separate step (I actually use a brush to scrub during enzyme treatment), or can Nexazyme simply be added to the ultrasonic tank solution during the general cleaning process.
     
  14. Paully

    Paully AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    217
    Location:
    Alabama
    I am sure this has been discussed but finding it... I am thinking about getting one of the following ultrasonic cleaners to replace the super cheap $100 one I bought. Can anyone who knows anything about it let me know if these are good choices.

    Sonix4 Mechanical Ultrasonic Cleaner (vs the digital) - https://www.sonix4.com/product-page/ultrasonic-cleaner-1-1-2-gallons-6-5l-with-heat-st136h

    Trusonic - http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Stainle...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649

    Thank you for any input!
     
  15. phantomrebel

    phantomrebel Serial Tapist Subscriber

    Yes, for convenience this works, but it is overkill and you can get by with one capsule powder per 5 liters, particularly when using at elevated temperatures where, as you have found, activity/efficiency is greater. Also, I use in tap water or specific buffer solutions, not distilled/de-ionized as the enzymes require ions for catalysis and stability. I haven't looked for pure liquid sources, but I have used Sporacidin and found the lipase and amylase activities to be very low in that mix. I assume this is because they aren't present in sufficient quantities and the protease (typically papain or pepsin) is quite active in solution and is digesting them. In any event, this is why I choose to stick with powered (dry) enzyme mixes. In the lab, we keep pure enzymes in solution in the fridge or freezer where activity is low and I would recommend only buying liquid enzymatic solutions that are stored this way.

    This is an interesting question. The short answer is yes, as some of the same enzymes (e.g. Papain protease) are used in laundry and other household cleaning solutions where they work in a detergent mixture. The long answer involves levels of activity in a situation where pH is not optimized and salts (ions) required for activity and stability are lacking (since tank solutions are typically made with DI water). Furthermore, I would suspect some denaturation of enzymes (killing their activity) in a solution of cavitation bubbles, but I have never looked into this. Maybe give it a try and see what happens?
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2017
    bhaskarcan likes this.
  16. AlexA6404

    AlexA6404 New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Hello Phantomrebel
    Thank you for clarifying ion requirement for enzyme solution. Unfortunately, I have cleaned many records using DI water with Nexazyme, already. Our tap water here is very hard. Do you see a problem using hard water to make enzyme solution? Would there be a problem scrubbing the record while using hard water enzyme solution, due to the minerals and other stuff in the water? Of course, I rinse again with DI water after enzyme application.
     
  17. phantomrebel

    phantomrebel Serial Tapist Subscriber

    Using distilled water is not a huge deal if you are using an enzyme mix like Nexazyme as this contains a variety of each enzyme type (six different proteases, for example) that have a range of pH optimums and ionic requirements. Some work fine in dH2O, others need a little Mg2+, etc. 100% activity is not essential, but you don't want alkaline pH and no ions around as a good number of the enzymes aren't active under those conditions. I would never use very hard water or highly chlorinated water straight from the tap on records. Always charcoal filter or use bottled.
     
  18. AlexA6404

    AlexA6404 New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Thanks. When you say bottled water, do you mean bottled drinking (not distilled) water?
     
  19. uniman4

    uniman4 New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Hey, I am new to the vinyl world, been reading and researching about this topic, but so much stuff, i just get confused on which way to go. I wish i could afford a machine but can not.

    Can someone please list the EXACT materials needed to do the process about that the historical records uses, I will use that one.

    Also, I might spend $30 for the vinyl vac? Or just make it?

    Will also get microfiber towels, an audioquest brush, and another soft brush for cleaning.

    Would like a nice tidy list of what i need, doin it as cheap as possible. I do think its smarter to go this way than the spin clean way?
     
  20. mjwraw

    mjwraw Active Member

    Can I just throw something in here, in my experience it doesn't matter what you do to clean your records, if you can't get every last little bit of your cleaning solution off your records before it dries on then it's never going to be a completely effective process, (on the basis that any residue that's left is by definition not only going to contain whatever dissolved ingredients the solution originally contained but also any dirt the cleaning process has picked up).
     
    johnebravo likes this.

Share This Page