• Check out the Annual AK Secret Santa exchange Program, signup before November 23rd in the AK Charities & Christmas forum!

Record Cleaning: Developing the Best Possible Methods

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would take that bet. Give me one you've given up on and more than likely I can improve on it.

Have you read his methodology?? Pretty comprehensive. Still, if you have silverfish turds, or old paint, grease, who knows.....the glue is pretty good at taking that off.
 
I would take that bet. Give me one you've given up on and more than likely I can improve on it.

If its just dirt I don't give up on any. I've had a couple that looked like they lived in a sand box. After cleaning them they played perfectly and silent in between tracks. How can glue be better than silent.
I do admit that I take great care in the selection of LP's I buy.
 
Have you read his methodology?? Pretty comprehensive. Still, if you have silverfish turds, or old paint, grease, who knows.....the glue is pretty good at taking that off.
It can remove stuff no amount of soaking or scrubbing - no matter how comprehensive - will remove. It can even reduce the noise impact of slight scuff marks, something only fine sanding will do, though I'd rather apply glue first than sand a record..
 
It can remove stuff no amount of soaking or scrubbing - no matter how comprehensive - will remove.

I've used a gluing product on some baseboards that I put on once. It was called "No Nails". Once I tried to remove one of those baseboards and it took quite a bit of dry wall with it. So like that?
 
Funky: Glad to see you are using a vacuum-based method. I don't know what Pure2 is, but if it is meant to not be rinsed, then it is probably ~95% water with trace amounts of surfactant and 5% isopropanol. I would continue to use it for pre-play touch up of previously deep cleaned records. For more dirty stuff, go through this thread and see why a non-ionic detergent is preferred over dish soap. Also, use their Pure-zyme enzymatic cleaner if super nasty (or make your own enzymatic cleaner). Enzymes get rid of stuff that detergent alone might not. I suspect this is what the glue also does, only the enzymes are specific and do it without any surface damage.
Here's what music directs site says: Purifier 2 is a strong cleaner, capable of overpowering the most stubborn residue or grease. It contains a degreaser, a static neutralizer, a mild detergent, and surfactant. Purifier 2 has a remarkably low 6 parts solid per million dissolved solids, making it residue free. Contains alcohol and is totally biodegradable.

Is this good to use exclusively and every time?
 
Well essentially I would assume thats what everyone does. I take it we're here for the information that guides us to what we like to do with our LP's.
I'm of the opinion we can always do better. That is what drives this hobby, otherwise there'd be no $14,000 interconnects or $100,000 tables. There will always be those who get satisfactory results with what they have and it's all good. Information is never harmful, and neither should be debate.
The argument that glue and ears trump scientific evidence and equipment is a weak one. Most equipment can pick up sounds that many cannot hear and microscopes detect what we cannot normally see. Just because you can't hear the damage doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Whether it matters is up to the individual. Maybe it could down the road. I find it odd to hear people complain about how a record they bought used was full of grime and scuffs and basically mistreated then they go and potentially mistreat their own collection.

It can remove stuff no amount of soaking or scrubbing - no matter how comprehensive - will remove. It can even reduce the noise impact of slight scuff marks, something only fine sanding will do, though I'd rather apply glue first than sand a record..
I have not experienced this with skuffs, but in this case I see great value to the method if the goal is to then make a digital copy.


James: Try dissolving the detergent in a small amount of 50% Isopropanol first then diluting. It works instantly if you don't want to wait overnight.
 
Here's what music directs site says: Purifier 2 is a strong cleaner, capable of overpowering the most stubborn residue or grease. It contains a degreaser, a static neutralizer, a mild detergent, and surfactant. Purifier 2 has a remarkably low 6 parts solid per million dissolved solids, making it residue free. Contains alcohol and is totally biodegradable.

Is this good to use exclusively and every time?

The degreaser, detergent and surfactant are the same thing, most likely Tergitol or Triton, The static reducer is an additional cationic detergent as has been discussed, and the alcohol is isopropanol. Hence, it is similar to what we have been discussing here so go ahead and use it. Without knowing the concentrations of ingredients, I would consider a dH2O rinse. The claim that it can "overpower" the most stubborn residue is marketing hogwash. You still need a mechanical force with the detergent (e.g. gentle scrubbing) and may also need enzymatic treatment to release tightly bound contaminants (typically fats, carbohydrates, and proteins....hence the Lipase, Amylase, and Protease in the enzyme mix). That's why they also sell an enzyme treatment. It all depends on your starting material. Some used records are just dusty, others are grimy, some are perfectly clean and some are so bad that playing them will damage your equipment. Likewise, some are common, some are valuable, some are brilliantly engineered, and some sound like crap no matter how clean. How you treat them is your choice, but at least you know what you are doing.
 
I've used a gluing product on some baseboards that I put on once. It was called "No Nails". Once I tried to remove one of those baseboards and it took quite a bit of dry wall with it. So like that?

Nah, that isn't what gluing does. It actually comes off very easily. And I have had minor scratches lifted with glue. I guess the grip PULLS the bent vinyl up???

Thanks, Vince, I'll try that.

Such a fantastic thread, people, no need to feel any slighting or get defensive. ALWAYS BE LEARNING!! :bigok::beerchug:
 
ALWAYS BE LEARNING!! :bigok::beerchug:
You always seem to have the best attitude James, and that's not always easy!
Anyways, all this recent talk about glue has forced my decision to get back to experiments with PVA masks that I previously abandoned. Surely I can come up with a DIY mix that uses simple ingredients, is pH neutral, contains antistats, is not harmful to vinyl. I'll see if I can accelerate drying times as well. If someone want to participate, I'll send a few working recipes that need improving. of course, they all start with the old Reg Williamson recipe (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/57939482/TAA_articles.pdf), but with various modifications (trying to get away from 50% alcohol formulas).
 
I'm very happy with the mix that Vince has posted. Works like a charm and with the Triton I have enough to last a long long time. Thanks for taking the time Vince to point me in the right direction. :thumbsup:
 
I'm very happy with the mix that Vince has posted. Works like a charm and with the Triton I have enough to last a long long time. Thanks for taking the time Vince to point me in the right direction. :thumbsup:

You are more than welcome Trekmaster, but it's not my mix...it's the industry standard. I just helped reveal the contents and why they are used. I'm glad it's working for you. Don't be afraid to up the detergent concentration on exceptionally dirty records as long as you do a good dH20 rinse. I'm dealing with a real old batch at the moment and that is what is working. Microscopic examination is telling me I don't really need the enzymes with these after a 1% Triton/5% isopropanol wash with paint pad scrub followed by H2O blast, then double dH20 rinse on VPI RCM. only takes about 4 min/record if I'm on a roll.
 
The degreaser, detergent and surfactant are the same thing, most likely Tergitol or Triton, The static reducer is an additional cationic detergent as has been discussed, and the alcohol is isopropanol. Hence, it is similar to what we have been discussing here so go ahead and use it. Without knowing the concentrations of ingredients, I would consider a dH2O rinse. The claim that it can "overpower" the most stubborn residue is marketing hogwash. You still need a mechanical force with the detergent (e.g. gentle scrubbing) and may also need enzymatic treatment to release tightly bound contaminants (typically fats, carbohydrates, and proteins....hence the Lipase, Amylase, and Protease in the enzyme mix). That's why they also sell an enzyme treatment. It all depends on your starting material. Some used records are just dusty, others are grimy, some are perfectly clean and some are so bad that playing them will damage your equipment. Likewise, some are common, some are valuable, some are brilliantly engineered, and some sound like crap no matter how clean. How you treat them is your choice, but at least you know what you are doing.
Thanks for such a detailed response. I really do appreciate it. This is a great Thread and you're doing us all a great service.
 
Vince, having a good attitude here on AK is easy for me. In real life, not so much. Still, appreciate your comments.

And if there is anything I can do to help with some type of gentle PVA treatment, I'm all in. Glue really has no equal on those most stubborn of records. Thanks again.
 
You always seem to have the best attitude James, and that's not always easy!
Anyways, all this recent talk about glue has forced my decision to get back to experiments with PVA masks that I previously abandoned. Surely I can come up with a DIY mix that uses simple ingredients, is pH neutral, contains antistats, is not harmful to vinyl. I'll see if I can accelerate drying times as well. If someone want to participate, I'll send a few working recipes that need improving. of course, they all start with the old Reg Williamson recipe (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/57939482/TAA_articles.pdf), but with various modifications (trying to get away from 50% alcohol formulas).
I'd happily participate but since I'm already quite satisfied with the PVA treatment as it is I'm afraid I'd have very little to critique about your formulae. I would say however, as one who has looked into this before, that basing it on commonly found ingredients that can be mixed into a bottle of glue would have much wider appeal. Some people can't get a hold of proprietary ingredients - especially outside of the US - but also some people are intimidated by the notion of mixing several ingredients together to make a preparation from scratch. Take a look at the number of inquiries in this thread alone, which accounts for all of 2 or 3 ingredients and you'll see what I mean.

The key to success is simplicity and ease of implementation....we're not chemists here with access to exotic ingredients...so a bottle of glue works just fine for most of us.
 
Great thing about internet fora is that everyone has an opinion. Over the last month I've cleaned over 300 lps using the magic wand vac attachment from Jason and a similar formula as Vince suggests. I am ecstatic with the results on albums as old as the 50s from my parents smoke filled home played 100s of times. No pops, crackle or hisses. The cleaning process gets relaxing being somewhat methodical/repetitive. Put on some tunes and clean away!

Another hobby I have is woodworking. I have titebond, gorilla, elmers, CA, epoxy on hand in decent quantities. I am much more comfortable using the cleaning mix vs. glue.... and so it goes.
 
I'd happily participate but since I'm already quite satisfied with the PVA treatment as it is I'm afraid I'd have very little to critique about your formulae. I would say however, as one who has looked into this before, that basing it on commonly found ingredients that can be mixed into a bottle of glue would have much wider appeal. Some people can't get a hold of proprietary ingredients - especially outside of the US - but also some people are intimidated by the notion of mixing several ingredients together to make a preparation from scratch. Take a look at the number of inquiries in this thread alone, which accounts for all of 2 or 3 ingredients and you'll see what I mean.

The key to success is simplicity and ease of implementation....we're not chemists here with access to exotic ingredients...so a bottle of glue works just fine for most of us.

Point well taken. This is what has been holding me up, that is, keeping it simple. I think I'll contact some wood glue manufacturers to see if they have more neutral commercial formulas. They are always changing things for specific applications or to comply with new EPA standards. I know, for example, that there are acid-free adhesives used in the preservation and art industries (I tried Lineco's Neutral pH White, but it is too thin). I'm sure if it was commercially available, performed the same as Titebond, yet was more compatible with vinyl records people would have no problem switching. A win-win for all.
 
I know, for example, that there are acid-free adhesives used in the preservation and art industries (I tried Lineco's Neutral pH White, but it is too thin).
Why is thin a problem? Being thin, it can be spread more thinly and evenly, enabling it to dry faster. It would also make it easier to blend in any additives or make other adjustments.

While on the subject of drying time, the user has a great deal of control in this area, by allowing the record to dry under warm, highly ventilated conditions. In the summertime here, I can have a record dry and ready to play in less than 2 hours, both sides. I would imagine in the lower states the records would dry even faster. The trick is to apply the glue thin enough that it dries quickly, yet heavily enough the peel doesn't split and sliver on removal. Using a pliable glue is an asset, as is making sure it isn't overly dry.
 
FWIW "regular" Titebond has a pH of 4.7
Though less acidic than Titebond II, this remains very acidic. For example, tooth enamel degrades below pH 5.5. Remember the grade school experiments soaking teeth overnight in soda pop? You want to soak your records in this overnight?

Why is thin a problem? Being thin, it can be spread more thinly and evenly, enabling it to dry faster. It would also make it easier to blend in any additives or make other adjustments.
While on the subject of drying time, the user has a great deal of control in this area, by allowing the record to dry under warm, highly ventilated conditions. In the summertime here, I can have a record dry and ready to play in less than 2 hours, both sides. I would imagine in the lower states the records would dry even faster. The trick is to apply the glue thin enough that it dries quickly, yet heavily enough the peel doesn't split and sliver on removal. Using a pliable glue is an asset, as is making sure it isn't overly dry.
It was so thin I couldn't get it to peel off the record in anything but a million pieces. It was a chore. Maybe many coats would have worked better.
A quick dry is certainly an advantage. I found raising the alcohol in my mixes allowed for faster drying, but I was worried about leaching so did not pursue this direction. There are plasticizers in PVA glue that, like vinyl, affect the pliability so this is something easy to control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom