Record Cleaning: Developing the Best Possible Methods

[guest110]

I only play a chemist on TV!

Look at you Trek! Glad the alcohol helped.
AVfan: Interested to hear your impressions. I can't seem to find my files on the static experiment. I still have the surface DC voltmeter so I'll re-do the experiment (after the visiting family leaves town!).
WntRmute: There are differences in the detergents you listed. While they are all non-ionic, the average length and configuration of the non-polar "tails" (and hence the average molecular weight) varies. This effects the micelle size, critical concentration, and solubility. It's not something we need to worry about for our use, but in scientific or industrial applications, it matters as you want to select the perfect detergent for the task. As I mentioned previously, record grime is diverse, so we don't need to be so specific. We are concerned with solubility however, so choosing the lower Tergitols may make things easier to work with. I'm generalizing here, but the less soluble the detergent, the better it can be for removing certain oils. The more soluble, the better it rinses away. So some people do mixtures to cover the bases. I suggest you pick the one that is readily available and you find easy to work with. They all will do a good job cleaning your records.

 

[GooGooMuck]

@Vince1: OK, I found some possible substitutes. Are any of these usable?

wanted: Triton X100, have: PPI N-95
wanted: NP-40, have: NP-4
wanted: Tergitol 15-S-7, have Tergitol15-S-3

From previous posts it looks like the Tergitol 15-S-3 is usable, however I am unsure of the others.

Thanks

 

[ripblade]

@Vince1: OK, I found some possible substitutes. Are any of these usable?

wanted: Triton X100, have: PPI N-95
wanted: NP-40, have: NP-4
wanted: Tergitol 15-S-7, have Tergitol15-S-3

From previous posts it looks like the Tergitol 15-S-3 is usable, however I am unsure of the others.

Thanks

The 15-S-3 on it's own is unusable since it is insoluble in water. You can mix it with 15-S-9 and the mixture will become soluble in water.

 

[Condorsat]

I'm using Nonionic Surfactant NP-6 High Purity (Tergitol)

I'm not making a stock base ... like Triton ... just adding the NP6 ... .0002 (one eye drop) per 8 oz. Stirring in a beaker (250ml) & then storing in Lab wash bottle. The new formula I will be using is ...

Forgot to mention that there's all different kinds of Tergitols (example NP6, NP7, NP8, NP9, 15 S3, 15 S9 ... etc etc etc.) Bottom line is that you have to do your homework before buying.

 

[guest110]

Another thread made me pull out previous notes on record treatments so I thought I'd include them here:

Part 4: “I swear by ‘GruvGlide’, ‘GroOoveLube’, or ‘Last’ record treatments”
You shouldn’t need these.
These products are grossly expensive and can be detrimental.

The worst of the group is probably GroOoveLube since it is a polydimethylsiloxone based product. They claim it reduces friction since it leaves a molecular silicone layer on the record surface. This is the same active ingredient type found in Rain-X, Armor-All, and other “slicking” products and if you’ve ever used these on your car you know how they can cause issues with decomposition and build-up. Why would anyone put such a thing into record grooves?

Next up is Last Record Preservative, a product advertised to keep your record playing like new for 200 plays because it chemically stabilizes the record surface molecules thereby protecting it from damage from the stylus. Wow, sounds great doesn’t it? Well, the product is perfluoropolyether (PFPE) based. Dupont came up with this family of compounds (tradename Krytox) in their search for novel greases and lubricants. The advantage is they are silicone free, chemically inert, thermally stable, and have a very low coefficient of friction. So in effect, it is just an ultra-thin layer of grease you are smearing on your records: there is no chemical stabilization occurring. As greases, they can lead to an accumulation that is very difficult to remove without resorting to strong solvents that would destroy your record. Your equipment is designed to play native vinyl records, there is no reason to grease them up.

The final record treatment product I will discuss is Gruv Glide. This product claims it eliminates pops and clicks using a propriety compound developed by a NASA scientist (so it must be great!). All it is is a mixture of Quat compunds , easily verified by looking at their patent (US4510187).
As I have discussed previously, these cationic surfactants reduce static. They are the same compounds found in Static Guard, Fabric Softeners, and hair conditioners and they have great antimicrobial properties. They work well in small amounts when added to a detergent mix during the wash cycle, but then it should be followed by a rinse to remove captured oils and dirt leaving behind a surface with just a fine molecular layer of adsorbed surfactant. Using the GruvGlide product as directed there is no rinse step. In fact, you are instructed to “buff” the compound into the record!! Quats are great if you are experiencing issues with static, but you should not need them if you are washing with non-ionic detergents (like Tergitol or Triton) and you should never accumulate them on your record surface. The good news is that, unlike the previously discussed coatings, GruvGlide build up can be easily removed with a detergent wash. Just include the rinse!

 

[hi*ball]

Thanks again Vince!

Your background has made this thread very interesting and valuable.
Now I'm just waiting for another squirt bottle and beaker so I can mix myself up a 10% Triton cocktail!

 

[toxcrusadr]

Very interesting stuff here and a lot of good advice.

As a chemist, a couple of comments and questions (those not interested in nerdy chemistry stuff, feel free to check out, no offense taken!):

1) Studies that could (or have) demonstrated that some cleaners can extract plasticizers (such as high or low pH compounds, as discussed earlier). It would not be terribly difficult in the lab to soak some junk records and measure chemicals in the solution. Of course you have to know first what you're looking for. Perhaps some of this has been done, but it may have been in the labs of record cleaning solution makers and never published.

2) A mechanistic explanation of how and why ionic surfactants can increase static charge on a record. An ionic surfactant generally goes with its counter-ion - i.e. lauryl sulfate has sodium in solution. If you rinse that off, either they go together or not at all. I just don't understand how a salt (which is basically what SLS or any ionic surfactant is) can create static charge. But I am open-minded on this.

3) "Residues" - there is a lot of talk about residues. Let's all keep in mind that a few drops of detergent in a pint of liquid is not very much. And we are (I hope) rinsing with water when doing a deep or initial cleaning (as opposed to a quick maintenance cleaning with a Discwasher on the TT prior to playing, with no rinse). Still I agree that products like shampoo that have a lot of additives should be avoided; for this reason Triton or Tergitol are ideal - surfactant with nothing else. Distilled water, yes, because it's a dollar a gallon, why not? Beyond that, it's diminishing returns.


Slightly off track, but I used to work at a contract lab doing environmental fate studies on chemicals. One of my projects was on alkylphenol ethoxylates - which is what Tergitol NP is. NP = nonylphenol, having a 9-carbon chain. There were other products with different chain lengths The number after the NP, IIRC, is the average length of the chains in the mixture.

 

[guest110]

Thanks Toxcrusadr! A Chemist's input is really valuable here.
Regarding charged detergents, you are correct, they are salts in solution. My understanding is that, when the record is cleaned, a small film of detergent is adsorbed onto the record surface (presumably through hydrophobic interactions of the non-polar tail leaving the charged head exposed). This remains even after washing in distilled water, which removes surplus ions. When the record is dried, there is no fluid for ions to move around to balance so the surface has the ability to take on a net charge, for example, when wiped with a rag, dragged through a sleeve, or placed against another charged surface (of which, most are negative). You can end up with a charge imbalance. A surface without any charge groups (non-ionic) would have less potential for this, or less tendency to gain or lose electrons. Water is able to provide electrons and balance the effect, which is why wet records don't have static charge and humidity in a room helps reduce static. A physicist would certainly be useful here to explain the theory behind this as I'm weak in the area of conductors, insulators, and electromagnetism, but this is my very crude understanding.

Regarding residues, yes, there aren't much at the dilutions we are talking but, when adsorbed and accumulated on a surface that is played for sound using very small variations in the grooves and amplified, small amounts can produce detectable noise. People even say they can hear the difference between rinsing with distilled water and tap, even though tap contaminants are typically dilute. I cannot. A lot of this is splitting hairs, but it's easy enough and more cost effective to go pure. If you can smell the soap scent or feel the moisturizer on your hands after washing, you know chemicals remain. Why leave these on our records?

Regarding plasticizers, many are phalates that are soluble in alcohol but not so much in water so it is not unreasonable to assume they can be extracted. You are correct that the research in this area is lacking.

 

[toxcrusadr]

Interesting concept about the surfactants sticking to the surface charged end up. I thought I saw somewhere in this thread that you have done some experiments and found there really was an increase in static? If there is anything definitive enough to share I'd love to see.

Totally agreed on the residue question, minimize when possible. Given the resolution of most of our systems and ears - well OK I'll just speak for myself: I doubt I would notice any difference between Triton and Dawn even if there were perfumes or whatever in it. Most of my vinyl is not that fabulous to begin with - a lot of these records are a half century old and show it. But I'm going to get some nonionic stuff, if that's what the pros are using the commercial stuff anyway. Somebody here could probably make a cottage industry selling small quantities of pre-diluted surfactants, since most of us would never use a whole bottle of the pure stuff.

I wish I was still in the lab with a mass spec at my fingertips. I could do the plasticizer research pretty easy.

 

[guest110]

Interesting concept about the surfactants sticking to the surface charged end up. I thought I saw somewhere in this thread that you have done some experiments and found there really was an increase in static? If there is anything definitive enough to share I'd love to see.

Totally agreed on the residue question, minimize when possible. Given the resolution of most of our systems and ears - well OK I'll just speak for myself: I doubt I would notice any difference between Triton and Dawn even if there were perfumes or whatever in it. Most of my vinyl is not that fabulous to begin with - a lot of these records are a half century old and show it. But I'm going to get some nonionic stuff, if that's what the pros are using the commercial stuff anyway. Somebody here could probably make a cottage industry selling small quantities of pre-diluted surfactants, since most of us would never use a whole bottle of the pure stuff.

I wish I was still in the lab with a mass spec at my fingertips. I could do the plasticizer research pretty easy.

Meet too. I've been out of my lab for 9 years now. A lot of equipment that I could now use was left behind. Most of my vinyl isn't that special either and my old ears are fading, but we live in a world of $100K turntables, $10K cartridges, and "extreme" audiophiles, so I think it is time to bring some science to the hobby. At the very least, we should strive to save this medium for future generations, regardless of how old fashioned that sounds. I will post some surface charge results soon as I did manage to keep an electrostatic voltmeter.

 

[ghazzer]

Vince: Let me add my thanks and appreciation. Your posts contain a wealth of technical and shade tree information than is actually understandable. I'm working on a 3D printing project right now and have some plans for a RCM. Now I can order all the ingredients for the cleaning solution, and be ready to roll!

Keep Up the Good Work - - -

 

[guest110]

Vince: Let me add my thanks and appreciation. Your posts contain a wealth of technical and shade tree information than is actually understandable. I'm working on a 3D printing project right now and have some plans for a RCM. Now I can order all the ingredients for the cleaning solution, and be ready to roll!

Keep Up the Good Work - - -

That sounds like a very cool venture Ghazzer. Would love to read a thread on how you went about this, as it is very much above my head. I appreciate the feedback myself, as I have no horse in any race, I'm just trying to demystify all the bunk about record cleaning and get into the fundamentals. There are good people who have researched and developed best methods, and others who pray on people to sell them a solution they don't need. Our job as enthusiasts is to educate ourselves and figure out, in an informed way, what makes the best sense. We will likely never achieve it, but there is never shame in striving for perfection!

 

[GooGooMuck]

So I have learned that the Tergitol 15-S-3 is not water soluble, so I can't use that. The NP-4 I have IS water soluble and has a PH of 7.2. Is this safe to use? If so at what dilution? I was also given "PPI N-95" as a possible substitute for Triton X100. Can't find any info on this.

 

[guest110]

So I have learned that the Tergitol 15-S-3 is not water soluble, so I can't use that. The NP-4 I have IS water soluble and has a PH of 7.2. Is this safe to use? If so at what dilution? I was also given "PPI N-95" as a possible substitute for Triton X100. Can't find any info on this.

According to the Dow data sheet on NP-4, it is also insoluble in water. The PPI N95 product is better known as Nonoxynol-9 and is similar to Triton X100 (Octoxynol 9), is soluble, is non-ionic, and could be used. It's good stuff, and the active ingredient in spermicide foam, since it is safe vaginally and it disrupts sperm cell membranes (like Triton). Just curious, where are you located where you can't get Triton or the soluble Tergitols?

 

[GooGooMuck]

According to the Dow data sheet on NP-4, it is also insoluble in water. The PPI N95 product is better known as Nonoxynol-9 and is similar to Triton X100 (Octoxynol 9), is soluble, is non-ionic, and could be used. It's good stuff, and the active ingredient in spermicide foam, since it is safe vaginally and it disrupts sperm cell membranes (like Triton). Just curious, where are you located where you can't get Triton or the soluble Tergitols?

This is what I was reading that made me think the NP-4 was water soluble:

"TERGITOL™ NP-4
TERGITOL™ NP-4 is a nonionic, water soluble surfactant with exceptional handling properties for use cleaning applications."

From here: http://www.dow.com/en-us/markets-and-solutions/products/tergitolnp/tergitolnp4
It's not that Triton of the other Tergitols aren't available, just that I know someone who works with surfactants and could supply me with small amounts. When I asked for the recommended chemicals, the ones I listed were given as possible substitutes.

Would the dilution of the PPI N-95 be the same as the Triton X100?

Thanks,
GGM

 

[guest110]

This is what I was reading that made me think the NP-4 was water soluble:

"TERGITOL™ NP-4
TERGITOL™ NP-4 is a nonionic, water soluble surfactant with exceptional handling properties for use cleaning applications."

From here: http://www.dow.com/en-us/markets-and-solutions/products/tergitolnp/tergitolnp4
It's not that Triton of the other Tergitols aren't available, just that I know someone who works with surfactants and could supply me with small amounts. When I asked for the recommended chemicals, the ones I listed were given as possible substitutes.

Would the dilution of the PPI N-95 be the same as the Triton X100?

Thanks,
GGM

Yeah, they screwed up on that description. Click on their data sheet link on that page and you will see it is only oil soluble. Look through the specs and you'll see "insoluble" or see this one: http://msdssearch.dow.com/Published...ants/pdfs/noreg/119-01927.pdf&fromPage=GetDoc. Yes, you would use N-95 just like Triton, typically 0.5% for initial cleaning to 0.05% for touch-up cleans.

 

[onwardjames]

God, I love this thread.

I had my old Spin Clean out the other night, and for kicks and giggles, dropped about 5 drops of the 10% mix into the tank. I know you'll probably tell me that Spin Clean's ingredients won't work with tergitol, because that's my luck, but I swear my vinyl came out gloriously clean.

Except for one damned old stubborn ELO album. Had to glue that baby (some hard crusty matter over the record).

When nothing else will do, use the glue. Otherwise, tergitol is my go-to stuff.

 

[toxcrusadr]

I love this thread too, just for the 'record.'

 

[Trekmaster]

I haven't been this excited since I got my chemistry set when I was 12

 

[jbailey930]

kudos to Vince and HiBall. I've been cleaning my stax of wax since I bought the magic wand from Jason in early November. A bit monotonous but results are phenomenal. My cleaning operation is my workbench where I run AR2AXs in a near field position w/ MC2100 Mac laptop w/Dragonfly.