Parallax982
Super Member
Pretty good. Not perfect though. It's a work in process.
Record Cleaning Question
- Thread starter Parallax982
- Start date
Lou G
Super Member
I would not use microfiber cloths for drying records. Most low cost polyester microfiber cloths leave behind micro polyester particles in the record grooves which will adhere to the stylus during playback and have an adverse effect on SQ. A much better choice are clean room wipes which will not leave behind any fibers or lint. I can highly recommend Kimtech clean room wipes. We routinely used them in our clean room applications in my laboratory.
Parallax982
Super Member
I'm going to be blotting off the water beads. Not wiping the grooves (or wiping at all for that matter). The towels will be new, washed once all by themselves, and not used for anything else. So while there is a risk of particle adherence if misused, I don't believe my plan will result in shedding. By the way, those Kimtrch/Kimwipes aren't lint-free either. The manufacturer claims they reduce the risk. I wouldn't want to misuse any towel. Part of the game plan is using towels unlikely to release lint. The other part is using them judiciously.
Lou G
Super Member
I never said kimwipes. The Kimtech wipes that I mentioned are their W4 clean room wipes which are lint free. It looks like the price for them has skyrocketed since I last purchased them for my lab.
Parallax982
Super Member
Got it. Well, the towels just arrived so I'm going to wash them and give them a try.
Parallax982
Super Member
The microfiber towels failed. They just don't absorb water. I'm finding it adequate to shake as much water as possible off the records before setting them in the drying rack. Cuts drying time way down, from 24 hours down to 3 or 4.
I'm not surprised about the microfiber towels not working out as I did the same thing when I first started out......seems like the water almost "beads up" on them much as like a newly waxed car would!
I'm still very curious about the fan proposition though......you mentioned earlier on that you have a lot of humidity, making drying times longer. So, if that is the case, high humidity usually also means less dust in the air so I'd be very eager to at least give a fan a shot. After all, you are in the experimentation stage of your project. Fans do a surprisingly good job of getting the water to evaporate more quickly and many would agree that they are the best possible solution as there is nothing "touching" the cleaned record. Besides, a bit of dust in the air is not likely to present you with much of a concern at all as nearly all of it remains on the surface and not in the grooves where it might tend to get stuck and build up, starting the need for the cleaning cycle all over again......just not likely to happen. The very small amount of airborne particulates that do happen to find a landing spot on the record are very easily removed with a carbon fiber brush applied before playing the record for the first time after cleaning. What's left, the stylus will move aside or, worst case scenario, will cling to the stylus but typically does not cause any untoward outcomes in terms of the listening experience.
The fan need not be one that moves small cars......just an ordinary, small fan will do if placed in the right spot to provide circulation that speeds drying time, especially if you are drying only a few records (3-5 e.g.) at a time. Just sayin......carry on amigo
I'm still very curious about the fan proposition though......you mentioned earlier on that you have a lot of humidity, making drying times longer. So, if that is the case, high humidity usually also means less dust in the air so I'd be very eager to at least give a fan a shot. After all, you are in the experimentation stage of your project. Fans do a surprisingly good job of getting the water to evaporate more quickly and many would agree that they are the best possible solution as there is nothing "touching" the cleaned record. Besides, a bit of dust in the air is not likely to present you with much of a concern at all as nearly all of it remains on the surface and not in the grooves where it might tend to get stuck and build up, starting the need for the cleaning cycle all over again......just not likely to happen. The very small amount of airborne particulates that do happen to find a landing spot on the record are very easily removed with a carbon fiber brush applied before playing the record for the first time after cleaning. What's left, the stylus will move aside or, worst case scenario, will cling to the stylus but typically does not cause any untoward outcomes in terms of the listening experience.
The fan need not be one that moves small cars......just an ordinary, small fan will do if placed in the right spot to provide circulation that speeds drying time, especially if you are drying only a few records (3-5 e.g.) at a time. Just sayin......carry on amigo
Parallax982
Super Member
I might try that. The time is no longer really an issue. More of an issue is that most of my records still crackle. Not all, so I assume it's just that the crap records I've picked up are pretty well worn. If it were the stylus or if the cleaning process were useless, they would all crackle.
Yes, that is very true.....once the record is damaged, as in scratched, no amount of cleaning is going to restore it......you will continue to hear the scratches in the form of pops, clicks, and just plain noisy playback. And I think you may be correct.....you just came into some records that had not been cared for very well and that's a shame but it happens.
However, many records that sound badly, meaning noisy, sound that way due to dirt in the grooves and those are the ones that you will be able to restore to very fine playback status. I'm thinking you will grow your collection and when you start cleaning records that are just plain dirty, then you will hear the big difference provided you are using the ultrasonic system properly. This means taking the time to address each aspect of the process in the most effective way. If you are happy with your present results then that's as far as you need to go. If not, then you focus on those aspects of the process where you may not have done quite enough.
This reflects my experience, actually, and I had to go back and do my homework a number of times before I was truly happy with the results. Once I made the necessary adjustments I can't tell you how much difference it made, it has to be heard. The downside was that some of these discoveries were such that I felt it necessary to go back and re-clean records I had already done once! Aaaaargh!!! But in the end, it was all worth it because now, no matter what album I select to hear, I know it is going to sound about as good as it can.
Happy listening, amigo......
However, many records that sound badly, meaning noisy, sound that way due to dirt in the grooves and those are the ones that you will be able to restore to very fine playback status. I'm thinking you will grow your collection and when you start cleaning records that are just plain dirty, then you will hear the big difference provided you are using the ultrasonic system properly. This means taking the time to address each aspect of the process in the most effective way. If you are happy with your present results then that's as far as you need to go. If not, then you focus on those aspects of the process where you may not have done quite enough.
This reflects my experience, actually, and I had to go back and do my homework a number of times before I was truly happy with the results. Once I made the necessary adjustments I can't tell you how much difference it made, it has to be heard. The downside was that some of these discoveries were such that I felt it necessary to go back and re-clean records I had already done once! Aaaaargh!!! But in the end, it was all worth it because now, no matter what album I select to hear, I know it is going to sound about as good as it can.
Happy listening, amigo......
so as long as this thread is continuing, here's what i've got: the vevor 10l, a rotation setup, and distilled/x-100/hepstat/reagent grade isopropyl for the tank. planning on 4 records, 8 minutes run time.
but here's where i get stuck. i need to rinse when done, but i am unsure what to do. i don't have a rcm, or even a turntable with vacuum wand (i might build one of those, if needed).
how would this do? drain/filter the tank after running, then keep on the rotation while i spray each of the 8 sides for a couple minutes with a pump sprayer of distilled water. let the excess drain into the emptied tank, shake off the excess water, remove the records, and rack them in an area with an indirect fan until dry. new mofi sleeves...
then i can drain the rinse water, wipe out the tank, and put the filtered fluid back in the tank and go again, maybe topping up the solution.
how's that sound?
but here's where i get stuck. i need to rinse when done, but i am unsure what to do. i don't have a rcm, or even a turntable with vacuum wand (i might build one of those, if needed).
how would this do? drain/filter the tank after running, then keep on the rotation while i spray each of the 8 sides for a couple minutes with a pump sprayer of distilled water. let the excess drain into the emptied tank, shake off the excess water, remove the records, and rack them in an area with an indirect fan until dry. new mofi sleeves...
then i can drain the rinse water, wipe out the tank, and put the filtered fluid back in the tank and go again, maybe topping up the solution.
how's that sound?
When I was doing it that way I used a Spin Clean for the rinse. 100% distilled water
Your proposed method ought to work just fine also
Your proposed method ought to work just fine also
If I had to do many more records, I would very likely pick up a spin clean.....good advice, @JSanders2056! I think you have a great idea there, @madwing ......give it a try and let us know how it goes.
Parallax982
Super Member
Tell me again about your technique.
It's the same as this:
If you haven't read that article, considering doing so.....it was the key for me to overcome my inhibitions and in no small amount overcome the intimidation with the prospects of setting this cleaning system up. The only differences are that I just use distilled water, a 6L tank and do just one rinse. My formula is pretty much the same although I use Triton-X rather than Tergitol. You can see my formula in a previous post on this thread. I also don't use a filtration system. When the solution doesn't meet the "clean to the eye" test, I just dump it and start over......just pennies involved, and a filtration system adds more complexity than I was willing to engage in. I do believe it has merit but I'm achieving results I'm very happy with without one. I vacuum each record before it goes in the tank to remove most of the loose dirt (with a separate vacuum wand, not the one I use to dry the record with after the final rinse) and that helps a lot in keeping the tank clean.
So, here's another thing I'd suggest to you.......if you have some records that (1) you are very, very familiar with in terms of how they should sound, and (2) are in good condition, meaning they have no scratches or other physical damage that is irreversible, then put these on your audio system and listen to them, preferably with some good quality headphones where you can hear detail very well. Then, once you have listened for a while, put those 2 or 3 records in your ultrasonic tank and clean them, followed by another listening session and I think you will be hearing the improvement very plainly.
Note: I'm a bit skeptical by nature, so I went to the extra step of recording the albums so I could do a real-time, live comparison switching back and forth very quickly and heard even more positive differences doing that. The recording was done with a Tascam digital recorder recording in 96kHz, 24bit, so pretty high resolution stuff providing excellent reproduction characteristics. The biggest difference I found was a MUCH lower noise floor, and when you achieve this it produces other, very happy changes as noise veils detail......remove it, and the detail comes jumping out at you!
Example: Listening to Sade, Diamond Life, Your Love Is King there is a cabasa that starts around the second verse. I had always heard it, but after the US cleaning, it literally "jumped out" at me and took me by surprise in a most pleasing way.
This is the kind of stuff that many just don't care about or need to hear, but for me the music just comes alive when I do hear it and that's a big part of my listening pleasure. So, as I alluded to earlier, if you're happy with where you are, you need go no further but if not, try refining your process a bit much along the lines of what Rushton Paul has done and you might be very pleased.
In conclusion, I really think, from your description amigo, that you started with records that were so damaged that no amount of cleaning was going to do much for improvements in how they sounded which is why you continued having a "scratchy" listening experience......carry on!
If you haven't read that article, considering doing so.....it was the key for me to overcome my inhibitions and in no small amount overcome the intimidation with the prospects of setting this cleaning system up. The only differences are that I just use distilled water, a 6L tank and do just one rinse. My formula is pretty much the same although I use Triton-X rather than Tergitol. You can see my formula in a previous post on this thread. I also don't use a filtration system. When the solution doesn't meet the "clean to the eye" test, I just dump it and start over......just pennies involved, and a filtration system adds more complexity than I was willing to engage in. I do believe it has merit but I'm achieving results I'm very happy with without one. I vacuum each record before it goes in the tank to remove most of the loose dirt (with a separate vacuum wand, not the one I use to dry the record with after the final rinse) and that helps a lot in keeping the tank clean.
So, here's another thing I'd suggest to you.......if you have some records that (1) you are very, very familiar with in terms of how they should sound, and (2) are in good condition, meaning they have no scratches or other physical damage that is irreversible, then put these on your audio system and listen to them, preferably with some good quality headphones where you can hear detail very well. Then, once you have listened for a while, put those 2 or 3 records in your ultrasonic tank and clean them, followed by another listening session and I think you will be hearing the improvement very plainly.
Note: I'm a bit skeptical by nature, so I went to the extra step of recording the albums so I could do a real-time, live comparison switching back and forth very quickly and heard even more positive differences doing that. The recording was done with a Tascam digital recorder recording in 96kHz, 24bit, so pretty high resolution stuff providing excellent reproduction characteristics. The biggest difference I found was a MUCH lower noise floor, and when you achieve this it produces other, very happy changes as noise veils detail......remove it, and the detail comes jumping out at you!
Example: Listening to Sade, Diamond Life, Your Love Is King there is a cabasa that starts around the second verse. I had always heard it, but after the US cleaning, it literally "jumped out" at me and took me by surprise in a most pleasing way.
This is the kind of stuff that many just don't care about or need to hear, but for me the music just comes alive when I do hear it and that's a big part of my listening pleasure. So, as I alluded to earlier, if you're happy with where you are, you need go no further but if not, try refining your process a bit much along the lines of what Rushton Paul has done and you might be very pleased.
In conclusion, I really think, from your description amigo, that you started with records that were so damaged that no amount of cleaning was going to do much for improvements in how they sounded which is why you continued having a "scratchy" listening experience......carry on!
Lou G
Super Member
@Parallax982, Did you use a surfactant in your ultrasonic cleaner and how long did you run the cleaner?
Last edited:
Hey @Lou G, I think the OP said he was just going to start with *distilled water......don't remember **how long he said he ran the cleaner or if he indeed ever said.
* Correction, he said tap water.....my bad.
**Correction, as @absolon points out, the OP was running the bath for 30 minutes, which I'm pretty sure is overkill but perhaps not to the point of damaging the records although I don't think I'd want to chance leaving them in there that long.....
* Correction, he said tap water.....my bad.
**Correction, as @absolon points out, the OP was running the bath for 30 minutes, which I'm pretty sure is overkill but perhaps not to the point of damaging the records although I don't think I'd want to chance leaving them in there that long.....
Last edited:
