Record Cleaning Machines
 

"jasee" wrote in message
...
Doesn't the sound alter, I would have thought it would have 'dampened' the
higher frequencies?

Yes, that was certainly my perception on playing the wetted LP.

Perhaps if you did it with a touch of detergent and distilled (not
dionised) watee then thoughly rinsed them you'd clean them quite
effectively?

It's definitely worth a go!

--

Cheers,


Dave

Record Cleaning Machines
 

"frankwm" wrote in message
oups.com...
You don't mention whether you've simply 'wet-played' - or combined
that with a detergent clean.
The fact you reduced the 'battleground effects' indicates that your
Iso-Alcohol method was leaving behind residues.

Well I detergent-cleaned (with a mild solution of "Flash"), rinsed and
dried it which, as I said, didn't seem to make any difference at all. So I
then wet-played it and that's when I noticed the difference. Having now left
it to dry out again for a couple of days, I can see exactly what you mean by
residues being left over. So I've wetted it again now, and it plays fine
again.

Thanks for the details of your method - I'll give it a try later this
week...


with 1970s vinyl it quickly forms an 'edge' and rotating the LP anti-

Yes, after applying Flash and rinsing I got a glue-like white substance
forming around the circumference.

Will report back soon!

--

Cheers,


Dave

Record Cleaning Machines
 

In article ,
Dave Matthews wrote:

Well I detergent-cleaned (with a mild solution of "Flash"),

I'm pretty certain Flash contains a scouring powder and would be not a
good idea. Cheap washing up liquid should be a better bet.

--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Record Cleaning Machines
 

Yes, after applying Flash and rinsing I got a glue-like white substance
forming around the circumference.

There is a slight misunderstanding.
It was taking the completed 'full-circle' water stream (and now-dry
LP) to the edge of the LP - whilst lifting the LP away from the
stream.
The 'edge' is what you get when, holding the LP almost vertical, is
quickly formed as you rotate the LP - ie; to one side the LP is *dry -
so you are moving this 'edge' around the LP as you are rotating it.
The end-result is an essentially 'surgically-clean' LP. The detergent
solution being *completely.(see above) washed away from the surface as
you're rotating the disc...in fact.if you breathe on the LP you will
see the 'mold-release pattern' - as originally formed.

You will get white deposits left behind in the groove with various
detergents (also the chalk-residues from tap-water if left to 'drip-
dry')..which is why you can't use any-old brand/type - 'Fairy Liquid'
- original - is no good..nor Citrus types.
Even - so-called - 'distilled water' (more like dirty water..if the
Chemist's stuff is typical..) will cause contamination.
Using my 'method' (placing the LP on a flat surface or TT to apply
detergent to just the one side is difficult - and will migrate to the
other side..) there is no need to have all the 'rinsing' nonsense.

The success (when professionally used..) of the vacuum (ie Keith Monks
type) RCM is the effective removal of surface solution (though some
'atomic' residue is likely left behind).
Their drawback is the use of a nylon brush to apply the
'solution' (thus carrying deposits from disc-to-disc) - also 'the
solution' itself.
I've had LPs ruined by Alcohol formulations - also the other 'pad-
type' machines used by shops - in the latter case covering them in
fine scratches.
In both cases with irremovable 'crackle' added...I can't see the point
in Paying to get That result.

Whether High Frequencies are lost when wet-playing is a moot point.
*I* wouldn't wet-play, as mentioned - but it could be that the lack/
lowering of surface noise gives *the impression* of less HF - similar
to hiss on FM stereo appearing to 'brighten' the sound...although I
can see the argument that water could 'smooth-over'/'fill-in' fine
groove detail..
A clean/new LP inherently plays 'smoothly' (all other things being
equal) - it's just that not many people are hearing them that way !!
(I threw away 100s of LPs from my original collection after inflicting
various 'cleaners'/methods on them).

The 'learning-curve' is to know what to avoid.. usually The Advice/
Manufacturers Products....
Interestingly, when I bought large collections, (from 50s onwards)
there were very few (well under 1%) that had been wet-cleaned.
It only becomes a slight problem (%-wise) from the mid-70s on...when
all the destructive contraptions/cleaning solutions mainly appear.
And, you can still buy them...

Record Cleaning Machines
 

"Dave Matthews" wrote in message
...
"frankwm" wrote in message
oups.com...
You don't mention whether you've simply 'wet-played' - or combined
that with a detergent clean.
The fact you reduced the 'battleground effects' indicates that your
Iso-Alcohol method was leaving behind residues.

Well I detergent-cleaned (with a mild solution of "Flash"), rinsed
and dried it which, as I said, didn't seem to make any difference at
all. So I then wet-played it and that's when I noticed the difference.
Having now left it to dry out again for a couple of days, I can see
exactly what you mean by residues being left over. So I've wetted it
again now, and it plays fine again.

Thanks for the details of your method - I'll give it a try later
this week...


with 1970s vinyl it quickly forms an 'edge' and rotating the LP anti-

Yes, after applying Flash and rinsing I got a glue-like white
substance forming around the circumference.

Will report back soon!



If you don't mind me saying so, I think your approach to vinyl is
wrong - there is no way it will compete for silence/noise floor with CD
or 24/192 and it's is a Fool's Errand to try. LPs can vary from
virtually silent to very noisy and the kit used can either help or make
the situation worse - I have a Shure V15/III that delights in finding
hiss and pops and I think the popular Goldring G1042 is a *spitchy
bitch*, whereas some/most Ortofon MCs run nice and quiet, as do some of
the cheaper carts like the AT110E.

Distance lends enchantment - forget about some of the
potentially-damaging potions and lotions that have been mentioned here
and other various voodoo techniques, just wipe a record off thoroughly
with a plush pad until the 'greasy dust' has been rounded up and pulled
off and put the record on. Retire to a safe distance (next room?) and
listen to the music. Train yourself to listen this way gradually moving
closer to the kit until you are not bothered by, or better yet, do not
even *notice* any unwanted noise! I listen to a lot of records while on
this computer (doing it right now) and, while the music fills the whole
house (bungalow) there is virtually *never* any surface noise reaches
me!!

When a record is truly too dirty to play, it's not what is used to clean
it that counts but *getting it off* - which is why there is no real
substitute for a vacuum machine!

Also, the better one's kit is, the more detail it will dig out of a
record and that includes unwanted noise. Sometimes the 'Technics
Technique' is a better way to play records - a modest deck with a modest
cart played through an SS amp's own phono stage will often give a much
less bothersome listen at the cost of possibly the nth degree of detail
and depth...??

Record Cleaning Machines
 

In article .com,
frankwm wrote:

Even - so-called - 'distilled water' (more like dirty water..if the
Chemist's stuff is typical..) will cause contamination.

Can you explain the details of this 'contamination'? If the water is
described as 'distilled' I'd expect it to be free from any precipitates. Or
are you saying that the sellers are selling water that has *not* been
distilled as 'distilled'?...


Whether High Frequencies are lost when wet-playing is a moot point. *I*
wouldn't wet-play, as mentioned - but it could be that the lack/
lowering of surface noise gives *the impression* of less HF - similar to
hiss on FM stereo appearing to 'brighten' the sound...although I can see
the argument that water could 'smooth-over'/'fill-in' fine groove
detail..

I can see that a change in the noise may affect the impression of the HF
level, but I am unclear how the liquid would otherwise affect HF unless the
stylus is aquaplaning... The contact pressures and accellerations for HF
replay are very high. I've not seen any evidence that 'wet' playing affects
this, so I'd be interested in any.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Record Cleaning Machines
 

frankwm wrote:
Yes, after applying Flash and rinsing I got a glue-like white
substance forming around the circumference.

There is a slight misunderstanding.
It was taking the completed 'full-circle' water stream (and now-dry
LP) to the edge of the LP - whilst lifting the LP away from the
stream.
The 'edge' is what you get when, holding the LP almost vertical, is
quickly formed as you rotate the LP - ie; to one side the LP is *dry -
so you are moving this 'edge' around the LP as you are rotating it.
The end-result is an essentially 'surgically-clean' LP. The detergent
solution being *completely.(see above) washed away from the surface as
you're rotating the disc...in fact.if you breathe on the LP you will
see the 'mold-release pattern' - as originally formed.

You will get white deposits left behind in the groove with various
detergents (also the chalk-residues from tap-water if left to 'drip-
dry')..which is why you can't use any-old brand/type - 'Fairy Liquid'
- original - is no good..nor Citrus types.
Even - so-called - 'distilled water' (more like dirty water..if the
Chemist's stuff is typical..) will cause contamination.

Well, I've always cleaned lenses with distilled water with a less than a
drop of fairy (just enough to break the surface tension) then rinsed
throughly with distilled and there is absolutely no residue left on the
lense. I've very critical of lense cleaning solutions, they almost
inevitably alter the bloom of the lense, not obviously when looked at
directly, but obviously if you look at a lense carefully. I don't see why
distilled water should cause contamination.

What exactly have you found in Chemists distilled water? If there were any
residue left, it would be very obvious with lenses

I see no reason why this method of cleaning shouldn't be as effective with
lps.

It's not clear to me what 'detergent' you are proposing and I still don't
entirely understand your method but if you're finishing off with tap water
you're inevitably going to be left with all the impurities in tap water. In
this area, the water is exceptionally hard so you will be leaving calcium
deposites for example all over the lp.

Record Cleaning Machines
 

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:32:00 +0100, "jasee"
wrote:

frankwm wrote:
Yes, after applying Flash and rinsing I got a glue-like white
substance forming around the circumference.

There is a slight misunderstanding.
It was taking the completed 'full-circle' water stream (and now-dry
LP) to the edge of the LP - whilst lifting the LP away from the
stream.
The 'edge' is what you get when, holding the LP almost vertical, is
quickly formed as you rotate the LP - ie; to one side the LP is *dry -
so you are moving this 'edge' around the LP as you are rotating it.
The end-result is an essentially 'surgically-clean' LP. The detergent
solution being *completely.(see above) washed away from the surface as
you're rotating the disc...in fact.if you breathe on the LP you will
see the 'mold-release pattern' - as originally formed.

You will get white deposits left behind in the groove with various
detergents (also the chalk-residues from tap-water if left to 'drip-
dry')..which is why you can't use any-old brand/type - 'Fairy Liquid'
- original - is no good..nor Citrus types.
Even - so-called - 'distilled water' (more like dirty water..if the
Chemist's stuff is typical..) will cause contamination.

Well, I've always cleaned lenses with distilled water with a less than a
drop of fairy (just enough to break the surface tension) then rinsed
throughly with distilled and there is absolutely no residue left on the
lense. I've very critical of lense cleaning solutions, they almost
inevitably alter the bloom of the lense, not obviously when looked at
directly, but obviously if you look at a lense carefully. I don't see why
distilled water should cause contamination.

What exactly have you found in Chemists distilled water? If there were any
residue left, it would be very obvious with lenses

I see no reason why this method of cleaning shouldn't be as effective with
lps.

It's not clear to me what 'detergent' you are proposing and I still don't
entirely understand your method but if you're finishing off with tap water
you're inevitably going to be left with all the impurities in tap water. In
this area, the water is exceptionally hard so you will be leaving calcium
deposites for example all over the lp.


The best detergent is probably photographic wetting agent used for
developing film. It is very weak - all it needs to do is break the
surface tension, and free from the sort of solid residues you will
find in washing up liquids. It certainly should not leave anything on
a lens, so an LP should be fine.

The big problem I can see is one of geometry. The place you really
need to clean is in the grooves. The water may well get in there, but
it can scarcely be expected to move along at speed, which is what you
need to shift dirt particles. So, today I found an old record, which I
was very happy to regard as sacrificial (James Last, second hand and
never played by me). It was fairly grotty, so I tried the ultimate
washer - a garden pressure washer. I used the needle jet and played it
over the entire surface. I used the detergent that came with the
washer. Well, it dried OK after a final rinse with distilled
water/wetting agent, and played a great deal more quietly than before
the washing. Looks OK too.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Record Cleaning Machines
 

On 26 Apr, 18:32, "jasee" wrote:
snip
The Chemists 'distilled water' I've seen appeared to have residue in
it..almost like lint-fibres.
It's not clear to me what 'detergent' you are proposing and I still don't
entirely understand your method but if you're finishing off with tap water
you're inevitably going to be left with all the impurities in tap water.
I did notice that the detergent I mentioned has 'real citrus extract'
- but it isn't at all obvious.
I clean only a handful of LPs/yr.
Although my 'method' is tap-water/detergent the *_whole point_* is
that it's _wholly-removed_ by washing away instantly from the LP
surface - nothing is left behind - therefore there would be no
advantage in using distilled/ionised water...let alone as a later
'rinse'.

Personally, I think most folks have a 'mindset' about 'how' to clean
LPs - but invariably they're just just buggering-them-up..
Although I now no longer want More - I wouldn't entertain buying any
collection that had been wet-cleaned.

I've just listened to 2 Lyrita/Nimbus sides - G.Bush: Sym.1/Bantock:
Greek Tragedy.
Scarcely a 'tick' in 45mins...20 yo 'uncleaned' LPs -other than my
just using a Milty DuoPad.
Nimbus went to great lengths to acquire 'perfect' cutting-lacquers -
if mine had been 'contaminated' I'm confident my method would restore
to the original spec. All my prior methods/tools would have not
achieved that.

The OP was looking for a better method/s to eradicate excessive
surface-noise - which mine will..however, it can't repair any inherent
damage caused from using various weird 'cleaning' solutions.

Record Cleaning Machines
 

jasee wrote:
"Doesn't the sound alter, I would have thought it would have
'dampened' the
higher frequencies? "

My comment was in response to the above.
I've no evidence that water would necessarily diminish HF - but
theoretically it's possible.- after all, one of the 'claims' of Snake-
Oil Salesmen is that their formulations remove so-called 'mold-release
agents' in order to 'read' the groove more accurately.
So, at a molecular level, wet-playing may create some sort of
'barrier' to the stylus/groove interface.
It is also quite likely to subtly change the 'dynamics' of cantilever
performance - so that would constitute overall 'dampening'.

I'm not really fussed about Distilled/etc water, as I don't now use
it.
From experience I suspect some are/have sold *'filtered* as being
distilled - as obviously it should be free from visible 'impurities'.
Tap-water now essentially is..thanks to costly infrastructure
investment...although there is still 'chalk' in some areas - but,
unless this is allowed to actually dry on the LP surface it isn't a
factor in my method.