Never mind, I can't fuck with all that nonsense...
Store the pure Tergitol??? in its original container (preferably under nitrogen) and in a non-food refrigerator to avoid degradation that causes an undesirable color and odor.
For the record cleaning fluid I use Laura Dearbon's formula from her book "Good Sound". There are a number of other formulas that could also be used. The following is quoted from Laura's book (without permission, of course).
The safe formula is the same as archival commercial preparations, except that you are mixing it yourself and therefore it costs you a fraction of the price of ready mixed. It can be used for both hand and vacuum cleaning. It is a 25 percent solution of isopropyl alcohol in water, with a drop of surfacant. Ethyl alcohol, sometimes applied to records in the form of vodka is more damaging to vinyl than is isopropyl. Use it only in an absolute pinch.
Drugstore isopropyl contains too many impurities to qualify it for record cleaning. Use technical or lab-grade isopropyl, which is extremely pure. Reagent grade is unnecessary and far more expensive. Water should be steam distilled, triple de-ionized. Both of these are readily available at a chemical supply house, which should sell them to you in pint and gallon sizes.
You also need to add a drop of surfacant, or wetting agent, to reduce the surface tension of the water so the formula can penetrate down into the grooves. Very high frequency grooves, in the range of 15 kHz, can be as small as four millionths of an inch, according to Wald Davies of LAST. Though alcohol itself helps somewhat, you still need a wetting agent. Two excellent and safe choices are Triton X-114 from Rohm-Haas and Monolan 2000 from Diamond Shamrock. Both of these are nontoxic - but don't take them internally - and biodegradable. Very importantly, they leave behind no residue on the record. They are harmless in these small amounts to record vinyl and, as far as is known, to any of the conceivable by-products and impurities likely to be found in record vinyl.
Kodak's Kodaflow is sometimes recommended as a wetting agent. Do *not* use this as it contains chemicals in addition to surfacants that would leave behind residues bad for both record and stylus. Kodak recommends against this application.
You should clean it before you file it... repeating if you notice significant build-up. If you have a very pricey set-up you may wish to give it a quick spin before playing.
You should clean it before you file it... repeating if you notice significant build-up. If you have a very pricey set-up you may wish to give it a quick spin before playing.
I spent good money on my VPI so I'm not going to go playing around with Lincoln Logs or whatever until it craps out. But people I know with ultrasonics swear by 'em... make of it what you may
Anyone ever try Photo-Flo in your record cleaner brew?
Yes, I put a few drops. Any more and it will make the fluid weird and kind of slimey like. It does seem to help keep the water from making little pools and instead spreads all around better and comes off the record easier.
Someone mentioned drying agent... I have continually upped the alcohol content of my solution to about 2 parts water 1 alch and that helps it evaporate quickly if any fluid remains after vacuuming.
For the record cleaning fluid I use Laura Dearbon's formula from her book "Good Sound". There are a number of other formulas that could also be used. The following is quoted from Laura's book (without permission, of course).
Kodak's Kodaflow is sometimes recommended as a wetting agent. Do *not* use this as it contains chemicals in addition to surfacants that would leave behind residues bad for both record and stylus. Kodak recommends against this application.
But I paid $30 for that little bottle of photo-flow!
The way I figure it all is: A record that's been cleaned is better than a record that is dirty.
i think i read somehwere, that under no circumstances should you put kodak photoflow in with the record washing solution and Kodak even specifically recomends against using the product for that purpose.
OK, so theres been a few record cleaning threads lately and here is my question:
Which is better, the vacuum machine or the ultrasonic with the lego brick setup...
I always thought the ultrasonic was better, but some of you swear by the vacuum cleaners...
Vacuum is better for 12" records. Although there may be a higher end machine where the 7" adapter works well. Mines is the $500 VPI and the 45 adapter thing sucks. Therefore, ultra-sonic is better for 7" records.
i have a nitty gritty and an ultrasonic, and I think the ultrasonic works best, period. It just takes longer. I feel that the ultrasonic really cleans out the deep grit that causes records to have background noise. Even records that may appear damaged on the surface can sound clean after the ultrasonic. An occasional tick caused by a surface scratch is not as distracting as a constant crackle, hiss or washout casued by dirt deep in the grooves.
Comments
OK, I'll switch it up then. Gracias dood...
That's it. NOTHING ELSE!
Should cost you about $3.00 to clean over 100 records.
Why make this more complicated that it should be?
http://www.loc.gov/preserv/care/record.html
Seems to work. (shrug)
hahahah....lavender with a touch of sumer breeze....
http://www.teresaudio.com/haven/cleaner/cleaner.html#use
How and what should you clean it with using this mixture??
Anything less would be uncivilized.
Very true.
Does anyone here ride for Gruv-Glide?
I uh, do not feel comfortable discussing my choices for personal lubricants in a public forum like this.
i use olive oil. extra virgin.
I completely understand.
How often do records need cleaning?! Only when you first file it? When you start to
hear the difference? Headz wanna know. Thanks in advance.
Up until now, as a cheap (but not so good) alternative, I've been wiping off dust with a wet paper towel, and then cleaning them off with a dry one...
It's all about how anal you want to get. Pause.
No doubt.
Which is better, the vacuum machine or the ultrasonic with the lego brick setup...
I always thought the ultrasonic was better, but some of you swear by the vacuum cleaners...
I spent good money on my VPI so I'm not going to go playing around with Lincoln Logs or whatever until it craps out. But people I know with ultrasonics swear by 'em... make of it what you may
Yes, I put a few drops. Any more and it will make the fluid weird and kind of slimey like. It does seem to help keep the water from making little pools and instead spreads all around better and comes off the record easier.
Someone mentioned drying agent... I have continually upped the alcohol content of my solution to about 2 parts water 1 alch and that helps it evaporate quickly if any fluid remains after vacuuming.
But I paid $30 for that little bottle of photo-flow!
The way I figure it all is: A record that's been cleaned is better than a record that is dirty.
and add
9 parts water
1 part metho....
check the library of congress website.
Vacuum is better for 12" records. Although there may be a higher end machine where the 7" adapter works well. Mines is the $500 VPI and the 45 adapter thing sucks. Therefore, ultra-sonic is better for 7" records.