One quart of distilled water, two drops of Dawn dish washing soap, and two drops of urine. It’s also good for cleaning your stylus.
The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"
The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"
I am providing this formulation for all who are interested in the very best, and can be proven and demonstrated to be the "Very Best". It can easily be made from available ingredients. On the surface, it appears to be very simple. However, it is based on extensive complex chemistry along with precise mathematical calculations and verifiable data.
You may use it with absolute confidence and be truly assured that it is beyond doubt the "Very Best". You may use it for your personal needs. Or, archival entities may use it for their purposes with confidence. Or, you may choose to start an enterprise that makes and packages quantities as either a "ready-to-use" or a "Semi-concentrated" version for sale and distribution knowing that nothing better exists. You have my blessings and encouragement with one condition. And, that is, that the pricing represents a "fair margin", and, not an obscene gouging, typical for such products.
Initially, I had prepared a presentation that briefly introduced myself, and provided the thought processes, design parameters, and the necessary basics of chemistry, physics, and mathematics to assure you and allow you to be absolutely confident in this formulation. I made a considerable effort to keep it as simple, but, also as thorough enough to achieve this confidence. However, that presentation entailed 5,239 words, typical of such a requirement, however, unacceptable in length by this website forum.
I have no option other than to offer the formulation as a 100% parts by weight version suitable to produce 1 Kilogram of the cleaner, and, invite you to question me about any aspect of the formulation.
Professionally, I am a Chemist, more specifically a Polyurethane Chemist. I have a Doctorate in Chemistry as well as two other Doctorates and a M.B.A.. I held prominent positions in significant corporations before being encouraged to start our (wife and I) manufacturing facility servicing those I previously worked for. We started, owned, and fully operated this business. We eventually obtained 85+% Market Share in our sector in Medical, Automotive, Sporting Goods, and Footwear areas before retirement.
The Audio Industry is extremely technical and many brilliant minds have contributed their talents over the decades in order that we may enjoy music today as we choose. Like many other technical industries, those of lesser minds and values invade the arena with their "magical" inspired revelations and offer their "magical" ingredients and items to all at extremely high prices. They promise that if only we are willing to part with our money - they can provide these items to you that make your audio system sound as if the orchestra, or vocalist, is in your room with you. And, after all, "magical items" must be expensive, otherwise, they would not be "magical".
This disturbs me enormously, and, it is for such reasons, I feel compelled to provide realistic and truthful information that conforms to basic Engineering, Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematical Principals in those areas with which I am very knowledgeable and familiar.
"Ultimate Record Cleaner Solution"
Ingredient Amount by Weight (Grams)
Distilled Water 779.962
Ethyl Alcohol 220.000
Tergitol 15-S-7 (Dow Chemical) 0.038 (Approx. = 2 Drops)
1,000.000
Important and/or Relevant Criteria
1.) Distilled Water ONLY. Do not use deionized, tap, rain, or spring water. Distilled Water is readily available in most grocery stores. Check labeling to be certain that it is distilled and not deionized. The pricing is comparable.
2.) Ethanol must be purchased at a "Liquor Store" or a "Liquor Control Board" that is suitable for human consumption, and the appropriate taxes must be paid. This assures that the alcohol consists of only Ethyl Alcohol and water. You need to purchase the 95+% version, also known as 180+ Proof. NOTHING ELSE is acceptable. (100% Ethyl Alcohol is not available under "normal" circumstances). Denatured alcohol from a Hardware Store or elsewhere is PROHIBITED, as well as ANY other alcohols.
3.) Tergitol 15-S-7 is made by Dow and is available on the internet in small quantities from Laboratory Supply Houses such as Fisher and Advance, etc.. I have no affiliations with either Dow Chemical, or Fisher, or Advance. You MUST use Tergitol 15-S-7 ONLY. No other Tergitol product is acceptable for this designed formula, and you need to acquire the undiluted form only.
4.) The above cleaner formula will result in a non-foaming (VLF) Surfactant Formulation that exhibits the following:
Surface Tension of 28.5 dynes/centimeter @ 20 C. (68.0 F.)
Surface Tension of 28.2 dynes/centimeter @ 25 C. (77.0 F.)
5.). A Surface Tension of 28.5 dynes/centimeter is Remarkable and will properly clean records of all organic soilings, and all oily substances, as well as very significant amounts of inorganic soilings. This available Surface Tension coupled with the Azeotropic Characteristics of very rapid evaporation and spotless drying occur because of the selection of Ethyl Alcohol and the very specific concentration determined as 22.00% p.b.w., further improves the products abilities. The "Ease-of-Use" and "Spot-Free" results are to be accepted.
6.). Be aware that an "ideal temperature of use" also exists for this formulation. And, that reasonable temperature is 40 C. (104.0 F.). Further increases in temperature offers no improvement, therefore, confirming the proper use of the term "ideal". I mention this not because of of any substantial improvement, but, only to be aware of its’ existence. And, if you have a choice to utilize a room that is warmer than another, select the warmer room closer to 104.0 F. There is no need to elevate the temperature of the records or the materials. Simply be aware that 104.0 F. Is ideal.
If interest is expressed in this submission, I am willing to provide additional submissions regarding other materials, and, other areas of interest. Such as"Best Contact Substance", "Best lubricants for turntables", " Better Dampening Materials" for turntables and tonearms, and, most significantly, "Best" material for "Turntable Platter/Vinyl Record Interface" usually called "Record Mats". The last item will certainly disturb many individuals and anger many suppliers.
Whatever I may contribute is substantiated by Science and Testing, and Verifiable. Science has no Opinions. Opinions in these matters are best reserved for those who rely on their imagination and wishful thinking.
Also, I have no vested interests in this Industry. Simply possess some scientific knowledge that also relates to some aspects of the Audio Area, and I am willing to share that information if requested!
470 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Being frugal, non-scientific, I wash mine by hand in batches 10 at a time while listening to music. See 11th photo here https://www.audiogon.com/systems/9511 Cover the table with a plastic sheet (picnic table cover) The Kit: I mix other stuff with the cleaning fluid that comes with the kit
I get my Distilled Water at drug stores like CVS or Walgreens. I find that the staff often do not know where it is in the store, but it is there https://www.cvs.com/shop/gold-emblem-distilled-water-128-oz-prodid-1190732 Then 91% alcohol (not available in Covid times) https://www.cvs.com/shop/cvs-health-91-isopropyl-alcohol-prodid-1011920 Next, I use a bit of Jet Dry ’Finish’ https://www.cvs.com/shop/finish-jet-dry-dishwasher-rinse-aid-8-45-oz-prodid-1010730 Scrub vigorously with Baby Scalp Brushes Protect Paper Label with the Lid from a saved Chinese Soup container, looks like this Scrub by hand, the spinner is only distilled water rinse, remove excess water with lint free cloth, final dry in the rack. Amazing how good nasty LPs left over from the 60’s can sound, especially when playing deeper in the grooves with advanced stylus shape
|
jason considering the forces involved, I read somewhere something like 22 tons, enough to eventually wear diamond, the stylast must be worn off in the 1st half inch! here’s a quickie find "pressure exerted by a stylus on the groove of a record is in excess of 300lbs per square inch" https://www.vinylmeplease.com/blogs/magazine/opposing-forces-ins-and-outs-anti-skate what’s best is to keep both the grooves and stylus clean so the dirt doesn’t get imbedded into the grooves like boulders in a stream. |
300 lbs (or whatever and actually has to be based on size of the contact patches and would vary according to stylus shape and stylus wear) would be the force if the contact patches were one square inch. However, the contact patches are actually a few square microns in area, so..... Is Wizzard serious or is he mocking some of us for our pretentiousness? If the former, why not isopropanol (vs ethanol)? If based on "science", as insisted, it must have taken a couple of years to do all the experiments necessary to arrive at such a high level of conviction. If he is being facetious, nice one. |
There was an apocryphal story about Percy Wilson's working group (that eventually led to the Keith Monks machine) using high octane vodka. It's sold in the States under a few brands, best known as Everclear-- basically grain alcohol. I guess it could keep record cleaning amusing until you fall over.
|
Here ya go...Everclear To be both truthful and scientific, I wouldn't advise it. |
The recipe above is 22% of 95% ethanol, which ends up as: 0.95 x 220 = 209ml pure ethanol in 780ml + 11ml (the 5% of Everclear that is water) = 791ml water, which is 26.4% ethanol in the final solution. The only reason not to use a higher volume of standard vodka (ie 40% ethanol, of which you would need 330ml in 670ml distilled water) is if you believe the water in the vodka is of poor quality. I have had no problems (hic!) using Iceberg vodka (which really is made with icebergs!), but then I’m used to dual-effect pharmacology in palliative care. I have seen no evidence that either isopropanol or ethanol interacts negatively in these concentrations with vinyl. Ethanol is theoretically easier to rinse off, but is more expensive. If it didn’t give me an excuse to keep a bottle of vodka in the house I’d use isopropanol. |
By the way, the ethanol will evaporate away over time on a shelf at room temperature. Wizz didn’t mention that. So if you’re anal about the ethanol concentration, you’d best make a fresh solution for each cleaning session. I personally will continue to use isopropanol or propanol. 98%. At a final concentration of about 25%. |
First, before I continue, I should state to those who submitted posts and anticipated prompt responses, allow me to inform you that very often I am unable to do so, and, I appreciate your patience. I have an extremely rare auto-immune condition that interferes with my life and my intentions. It does not permit me to function as I would like. Fewer than 25 in Canada, and fewer than 300 people in the U.S.A. have this condition. It is somewhat comparable to ALS only much worse. Besides being unable to function, significant portions of my body become paralyzed or semi-paralyzed associated with intense pain. I am able to be alive and contend with this condition with regular IVIGG treatments. I consider myself extremely lucky because I am still alive, most of those afflicted do not respond well and die within a year or two. I needed to state this before I continue further. |
@lewm cc: @jasonbourne71 Forgive me, but I am going to jump ahead and respond to Lewm before responding to JasonBourne71 and others. As I stated at the onset, my posting was a post about Scientific Facts. Truthful and absolutely correct in all aspects. It was not an invitation about expressed opinions or initiating debates among others. I clearly stated that I was prepared to answer questions and provide explanations. I also stated that if there was an interest in the initial posting, I was willing to provide "Facts and Truths" about other subjects with which I am very familiar and qualified. Lewm, you had asked a very pertinent question about. the exclusive use of Ethanol, and why not use isopropyl alcohol or propanol, and, I appreciated that question, and was very willing to respond in detail, and, I did in a hand written presentation to be posted when I was able to do so. But, you then proceeded to "drift". You asked if I was serious. The answer is YES I AM! You then took the opportunity to somewhat respond to someone else's question using my post which is for the facts and the truth only. You made a somewhat definitive remark "like 300 pounds pressure" rather than ask me, which is the objective of my Post. "Facts not opinions or beliefs" Truth not lies or B.S. But then again on 5 June 2023 at 10:54 AM, you took the liberty to make additional definitive statements for others to read. With your self-appointed authority you made an absolutely idiotic statement about a subject that you obviously know nothing about. And, this is on my site that was initiated to exclusively provide factual and truthful information only. Allow me a partial quote of yours,"By the way, the ethanol will evaporate away over time on a shelf at room temperature. Wizz didn’t mention that. So if you’re anal about ethanol concentration, you’d best make a fresh solution for each cleaning session. Etc. …". Let me address. That very last statement first. If you new anything, as I do, you would know that due to the Hydrogen Bonding characteristics of ethanol you would know that ethanol is hygroscopic and to a significant extent, and, that ethanol readily absorbs water (as moisture) Fromm the atmosphere (air). This is why "Wizz" (actually Wizzzard) did not mention it - because he knows only the facts. And, it may surprise you to discover that over time the ethanol does not evaporate and you would not need to replace it. In fact, the exact opposite occurs, the ethanol absorbs more water from the atmosphere. However, at precisely 22.000%, which is the primary transition point concentration, it would remain very stable and would not be noticeable. Some detection may be noticed at the secondary transition point of 41.500%, but more likely at 95.60%. If you happen to be referring to me as "anal", I suggest you first look in a mirror. Now to the first point that you stated with "some convection" and misled JasonBourne71 and possibly others. Stating 300 lbs. as a stylus pressure on a record. This was terrible to "state" on a forum devoted to truth and accuracy. This is exactly where absurdity enters an area where a statement is made based on nothing. This is something that can easily be calculated and presented with precision. At the onset I stated you can ask questions. If you were to inform me of the phono cartridge that you have, and the type of stylus affixed to the cantilever, and the weight you apply for proper tracking, I, or or others, can calculate the exact amount of force applied to the record. It would take me less than 2 minutes to calculate, and I would be willing to share the mathematics with you if you are so interested. The pressure I provided to JasonBourne71 was based on an average of the 6 basic stylus types (because he did not mention his particular stylus configuration) but the information was necessary to provide an answer the his primary concern. Assuming he was using a tracking force of 2.0 grams, I had determined in less than 3 minutes that the force was 10,811.7 pounds per square inch. Again, a factual, correct calculation that can not be disputed or debated. Simple mathematics, nothing more. But that was the intent of this posting! As mentioned earlier, I prepared a good and clear explanation for you as to your excellent question as to why only Ethanol, and why specifically 22.000%. Not 20, or 21, or 23, or 25, but, 22.000%. And that no other alcohols be used or even considered. But, I determined to use my allocated time to others that appreciate me and my efforts, and my intentions. But, I will keep my word, and honor my position and answer your question, however, to a minimal degree only. All materials including resins and resin blends, whether natural synthetic, have many characteristic parameters. I have correctly restricted myself to include the parameters that are of relevance. Because we are using solvents (and diluents) one of our primary objectives in not to alter or damage the substrate (vinyl recording). We want something that will clean the record the very best without causing harm, hence, "The Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation". The parameters are: Hildebrand Parameter , Dipole Moment, Dielectric Constant, Polarity, Fractional Polarity, and Hydrogen Bonding (van Der Waals forces). As we review ALL the alcohols available and other ingredients, only 2 ingredients have NO detrimental effect to vinyl records, and they are, distilled water and ethanol. And why 22.000% exactly. If you recall from High School Days, you will recall doing graphs. You may remember several types, if not, you should surly recall "Inflection Points". And, the various slopes and their meanings. Some graphs represent only two slopes, others as many as 2 (secondary) or three (tertiary).If you plot Surface Tension versus Ethanol concentration, you will obtain a very severe slope, and, two relatively gently slopes. The first is the primary an is exactly 22.000%, the secondary exists at 40.500% and is relatively insignificant (most, would even ignore it). It is for this reason that 22.000% is determined. Another reason it the advantageous azeotropic characteristic exhibited at 22.000% which is very desirable. For others reading this: Isopropyl alcohol is also known as 2-rpopanol and dimethyl carbinol, and propanol is correctly known as 1-propanol, propyl alcohol, ethyl carbonyl, and n-propanol. Dr. S.N.W. BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc. |
Forgive me, but I am going to jump ahead and respond to Lewm before responding to JasonBourne71 and others. As I stated at the onset, my posting was a post about Scientific Facts. Truthful and absolutely correct in all aspects. It was not an invitation about expressed opinions or initiating debates among others. I clearly stated that I was prepared to answer questions and provide explanations. I also stated that if there was an interest in the initial posting, I was willing to provide "Facts and Truths" about other subjects with which I am very familiar and qualified. Lewm, you had asked a very pertinent question about. the exclusive use of Ethanol, and why not use isopropyl alcohol or propanol, and, I appreciated that question, and was very willing to respond in detail, and, I did in a hand written presentation to be posted when I was able to do so. But, you then proceeded to "drift". You asked if I was serious. The answer is YES I AM! You then took the opportunity to somewhat respond to someone else's question using my post which is for the facts and the truth only. You made a somewhat definitive remark "like 300 pounds pressure" rather than ask me, which is the objective of my Post. "Facts not opinions or beliefs" Truth not lies or B.S. But then again on 5 June 2023 at 10:54 AM, you took the liberty to make additional definitive statements for others to read. With your self-appointed authority you made an absolutely idiotic statement about a subject that you obviously know nothing about. And, this is on my site that was initiated to exclusively provide factual and truthful information only. Allow me a partial quote of yours,"By the way, the ethanol will evaporate away over time on a shelf at room temperature. Wizz didn’t mention that. So if you’re anal about ethanol concentration, you’d best make a fresh solution for each cleaning session. Etc. …". Let me address. That very last statement first. If you new anything, as I do, you would know that due to the Hydrogen Bonding characteristics of ethanol you would know that ethanol is hygroscopic and to a significant extent, and, that ethanol readily absorbs water (as moisture) Fromm the atmosphere (air). This is why "Wizz" (actually Wizzzard) did not mention it - because he knows only the facts. And, it may surprise you to discover that over time the ethanol does not evaporate and you would not need to replace it. In fact, the exact opposite occurs, the ethanol absorbs more water from the atmosphere. However, at precisely 22.000%, which is the primary transition point concentration, it would remain very stable and would not be noticeable. Some detection may be noticed at the secondary transition point of 41.500%, but more likely at 95.60%. If you happen to be referring to me as "anal", I suggest you first look in a mirror. Now to the first point that you stated with "some convection" and misled JasonBourne71 and possibly others. Stating 300 lbs. as a stylus pressure on a record. This was terrible to "state" on a forum devoted to truth and accuracy. This is exactly where absurdity enters an area where a statement is made based on nothing. This is something that can easily be calculated and presented with precision. At the onset I stated you can ask questions. If you were to inform me of the phono cartridge that you have, and the type of stylus affixed to the cantilever, and the weight you apply for proper tracking, I, or or others, can calculate the exact amount of force applied to the record. It would take me less than 2 minutes to calculate, and I would be willing to share the mathematics with you if you are so interested. The pressure I provided to JasonBourne71 was based on an average of the 6 basic stylus types (because he did not mention his particular stylus configuration) but the information was necessary to provide an answer the his primary concern. Assuming he was using a tracking force of 2.0 grams, I had determined in less than 3 minutes that the force was 10,811.7 pounds per square inch. Again, a factual, correct calculation that can not be disputed or debated. Simple mathematics, nothing more. But that was the intent of this posting! As mentioned earlier, I prepared a good and clear explanation for you as to your excellent question as to why only Ethanol, and why specifically 22.000%. Not 20, or 21, or 23, or 25, but, 22.000%. And that no other alcohols be used or even considered. But, I determined to use my allocated time to others that appreciate me and my efforts, and my intentions. But, I will keep my word, and honor my position and answer your question, however, to a minimal degree only. All materials including resins and resin blends, whether natural synthetic, have many characteristic parameters. I have correctly restricted myself to include the parameters that are of relevance. Because we are using solvents (and diluents) one of our primary objectives in not to alter or damage the substrate (vinyl recording). We want something that will clean the record the very best without causing harm, hence, "The Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation". The parameters are: Hildebrand Parameter , Dipole Moment, Dielectric Constant, Polarity, Fractional Polarity, and Hydrogen Bonding (van Der Waals forces). As we review ALL the alcohols available and other ingredients, only 2 ingredients have NO detrimental effect to vinyl records, and they are, distilled water and ethanol. And why 22.000% exactly. If you recall from High School Days, you will recall doing graphs. You may remember several types, if not, you should surly recall "Inflection Points". And, the various slopes and their meanings. Some graphs represent only two slopes, others as many as 2 (secondary) or three (tertiary).If you plot Surface Tension versus Ethanol concentration, you will obtain a very severe slope, and, two relatively gently slopes. The first is the primary an is exactly 22.000%, the secondary exists at 40.500% and is relatively insignificant (most, would even ignore it). It is for this reason that 22.000% is determined. Another reason it the advantageous azeotropic characteristic exhibited at 22.000% which is very desirable. For others reading this: Isopropyl alcohol is also known as 2-rpopanol and dimethyl carbinol, and propanol is correctly known as 1-propanol, propyl alcohol, ethyl carbonyl, and n-propanol. Dr. S.N.W. BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc. |
Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition
|
@jasonbourne71 @lewm
Good day sir,
Your had made posts to my submission. Although your posts somewhat deviate from my intended purpose, I am very willing to provide you with information that will properly guide you with your concerns. You had touched on 4 separate issues and I intend to address them individually as well as indicating a potential caution for you if it happens to apply.
1.). You mentioned the "LAST factory" and my familiarity and specifically you use of "Stylast". I am aware "Last". I recall when I purchased my first AR-XA Turntable in 1969 that I wast provided a sample of "Last". I do not recall if I ever used it or not. I was impressed with the AR Turntable that I decided to buy 6 others as presents. I was informed that if I purchased 10 I would receive a 35 % discount. And, that is what I did. I gave five away and sold the others to acquaintances at the price that I paid which. They appreciated. I was given significant quantities of "Last" cleaner and stylus brushes. I do not know why I mention this, but your question precipitated old memories. I was unfamiliar with your product "Stylast", so I went to their website and did some further investigating. Their website about this product is extremely misleading. It can not be interpreted any other way other than as it is presented. And, I feel sorry that you were misled. I had thought that they had a commendable reputation, and, again I find myself disturbed by some entities in this industry.
There are two separate parts to the knowledge that I will share with you, actually, three. The stylus is made of diamond, the hardest substance known to man. Other than a soft brush to remove accumulated debris, I do not see a need for a "Stylus cleaner". If you feel compelled to "clean your stylus" I can recommend the "Very best Record Cleaner Formulation" I provided, or, a product similar inn approach to the "Stylast" that you are using, only, that it is much better, much cheaper, and can be used for many other applications that you may come across. Your operative words and statements were: "claims", "apparently", and "some scientists.
Let me address your first question - "Does the application of Stylast to the diamond stylus actually reduce wear?" Answer, "Absolutely NOT!" Thank you for a good question and you have a precise answer. Now you share your practical experience about lubricating a drill bit - and, you are absolutely correct in your thinking. I am a member of STLE (Society of Tribologists and Lubricating Engineers), as well as previous involvement in Argonne National Laboratories and continuing interests. A Cutting/Drilling fluid is applied continuously, or, as frequently as necessary. And, you are correct, it is not only for cutting but for cooling as well, however, a "one-time" application of anything means nothing in relationship to this analogy.
I do not know what cartridge you have mounted on your tonearm, so I will make some assumptions. The following list is a number of styluses and their configurational dimensions:
Micro Line 2.5 x 75 Microns Micro Ridge 3.8 x 75 Microns VanDenHull 4.0 x 70 Microns FritzGeiger 5.0 x 70 Microns SAS 2.5 x 75 Microns Paratrace 4.0 x 70 Microns
I could have selected just one Ortofon Stylus, but I thought it best that a full cross section well better demonstrate my point.
Using these dimensions as an average, it can be determined that if you use 2.0 grams to obtain your desired tracking. Force the pressure exerted by the diamond stylus on the record is 10,811.7 pounds per square inch. Your application of Stylast or anything else for that matter is GONE within the first few millimeters. There is NO further cleaning effect. The Stylast presentation is extremely misleading, even absurd. I am as. Disappointed in them as you may be. This is a terrible abuse of marketing ethics.
Further investigation reveals that Stylast is more than 90% perfluorotributylamine, and they claim about 10 % proprietary ingredients. Which is nothing more then a deceptive method of implying the necessary solvating ingredients and covalent ingredients. At least they supply a S.D.S., give them credit for that for supplying information which is a commendable 95 % accurate Data Sheet. Most. Of the "charlatans" do not even trouble themselves, or simply supply a two page "Proprietary Data" sheet containing nothing. Do not ever purchase anything from a company that does not supply a proper S.D.S.
What this product is a very common intermediate compound, 3tributylamine, and substitute the Hydrogen atoms with Fluorine atoms. It makes an excellent agent for specialized soldering techniques, and an excellent electrical contact cleaner. It has recently found a important medical imagining material that allows itself the be encapsulated in lipid microspheres thereby cheating an image enhancing compound for echocardiograms. A specialized individual must inject this in you blood to present an ultrasound image that is far superior to a typical echocardiogram.
But that is of no interest to you. The CRC corporation uses perfluorotributlyamine in their premium contact cleaner along with other superior electrical contact cleaning ingredients that is superior. If you insist on sticking with Stylast type materials, I suggest that you rather purchase the CRC material. It is better as a contact cleaner and has many other uses at home, your computer, your automobile. It is available at Industrial supply houses such as Grangers, and Fastenal, or at automotive supply houses such as NAPA. It is expensive, it costs about $50.00 for a 13 Fluid Ounce can. Although expensive, that is ridiculously cheap for what you were paying Stylast for almost next to nothing, relatively speaking.
Also, on a very serious note! If you a re a smoker, or someone in the household is - DO NOT use either Stylast or the CRC electrical contact cleaner while smoking. IT is Extremely Dangerous! Depending upon your genetic make-up, it may even be Deadly, And, I am NOT exaggerating!!!
Using a simple brush on your stylus is all you really need to do. But, that is only to remove the debris from the stylus. If you need to clean your records, I suggest you use my formulation |
I do not know if you are being a "Smart Ass" with your mention of two drops of urine, nor, do I know who you are addressing.
If you are addressing me , I do not care what you use. I provided a formulation for "The very best record cleaner", and am willing to answer questions about it, and I also offered to to provide other scientific based truths and knowledge about about other areas such as record mats, lubricants, contact materials, dampening agents, etc., if such interests exist.
Proper etiquette requires that I allow myself to believe that you have some interest however you may have expressed yourself. It does not address any questions, therefor, I will make some assumptions and address your posting.
Distilled water at 20 C. Exhibits a surface tension of only 72.72 dynes/centimeter. Dawn is a very powerful surfactant and is excellent for washing cooking and eating utensils, as well as being mild enough to wash your vehicle. However 2 drops only reduces the surface tension to 42.82 dynes/centimeter. A very far cry from the 28.5 dynes/centimeter of the formulation presented. It is also intended to be a high-foaming surfactant - the exact opposite in what you are looking for in a record cleaning formulation.
Dawn should absolutely not be used on records. It contains 8 ingredients in addition to water. A significant portion of the surfactants are "Anionic" surfactants which are forbidden in such applications. I will gladly supply you the list of ingredients if you are serious and how they behave. The addition of two drops of urine is the puzzle! If you are meant to be serious, it offers no benefits. Most people realize that urine is sterile upon release, however, it is also that aspect that eventually makes it conducive as an excellent bacterial and mold growth medium. Its addition offers no benefits only potential problems. |
| Post removed |
Thank you for your significant, detailed, and meaningful submission.
Although it somewhat deviates from the intent of my Forum Post, it, nevertheless captures the spirit of my post, and, is very detailed and meaningful and an appropriate ADDITION to my post for those who are interested in a somewhat different approach to my exclusive designed selection method. My intent was to present only one formulation that is determined to be "The very Best", and to present a document that entailed 5,239 words supporting that determination. Which, as of this writing, and, on the response posts I have received, I am glad that I did not squander my time doing that presentation.
However the document you presented only substantiates my initial intent, and also demonstrates the complexities of developing meaningful products.
I sincerely appreciate your post of this comprehensive publication that permits others to review very viable alternatives.
Thank you very much!
Dr. S.N.W. BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc. |
The use of the Vodka is excellent, and is less than if you purchased or ordered the Ethanol alone. However your calculations require some minor modifications because "Proof" is expressed as parts by volume, as is normal for most Algol concentrations. And the formulation is in parts by weight (not volume). Also, you need to adhere to the exact 22.000% parts by weight expressed in the formulation.
I gave some explanation the lewm, but it should be more detailed for you. The 22.000% represents the exact primary inflection point. I have never posted on any websites in the past. This is my first time which explains my errors that I attempted to correct.
I will prepare a graph, and find some way to post it and that should convince you why the 22.000% is important. I will also adjust the corrections for you regarding the volume versus weight. I hope to provide you with this tomorrow. If all goes well.
The selection of Ethanol is the only correct selection. I actually am the author of the first book written about the calculations of "Solubility Parameters". This boob is somewhat exclusive unfortunately. I can also state that I have authored actually two books, however, the one still remains "Classified", and is the property. To the U.S.A. Department of Defense, and none of that information can be discussed, and it is actually not absolutely necessary in this particular matter.
Till a later date then!
Dr. S.N.W. BA, MA, MChem, MBA, DPhil, DSc. |
@wizzzard Thank you for taking the time to teach us about cleaning fluid. I have been making my own for over a year. It is very similar to yours. I have some questions. Is there a problem using denatured ethanol? It’s more available to us. I have been using Triton X as a surfactant. Is there any reason to change? I also add 10 cc BAK to suppress fungal growth. One other comment is the distilled water most of us use is not lab grade and will leave a residue. For this reason I greatly prefer vacuum drying. Your comment is greatly appreciated!
|
| Post removed |
I use a product called Shaklee Basic H to wash windows, my car etc. Very clean rinsing and environmentally friendly. It's supposed to make 'water wetter' reduces the surface tension. I've seen how well it cleans windows and my car, no visable residue on the windows which would show up fairly well. So very interested in trying Wizzzards formula in my spin clean, I've seen the benefits of reducing water surface tension, couldn't find the exact amount like Wiz provided. Thanks for that. Here's the link to Basic H ingredients: |
Interesting post. I've been using 91% isopropyl alcohol in my "mix" for a long time with what seems like reasonable results. I'll give your formula with the Everclear a try (on records, not on myself). I've not drank that stuff since college days and do not recommend it for human consumption. I've been using a bit of Triton-X instead of Tergitol. Thanks. |
I learned at the Gangster Museum, NYC this about Denatured Alcohol Alcohol had been subject to excise taxes as a beverage in the United States until 1906, when a process borrowed from Europe added “denaturants,” or substances that made grain-based (ethyl) alcohol taste or smell bad, to deter its use in drinks. The “denatured” alcohol could then be used, tax free, in manufacturing. USA, during prohibition, those without bathtubs, or moon-lit nights (origin of moon shine) drank denatured alcohol, many became sick, yet ... |
@wizzzard , excuse me, I missed your comment on denatured alcohol. I was using isopropyl alcohol and will switch to pure ethanol. To Orient you correctly my formula was 1 gallon water, 1 cup isopropyl alcohol. 2 drops Triton X and 2 tablespoons BAK. I do have a scale I use to mix epoxy and catalized lacquer and will switch to your proportions. I would very much appreciate your comments on Triton X and BAK. I use a Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro, worth every cent. You The AR XA was a tour de force of original turntable design and I think Edgar Villchur’s best work. It is a turntable design every audiophile should study. It has been copied initially by Thorens and Linn, then improved by David Fletcher’s SOTA Sapphire and gussied it up by AJ Conti’s Basis, SME, Avid, Oracle and finally Mark Dohmann with the Helix. The only error is the XA’s lack of an anti skating mechanism. Everything else is commensurate with is price. Can I interest you in a set of cable elevators? They only cost $8500:-) |
@wizzzard , I forgot to mention BAK (benzalconium chloride) as a cationic surfactant helps prevent static buildup on the record. This formula does leave a residue on the record which if used with a vacuum machine is very slight. I have to clean styluses once weekly. I get the impression records are quieter after treatment but I need proof of that and will have to devise an experiment. The anti static nature of the solution has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt. I use a turntable with vacuum clamping. It generates huge static voltage charges on the bottom of the record. After treatment there is no significant charge generated.
|
Good day Mijostyn,
I will address your four most recent posts at the same time. First, I need to make some adjustments. You have presented very good and clear questions, however, there are a few very minor deviations in the formulations you presented.
My first assumption is that you stated that you are using "Triton X" as a surfactant. I believe that I am correct to assume that you are using "Triton X 100".
Triton X 100 is the most commonly used Triton surfactants manufactured by Dow Chemical. You may not be aware of this trivial bit of information and history about Triton X 100, but, sometime around 1960, TritonX 100 was the Reference Standard of nonionic surfactants. It was the base to which all other nonionic surfactants were compared. In fact, to this day, it is the "Medical Standard" that is used in Medical experimentations. Even if other surfactants are used ( and, they mostly are not), Triton X 100 is also used. This is very important because Medical Research that is done today can accurately be compared and judged to studies that were done more than 63 years ago. This is very important in Medical Research.
Nevertheless, the selection of Triton X 100 for cleaning vinyl records is a good choice, not the best or close to the best, but a good choice. And, if you already have access to Triton X 100, I do not see any reason to make a change unless you are interested in making the "Very Best". Stick with the Triton X 100, but you proportionally need to incorporate more into your formulation. I thought that I would first alter what you are using and make it more relatable to the "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation" that I initially presented, and then I though to also provide a comparison, and then make comments about the ingredients in question. I decided to refer to your formulation as "Mijostyn’s Good Record cleaning Formula"
"Mijostyn’s Good Record Cleaning Formula
Ingredients: Parts by Weight (Grams)
Distilled Water 779.772
Ethanol 220.000
Triton X 100 (Dow Chemical) 0.228
Benzalkonium Chloride 0.000
1,000.000
Now, if I were to take my formulation and relate it to what you have been using it would read as follows for comparative purposes only.
Ingredients: Parts by Weight (Grams)
Distilled Water 941.499
Denatured Alcohol 50.900
Benzalkonium Chloride 7.600
Triton X 100 (Dow Chemical) 0.001
1,000.000
You should not be concerned with the "Distilled Water" that you purchase at a supermarket, or drugstore, or Walmart. As long as it is stated as distilled and not deionized.
I do not know if your intent to use Benzalkonium was as a "antimicrobial agent" or as an "anti-static agent", or both? Nevertheless, you do not need an antimicrobial agent. Also, the selection of this agent as an anti-static agent can only cause problems, also, if intended for such a purpose, the amount used is extremely excessive. There are much better and easier ways to control static, and, they should never be incorporated within a cleaning formulation.
Now to the denatured alcohol versus "Pure Ethanol" aspect. In one respect using denatured alcohol is LESS DESTRUCTIVE than using another alcohol such as, isopropanol, because it first depends upon the concentration of ethyl alcohol in the denatured. The Ethyl alcohol concentration can be as low as 60%, or 90%, or most often 95%. The majority of the denaturant is "Methyl alcohol". And, I mentioned that ethanol has NO EFFECT on vinyl records, methyl alcohol does, but, although it is destructive - it is the least destructive of the more common alcohols. However, you should use Ethanol purchased at a liquor store ONLY. It is not worth saving a few pennies and progressively damaging your records over time. The other ingredients used to make alcohol denatured are copper sulphate (used for coloring only, and not a big problem), Methyl Ethyl Ketone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, and denatunium (to make it bitter tasting), and pyridine (to make it smell to high heaven). There are also others. The exact quantities are no longer governed and benzine has been banned. But it is important to note that even in very minute quantities they are extremely effective. Please, please use only ethanol for numerous reasons. I will be preparing a graph for all to see why the level of 22.000% is important, and not just a number I picked out of a hat. The graph will (or should) make it clear.
So, scrap the BAK, feel confident in your distilled water purchases, purchase and use only ethanol, and significantly increase you level of Triton X 100 by a factor of 5+.
I noticed that many use volumetric methods of making their formulations, I intend to convert my presented formulation in a volumetric format as well very shortly.
I hope this has cleared some things up for you and has been helpful. If you follow what I have stated, you will no longer have any residue problems. Also, Triton X 100 is not as low foaming as the Tergitol 15-S-7, but it is manageable and will not produce unnecessary spotting and quickly dry spot-free. |
| Post removed |
@Wizzard- I’m fascinated by archival techniques including those used for LPs (not shellac). Most of what I did was compare sonic results using different commercially available fluids and methods. I met Neil Antin (@Antinn) on these fora - he is the author of that tome on record cleaning methods, chemistry, materials science and the like. (His background is engineering based and he developed the Mil-Spec for use by the Navy in cleaning life critical o2 systems). Neil is also an audiophile and during a brief retirement period put together his thoughts on cleaning LPs in a methodical way, starting with the basics. One thing that Neil confirmed in his extensive studies was the value of a pure water rinse step to remove residue, including the contaminants left by the cleaning fluid itself. You might find it an enjoyable read. One other thing of note- Certain cartridge manufacturers warn against any liquid stylus cleaner (Ortofon, for one) as it can loosen the glue that is used to bond the stylus to the cantilever shank. There is at least one commercial manufacturer who is offering a stylus fluid (proprietary, of course) that is supposed to be safe even for these types of cartridges. Best, Bill Hart |
| Post removed |
@wizzzard , Thank you for your extended response. Yes, it is Triton X 100 which I got from my hospitals lab. I am a retired family doc. I use supermarket distilled water. If you let 1cc dry on a black plate you will see a white residue. My point is that if records are allowed to air or fan dry this and any other residue will be left on the record. Since I have no idea what this is I would have to assume it is abrasive. Vacuum drying will remove the bulk of this. Why is Tergitol better than Triton X100? I will swap the isopropanol for ethanol immediately. People with large record collections may listen to any particular record once a decade. Records left for prolonged periods are notorious for growing fungus. The BAK will prevent fungal grow under normal (not excessively humid) conditions. I went to medical school in Miami, Florida. I made living designing and installing Hi Fi systems in the homes of very wealthy people. I would pull records out of large collections to listen noticing that mildew smell that everyone is familiar with when they leave their laundry in the washing machine too long. |
@wizzzard , This is a continuation of the last post. Is the BAK detrimental in any way? The effect on static was a total surprise! As I said before my turntable uses vacuum clamping, a great way to generate static. The charges were so high that in removing the record sparks would jump to the tonearm causing a loud pop through the system. I had to mute the system every time I removed a record. I use a conductive sweep arm which discharges the top side of the record fine and the platter is grounded. If I leave the record on the turntable for 20 minutes the static dissipates. When I started using this formula the static stopped entirely. The effect persists over at least a year without recleaning the record. If the BAK is not detrimental I would like to continue it. Suggestions on formulation are appreciated. I think you should keep the formula in grams as it is far more accurate than measuring in volume which is why I use that method for more critical formulas. If the concentrations are that important leave it in grams. Kitchen scales are cheap. The only problem is that best of them only measure down to a 10th of a gram. More accurate scales would be a lot more expensive. So, you may want to round the formula off to 0.1 gm. Another reason why vacuum drying is important for me at least is that my formula is leaving a residue on the record and I want to minimize this. I study my styluses under high magnification and have tracked the deposition of residue on the stylus and after a week there is usually enough on the stylus to clean it. For obvious reasons the residue only accumulates on the pivot side of the stylus. One swipe back to front with a stylus brush is enough to take it off, no fluid required. |
Thank you wizzzard for your post. I just bought a us cleaner and will use your formula. I have a heavily modified AR-ES and a heavily modified Thorens 160. Will give it a try with my fist batch. I would never invade your privacy but you posted your condition. I'm going out on a limb and assuming it is SOD1. If so,and I don't know if it's available in Great Briton the FDA here just approved a drug The drug Qalsody (tofersen) is expected to help people with a very specific mutation, SOD1, which applies to only 2% of the ALS population. Studies showed that the drug reduced plasma neurofilament light (NfL), a blood-based biomarker of axonal (nerve) injury and neurodegeneration. If I intruded I sincerely apologize and if I'm wrong I also apologize but I wanted to inform you if I was correct and you didn't know of this therapy. My best to you! Mark |
WARNING: 22% Ethanol is flammable with a flashpoint of about 75F. Using this concentration in an Ultrasonic Tank with 100’s or 1000’s of mL that is not explosion proof rated is dangerous. With an ultrasonic unit three mechanisms are in play - the heat that speeds up evaporation; the record rotating is drawing fluid out that is evaporating, and the ultrasonics are agitating the fluid surface and a mist/vapor is often produced. All of this has the potential to setup the necessary conditions to develop flammable AND potentially explosive vapors. Additionally, in a common domestic setting, it is very unlikely that the high ventilation turn-over rates that are required in medical and industrial settings that prevent the accumulation of flammable/explosive vapors will be used. So, the risk in a domestic setting is much higher. There are explosion-proof rated industrial US tanks, but these are very expensive and generally not sold to consumers. Otherwise, 'flammable' alcohol concentrations use with vacuum-RCM the risk is much less, mitigated by use at room temperature and by the very small quantity used – maybe 5- mL per side. |
To the contrary - I know exactly what I am saying. I am the author of this book - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press with over 20-yrs experience in developing precision cleaning processes for ships and submarines. Otherwise, the source of the data for Ethanol is specified in the book in Chapter VIII with appropriate references with links to the data. Additionally, maybe you missed the fact the person was going to use your formula in a ultrasonic tank generally heated to 95F with often upwards of 200-400watts electrical power. And, if you look at the phase diagram for ethanol & water at any significant concentration it does not form an azeotrope so the vapor concentration will be > the liquid concentration. In the US, NFPA-70 and National Electrical Code (NEC) has strict requirements for electrical equipment use with anything flammable that is classified as >100F. That all being said, I do not know about you, but I do not drink my wine in a 1L glass at 95F and I do not have any significant ignition sources at mouth noting that a lit cigarette is not a credible ignition source - the book addresses. And cooking with wine is at relatively low volumes and often with good ventilation. In the meantime, if you are who you claim to be - prove it. Full name with something that verifies you are who you say you are. If you read my bio that is as much as I will specify and most of what I have written is not in the public domain. Neil Antin |
I intend to get back to you later after I respond to others who have posted earlier. I do promise to get back to you, it is simply a matter of priorities. But, I have read Drkingfish's post to me, and I do not see any reference to his specific purchase of an ultrasonic cleaning machine, only his possession of an AR ES-1 and a Thorens 160. I did no insult you as Lewm suggests, I merely asked what your Academic Qualifications were, and suggest that you relax. However, you very emphatically stated that ethanol/water "does not form an azeotrope" ! Really? In the interim, please refer to any High School Chemistry book. For that matter, I believe that this subject is now covered in Grade 8, and possibly Grade 7. If ethanol and water do not form an azeotrope, you have just eliminated all the distilleries in tho world actively producing Liquor for human consumption, and ethanol for chemical reactions and other uses. I stated my background at the very onset (perhaps, you missed that). As I stated I will get back to you later. Suggest, you relax, perhaps have a massage, but don't forget to warn the masseuses (male or female) not to rub to vigorously because rubbing alcohol usually contains anywhere from 70% isopropyl alcohol to 75% with water( which has a Flash Point that is more than 2 degrees lower than ethanol and burns at a considerably higher temperature than ethanol) , and you do not want to explode on the massage table. In the meantime, stay safe till later. Thank you for your comments! |
If you carefully read @drkingfish he mentioned ’us’ that is a common abbreviation for ultrasonic (tank). Otherwise, here a phase diagram for ethanol-water - Ethanol-Phase-Diagram.jpg (800×695) (moonshinedistiller.com) and distillation discussion - Test01 (queensu.ca), it forms an azeotrope at about 95.6%, noting that I did not say that it did not form an azeotrope only implying that at any significant concentration in the context of your formula. Otherwise, instead of keeping this professional, your immature attempts at insults I perceive only as an insult to your advertised intelligence; that’s a shame. But you are a world away, someone behind a forum handle and have no meaning or significance to me, and I will not waste any more of my time with you so and I suggest you do not waste yours. |