The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"

@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.                                                                                                                                              

@lewm  a@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.                                                                                                                                              

Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition

https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2022/01/PACVR_3rd-Ed_2022-01-17_Master.pdf

@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

@duckmanst3 

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.