The "Very Best Record Cleaning Formulation"

cleeds, Now I am a bit confused.  Above, you wrote, "As I mentioned @lewm , I use a Klaudio US cleaner and have a conventional OG Nitty-Gritty. I don’t find that either cleaner requires alcohol to remove common contaminants."

Here you are saying you do use a solution with a water base (e.g., the VPI RCM concoction, whatever that may be) with your NG.  If so, we are in accord.  My earlier point was that US RCMs don't or certainly may not require anything but water in the tank because of the very nature of how US works.  Whereas, I mentioned I do use a water plus alcohol plus nonionic detergent solution with my VPI HW17.  So, no problem.

@kylehildebrant 

I apologize I have been away for a few days and was unable to post.  Also, My new computer appears to be very problematic, and it is driving me crazy.

I noticed that this is your very first post - and what a post it is (although you may not understand the significance that I am relating to).  Noting the "unnecessary back and forth", and asking for answers to what would normally appear to be simple and straightforward matters.  Not realizing that my answers to you will rupture the brain vessels of several of the contributors to this Forum.

Nevertheless, you can obtain Tergitol 15-S-7 (now a Dow Chemical Product) on the internet from:  a.) "The Lab Depot", or, b.) "Advance Scientific & Chemical", or, by contacting (by phone) a local Dow Representative or Dow Chemical Distributor.  There are other internet choices, but you will need to do your own searches.  Phoning a Dow Representative or Distributor may be very productive, however, unfortunately it has a lot to do with where you reside.  Remember when speaking to any of these individuals to be truthful and honest with regard to your intentions, and your interest in the product.  You may be pleasantly surprised, or, not!

The answer to your second question is that YES it can be used in an Ultrasonic Cleaning device, but, recall your times in the bath may only be one-tenth of a "normal" time period, and that no rinsing (especially with distilled or deionized water is required or recommended.  It is self-defeating in many respects.  If you feel compelled the "rinse" then rinse only with the formulation that is presented.

Before I say more, I would ask of you to first respond if you already have an Ultrasonic Cleaning device or not?  Get back to me about this, and it can be further discussed.

This is where I already sense that other contributors minds are "blowing up" (yes, pun intended).  You may understand at some point as to my referrals, and, if and when you do, you can then explain it to me.

Recall, my "Very best Record Cleaning Formulation" is just that, and it is to be "an ease of use" product as well.

Good Luck, and keep in touch!

Wizzzard 

@wizzzard,

You can say what you wish, but the law (29 CFR 1910.106) is very specific as to what is classified as flammable - NFPA_30_Fact_Sheet_2021.ashx. And, in larger volumes, in small spaces, flammable vapors can be build up - NFPA Journal - Safe Distilling, Mar Apr 2018.

Yes, as you have implied the flame speed and heat of combustion of water alcohol solutions are low, but the minimum ignition energy is well within the range of a 120V electrical contact. But are you familiar with what is now available for ultrasonic tanks - Amazon.com: VEVOR Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner 6L 40kHz Vinyl Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine Knob Control Record Ultrasonic Cleaner 4 Records Vinyl Sonic Cleaner Stainless Steel Tank w/Mechanical Heater & Timer : Industrial & Scientific. Do you think these low-cost PRC manufactured UT tanks are UL listed?

You have no idea of people’s domestic use situation. Some people put these low-cost UT tanks in closets or small bathrooms (w/o venting) because they are so noisy.

I have education in fire science and I have firefighting training from when I was in the Navy, and I would not make any general recommendation for use of any fluid in larger quantities such as in a UT tank that the law classifies as flammable, without a whole lot of caveats, and I suspect that the NFPA would not even think that was safe. But that is me, and of course you and anyone reading is free to take exception.   And with this being said, I have nothing else to say.

@wizzzard Thank you for the detailed reply. I do think I grasp some of the significance, reading back through the thread. 

As for the UltraSonic cleaner I have, it is the HumminGuru.

And with regard to minds exploding—and rooms exploding—I'm not sure what to think. For you, not a concern. For @antinn it seems to be a big concern.

@lewm 

Yes, I was prepared to respond to you with one of my surly statements again, especially after you, did not disappoint me, and was able to inform me of what my personal thoughts that kept reappearing in my mind actually were. 

Of course I knew that the Captain played by Strother Martin while standing on the ridge said ""what we have here is a failure to communicate".  However I included the (BANG) after the quote to relate when it is REPEATED by Paul Newman just before he is killed, is more significant and relevant to the entire  story.  Plus, and a very important plus, they were MY THOUGHTS.  How insightful of you.

But I chose not to post my prepared scathing remarks.  Especially after I had witnessed a possible glimmer of hope.  Although, the remark was in parenthesis by you [ Despite Wizzzard's antagonistic attitude toward my posts, I may change the formula thanks to him.]. You need to go back in time to the very beginnings of time to review who was "antagonistic first", in fact "the antagonism" started before I even made any statements.

But, because of that "possibility and glimmer" I will forgo my prepared statement and "make you an offer you can't refuse".  Actually you can refuse but perhaps you should not.

Now, you stated what you use volumetrically, and I would hope you can convert that to parts by weight for better precision.  you, however, never mentioned how much Triton X-100 you use in your formulation.  Everything else is now known.

Allow me to state (in may terms) your formulation.

Deionized Water.                           803.650  grams

Isopropyl Alcohol (98.0%).            196.350  grams

Triton X-100                                     ?.???  grams

Total Weight                             1,000.00+.  grams

Now, if you slightly lower the amount of Isopropyl Alcohol and use the correct amount of Triton X-100, the formulation would be as follows:

Deionized Water.                        804.772. grams

Isopropyl Alcohol (98.0%).         195.000. grams

Triton X-100                                   0.228. grams  ( Approx. 11 to 12 drops)

Total Weight:                          1,000.000. grams

Now, go ahead," just for the heck of it", compare the above to the following.  It won't kill you.

Deionized Water                        779.772  grams

Ethanol  (99.5%)                       220.000. grams

Triton X-100                                  0.228. grams. (Approx. 11 to 12 drops)

Total Weight:                         1,000.000. grams      

Also keep in mine that 12 drops is better, but do not add more, the reasoning behind the 11 to 12 drops, original suggestion.

Use it as you would normally.  We now know that we both have VPI HW-17 Record Cleaners.  And they are of about the same time period.  Another thing I did manage to recall.  Was that when my unit was given to me by the individual that I purchased a lot of other equipment from, also provided me with a bottle of "VPI Record cleaner.  The bottle was about 500 cc, I have no idea as to what the surfactants or additives (if any) were, but, I distinctly remember without any doubt, that it contained Ethanol as well as water.  Also, there was no trace whatsoever of any Isopropyl Alcohol.  I can assure you I have a very "good nose" for solvents.  Others jokingly use to say ask Wizzzard to do a "Finger Chromatography".  Which I did, and, surprised many people by not only the content but the percentage.  What can I say, it was a "Gift"!

If you agree to perform this simple test, regardless of the results you provide me, I promise to tell you all the details of as to why Ethanol and not Isopropyl Alcohol.  More detail than you will ever want to know.  This is so that you do not have to embarrass yourself to thank someone for a "non-answer"- "answer".  And, I will be kind up front so you need not to bother "doing a deep dive" into Hansen's 519 page book.  The answer is not in there.  I did not think so, but, just to be certain I went through my Complimentary Edition that I have in my Library.  Yes, I did say that correctly, my Complimentary Second Edition .  You see CRC Press made an offer to me many years ago, and I still receive Various Books at no charge even though the company has changed hands many times.  I only stated this because I would not waste any money purchasing that insult to Dr. Joel Henry Hildebrand, with whom I had the pleasure, and honor, to collaborate with many, many years ago for about 6 months.  One of the greatest Chemists this Country has ever known.  And one of my greatest experiences as well.  He received every distinction and award possible, with the exception of the Nobel Prize, which he was worthy of as well.  And, as for Hansen in his Phd. Thesis to do a terrible injustice to

SORRY, I have to stop , I am getting very emotional and annoyed right now, you can't imagine.

I am sorry I will need to leave you now. please consider what I offered.  Perhaps when I cool off I can explain myself better to you. 

I have to go!