2. analog
  3. 184776-182388

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!

128x128wizzzard
lewm
12,994 posts
 

Dear Wizzzard, You might start by taking a look at the topics of long-lasting threads here on the Audiogon Analog forum.  You probably would note that the same or very similar issues arise over and over again.  For some topics there is seemingly an insatiable appetite for commentary or for making comments.  Any of those is a good bet.

wizzzard's avatar
wizzzard OP
154 posts
 

@lewm 

Thank you for your input!

I was wondering if you had yet to try Ethanol as a substitute for the Isopropyl alcohol you are / have been using.  I take no offense if you have not tried Ethanol to note any differences.  I certainly understand the concept of "Don't fix anything if it ain't broke".  I was simply curious, and, thank you again.

Wizzzard

wizzzard's avatar
wizzzard OP
154 posts
 

@mijostyn 

No.  I am expecting it early next week.  A shipping agent and friend I have relied on for many years is attending to the shipping.  I did not buy the item from the distributor.  It was purchased directly along with some of the "Ready to use" cleaner.  He has been shipping items for me from Europe since 1984.  In the field of Polyurethanes most equipment came from either Germany or Italy along with some other more Countries as well.

I wanted some of the cleaner to verify what I have been told.  I have a very sufficient Laboratory set up at my home.  Even though I am retired and have a number of Medical issues, I still do consult with some people and companies that request information.  Often I need to test items, and/or, develop formulations for those that require my input.  But, since I am approaching 80 years of age, many of the people that I associated with are no longer with us.  Now, it is either their sons or daughters, or, those that have taken their position still require my input.

With regard to the Larostat 264A, it has nothing to do with "payment".  Money only clouds the issue.  It is the "Border", and coincidently getting examined by Customs.  This would jeopardize my current status. 

wizzzard's avatar
wizzzard OP
154 posts
 

@mijostyn 

Sorry about that - we had a power failure in our area and I did not finish my message to you and was checking if anything got through.  

Anyway, what I was attempting to point out is that companies most frequently avoid any charges related to shipping small quantities of material.  The paper work is not wort the extra effort. and it contributes confusion to the accounting.  That is why a company, if it is willing to send you a small quantity of material, there would never be any charges.  And, by small quantities can be also quite substantial.  It was not unusual for us to send 5 gallon "No-Charge" samples.  Even on some occasions we would ship a 55 gal drum that either had 250 lbs. or a full 500 lbs. at no charge as a trial.  So, a company such as BASF would normally ship such a sample as the Larostat 264A to us at no charge, and the amount could vary from a 250 ml. sample, or a 1,000 ml. or, even 2,500 ml. quantity.  If I specifically requested a minimum of 5 gallons there may be a charge, but, most likely not if justified.  The point being is "If they are willing to send, or, not to send a sample quantity.  And, if you wanted to pay, you would have to go through the total process of setting up an account, whether it be for $100.00 dollars or $1,000,000.00 - the application and process would be the same. That is why samples are typically sent at "No Charge".

I will be making a call tomorrow to someone in Lowell and find out if you can pick up Anti-static surfactant.  If they are reluctant, my final option is to send it to you when we eventually get to Western New York.  I do not know when that will be.  For certain it will not happen in the next three weeks.  I will keep you informed, and then you can provide your address.

Sincerely,

Wizzzard

P.S. I will answer your question over the weekend regarding the tonearm material selection, and my reasoning.  The reasoning aspect is important because it has a significant bearing on the eventual costs involved.  But, I do have an answer. 

wizzzard's avatar
wizzzard OP
154 posts
 

@mijostyn 

Oh heck with it!  Dismissing the details for now - the answer is 7075-T6 Aluminum.

It can either be cast or extruded.  If cast it must be under cover of Argon.  Also the Aluminum alloy would be best if anodized, and, anodized thoroughly to make it even stronger.

Yes Tungsten is the strongest and most rigid but brittle and difficult to work with. And, yes Titanium and Carbon fiber are all the rage now.  And Magnesium is also bantered about.  But, pound for pound you cannot do any better than 7075-T6 for a tonearm.  I have no idea if anyone is using this alloy for making tonearms - you would best to check that out yourself.  I am just considering the end product and what I would choose if I were to make tonearms. At this point, I would not consider anything else. It is also extremely conductive for an aluminum product.               The anodizing assists dramatically making it almost impossible to distort.  Its disadvantages (although few) are not relevant if you were to use it to make a tonearm.  Also, it is far, far less expensive than any of the other alternatives mentioned.  So, both cheap, easy to work, choices of processing, and, the very best choice.  It has it all.

That is my answer.

Wizzzard

P.S. Also, I would avoid any consideration of using ceramic bearings.  Great for Formula 1 Race cars, but not for tonearms. Too often we ignore products that have a proven record only to bee swayed by what is now fashionable.  Fashion is important. if you are Giorgio Armani or Miuccia Prada, but not a tonearm manufacturer wanting to produce the best tonearm.

More to discover