Record cleaning and realistic expectations

Some cleaning regimens are obsessed with the rinse cycle, advocating distilled water only.  I use a VPI HW-17.  The vacuum removes whatever liquid is on the record.  Is there any reason to believe ethanol in the rinse would leave a residue?  It is distilled, it is very pure and there should be no minerals  in it.

No, I don't think the ethanol will leave any residue, but the water that is with it might. Obviously, being distilled, you are minimising this as best you can. I doubt the vacuum leaves a record truly dry, so this is why the tiny bit of moisture left behind should be as uncontaminated as possible. Once it dries, you are left with what was dissolved in it.

I certainly fall into the category of "obsessed with the rinse cycle." I can hear the difference with a lab grade US machine. YMMV.

It has been more than twenty years since I took my deep dive into record cleaning… and it was pretty deep. I do remember that alcohol is a real no no, not because of a residue, but it hardens or damages the vinyl in some way. My research included how the Smithsonian cleaned and preserved records as well as some lengthy scientific publications. Too long ago for me to remember the details… but no alcohol.

@ghdprentice - For what it is worth, I don't think alcohol (most commonly denatured or isopropyl to prevent drinking) is necessarily harmful, though I rarely use it. It is an ok solvent and a modest surfactant (reduces water tension). One concern was its effect on plasticizers, but that is not what comprises most of the compounds used--you know, the stuff that makes those heavy library type album covers soft and pliable. 

There was one fellow here whose screen name escapes me-advocating the use of high octane ethanol, known in the States as Everclear. I don't use that either.

I similarly did a deep dive a while ago, and got an opportunity to spend a day at the intake facility of the Library of Congress in Culpeper, Va. Although my original objective was to talk about cleaning and archival practices, the place and the people were so fascinating that I spent much of the day doing other things- listening to overdubs by Les Paul cut to lacquers (before he had a tape machine) and spending time in their vaults. I wrote it up and it is on the Net. I subsequently did an interview with one of their preservation specialists about cleaning practices. A lot of it is common sense and does not necessarily require fancy equipment, though I use a big Monks and a KL ultrasonic. The combination is synergistic in a real sense. 

I was fortunate to meet Neil Antin (@antinn) who literally wrote a book on the subject-he was the author of the mil-spec for cleaning o2 systems in naval submarines, so the issue of residue was an important factor, as well as the measure of cleanliness. To paraphrase Neil (and to echo conclusions I reached independently a long time ago through experimentation, though without the scientific and engineering background Neil has), there is no single "best" way-- a lot depends on the user, the record in question and lengths to which the user is willing to go. Much of it is in the method, not the machinery.

I'm still mainly an LP guy so clean playing records are important to me, starting with the condition of the LP-- much of what I buy is older, "used" or "dead inventory" but a lot of new pressings have nasties that cleaning can ameliorate. I've been able to salvage some that I once would have considered unplayable due to groove chew; turned out it was crud and I suspect came from past attempts at "cleaning" back in the day with sprays, wipes and other methods. There is no magic in any of this and some records are irretrievably damaged. 

I stay away from anything that has mold. I won't let it in the room, especially if it is active. I just don't want to mess with it, for health and contamination reasons. But, there's a ton of information out there, some of it good, some of it not so good. The mantra, of course, is "do no harm."

Bill Hart