2. analog
  3. 1253748580

record cleaning findings/puzzle

Hello Gentlemen,

I have been experimenting today with steam cleaning my records. I am looking for support of my findings.

I used 2 identical records ( as well as others ) one I cleaned with the vpi 16.5 and my homebrew 25% isopropyl(99%), 75% distilled water (pharmacy)

Steps

1.Mo-fi brush one 2-3 cycle with cleaner, vacuum 2 cycle
2.audioquest brush, distilled water rinse 2 cycle, vacuum
3.Play

(The brushes were just ones I had around, I did not pick these for any particular reason)

The other record was cleaned with the same brushes, same method, but I also used the hand held steamer during steps 1 and 2. I kept the steam on the record 2-4 inches away, for duration of scrubbing.

I assume there is a sonic print to my solution, is achohol typically bright/harsh sounding?

Between the 2, at first I found the steamed ones to sound more organic, maybe slightly rolled off in the highs, but just warmer and more detailed everywhere else except the highs.

When I play the Alcohol only, cleaned record the highs are more present/forward, and noticeable, but upon further listening I notice a lack of depth because of it. trick details.

Here's the good part:

I then switched the cleaning methods for both records ( and others as well) and the sonic footprints followed each method onto each record. I did this back and forth 3 times with this pair and four times on another single record.

I am assuming I am hearing my solution, but could the steam somehow be reacting with my brushes and maybe melting them, or leaving something I am hearing on the surface which is damping the highs. At first I thought I wrecked the records, then I started to notice the inner details in the rest of the spectrum other then the highs, and when I added my solution again, the highs came back, now sounding to strong and glaring.

Which is the real sound of this record?
Has anyone else found this too?

Thanks,
Mike
hanaleimike
hanaleimike OP
125 posts
 
Doug, I will try it again today, but what I refer to as trick details are the hf being pushed forward. Hearing the " tssh" of a symbol out front and the rest of the body of cymbal is back in the soundstage where it is supposed to be. You notice the hf detail and think there is more detail, but it's just out of place.
With the steaming method I think the details were all there, more in fact across the whole spectrum, but most importantly the sound as a whole was more real and natural.
If you think the alcohol would produce a cleaner record, I will try it on another couple pairs of doubles and report back. Maybe the dawn leaves a residue, of the cf brush ( I just ordered a vpi brush)
Sometimes hearing the differences is the easy part, it's deciding which is the right or real sound, or even which one you prefer that drives me mad.

Maybe with the steam the grooves are cleaner. I read that the high frequencies are higher in the groove wall, so maybe the steam cleans further down the groove and allows the detail from the rest of the spectrum to match the level of the hf, therefore sounding even and not accentuated in the highs. I mentioned I thought it sounded slightly rolled off at first, upon further listening, the highs are still there, but the mids and bass are more detailed as well. It doesn't sound damped, it sounds more open and lifelike???

I'll report back when I get the new brush.
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
I didn't say alchohol would produce a cleaner record. I said it wouldn't leave a sonic signature.

I use an alchohol step in my regimen for only one reason: to de-nature any enzymes left behind by my first cleaning step, which involves a soak in an enzyme-based solution. If I weren't using enzymes I wouldn't use alchohol. Like Audiofeil, I haven't found it to be particularly effective as an LP cleaning agent.

"The high frequencies are higher on the groove wall"? What????
hanaleimike OP
125 posts
 
Ya sorry, it appears maybe I am higher. So much reading and info on the googlegon net sometimes I mix and match facts. Thanks for the clarification.
oilmanmojo
472 posts
 
i have found steaming does improve the quality of the cleaning regime i use but i do not use it on all applications. I also use a home made version using alcohol similar to yours and find it effective especially with steaming. IMO, the steaming raises the temperature of the cleaning fluid slightly thus making it more effective. The alcohol primarily reduces the surface tension and allows the fluid to get deeper into the groove. It does aid in evaporation, but i think that is a minor attribute especially with vacuuming. I also think the use of good brushes are a key to cleaning. a brush that has the microfibers that can extend deep into the groove improves cleaning. Now having said all of this, i find the highs more improved with deep cleaning than anything else. If you have ever pick up a dust ball or little grundge on the stylus, you probably noticed it when the highs got lost or distorted. So i echo dougs comments that if a cleaning regime produces brighter highs, it is more effective.
sdlevene
13 posts
 
It is quite common for solvents sold as spectroscopic-, HPLC-grade, or even higher purity to contain significant levels of contaminants that remain behind after evaporation. These contaminants are detectable in electron or scanning-probe microscopy experiments as nanometer-sized, or larger, background deposits. For critical applications solvents are typically redistilled in an all-glass apparatus shortly before use and may sometimes be stored under nitrogen or argon. I do not know whether trace contamination is contributing to what you are hearing; however, one should be aware that even "highly purified" solvents, including ethanol or isopropanol, are often carriers of impurities.
More to discover