Regarding LAST Record Preservation Treatment, I used it for a brief time back in the 1980s. I eventually abandoned it because I found that if I applied it to a record that was not scrupulously clean (I didn't have a record cleaning machine at that time) it would substantially INCREASE tics and pops. My speculation is that it tended to "cement" in place any microscopic particles that may be present in the grooves, rather than allowing the stylus to sweep them along.
I do use Last Stylus Cleaner, before and after playing every side of a record. Apply it back to front, of course, and try to avoid applying it any higher up on the cantilever than necessary, to assure that it won't migrate up into the internal suspension of the cartridge. I use a small flashlight to make sure I can see what I'm doing when I apply it.
I also use a Zerostat Milty anti-static gun. My technique is to shoot the record in three places (roughly trisecting it), from a distance of roughly 6 or 7 inches. At each location I slowly squeeze and release the trigger three times, with the last release not being performed onto the record. I seem to recall that results in positive ions being applied last, which has been alleged to be preferable.
For the past 20 years or so I've been using a Nitty Gritty 2.5FI record cleaning machine (the "FI" stands for Fluid Injection), which I have been very pleased with. Various dealers currently offer it for $915 or so. Other Nitty Gritty models are available starting at a bit more than $400, but personally I would not want to have to deal with the manual fluid application, manual brushing, and manual rotation they require.
The VPI machines seem to be more popular among audiophiles than the Nitty Grittys, and I don't doubt that they would be an excellent choice. Personally, though, I like the fact that with a Nitty Gritty you are not placing the record on a platter. The Nitty Gritty's brushing fibers which surround the vacuum slot and contact the record are easily cleaned with a supplied wire whisk, which is preferably used with the vacuum turned on.
I also have a high quality older Oracle record brush, but since getting the Nitty Gritty machine I rarely use it. Although many audiophiles feel differently (as exemplified in the post just above), my instinct is to have as little as possible come into physical contact with a record once it has been cleaned. The concern being that a brush, no matter how well designed, may apply some microscopic particles while removing others. JMHO.
At a far lower price there is also Spin-Clean, which I have no experience with or particular knowledge of.
I would also suggest purchasing a supply of good quality anti-static record sleeves, to be used after each record undergoes its initial cleaning. I use these Mobile Fidelity sleeves.
Also, while I'm not sure how much relevance it may have to tic and pop issues, you might want to consider purchasing a record clamp if you are not already using one.
Finally, Ralph K. of Atma-Sphere (maker of very high quality tube amplifiers and preamplifiers, who participates here regularly as "Atmasphere") has stated in a number of past threads that the audibility of tics and pops can be markedly influenced by the design of the phono stage electronics. The reason being that a lot of the energy associated with tics and pops occurs at ultrasonic and possibly RF frequencies that are not directly audible, but which may have audible consequences as a result of non-linearities, intermodulation distortion, feedback, and other such things that occur in phono stage circuitry. As a general rule of thumb, it can probably be expected that phono stages using passive RIAA equalization and no feedback are likely to give less emphasis to tics and pops than other kinds, although such designs may tend to be more expensive than others if comparably well implemented. Something to keep in mind.
Best regards,
-- Al
I do use Last Stylus Cleaner, before and after playing every side of a record. Apply it back to front, of course, and try to avoid applying it any higher up on the cantilever than necessary, to assure that it won't migrate up into the internal suspension of the cartridge. I use a small flashlight to make sure I can see what I'm doing when I apply it.
I also use a Zerostat Milty anti-static gun. My technique is to shoot the record in three places (roughly trisecting it), from a distance of roughly 6 or 7 inches. At each location I slowly squeeze and release the trigger three times, with the last release not being performed onto the record. I seem to recall that results in positive ions being applied last, which has been alleged to be preferable.
For the past 20 years or so I've been using a Nitty Gritty 2.5FI record cleaning machine (the "FI" stands for Fluid Injection), which I have been very pleased with. Various dealers currently offer it for $915 or so. Other Nitty Gritty models are available starting at a bit more than $400, but personally I would not want to have to deal with the manual fluid application, manual brushing, and manual rotation they require.
The VPI machines seem to be more popular among audiophiles than the Nitty Grittys, and I don't doubt that they would be an excellent choice. Personally, though, I like the fact that with a Nitty Gritty you are not placing the record on a platter. The Nitty Gritty's brushing fibers which surround the vacuum slot and contact the record are easily cleaned with a supplied wire whisk, which is preferably used with the vacuum turned on.
I also have a high quality older Oracle record brush, but since getting the Nitty Gritty machine I rarely use it. Although many audiophiles feel differently (as exemplified in the post just above), my instinct is to have as little as possible come into physical contact with a record once it has been cleaned. The concern being that a brush, no matter how well designed, may apply some microscopic particles while removing others. JMHO.
At a far lower price there is also Spin-Clean, which I have no experience with or particular knowledge of.
I would also suggest purchasing a supply of good quality anti-static record sleeves, to be used after each record undergoes its initial cleaning. I use these Mobile Fidelity sleeves.
Also, while I'm not sure how much relevance it may have to tic and pop issues, you might want to consider purchasing a record clamp if you are not already using one.
Finally, Ralph K. of Atma-Sphere (maker of very high quality tube amplifiers and preamplifiers, who participates here regularly as "Atmasphere") has stated in a number of past threads that the audibility of tics and pops can be markedly influenced by the design of the phono stage electronics. The reason being that a lot of the energy associated with tics and pops occurs at ultrasonic and possibly RF frequencies that are not directly audible, but which may have audible consequences as a result of non-linearities, intermodulation distortion, feedback, and other such things that occur in phono stage circuitry. As a general rule of thumb, it can probably be expected that phono stages using passive RIAA equalization and no feedback are likely to give less emphasis to tics and pops than other kinds, although such designs may tend to be more expensive than others if comparably well implemented. Something to keep in mind.
Best regards,
-- Al