Results from Beta Testers of New Formulas

Regarding the safety issue ... I tested the solutions on a few LPs, all from different labels. I allowed the solutions (one at a time) to sit on the vinyl for a half-hour (something I don't recommend you do with ANY vinyl cleaner), and then removed with my vacuum RCM. I did this just about every day for about 6 weeks. Given that, with normal cleaning, the fluids should be on the vinyl for a minute or less, I figure this was more than a lifetime's worth of "fluid on" time.

Every week I examined the LPs with illuminated microscopy, and played them. I found no degradation in appearance or sound of the vinyl ... and this result maintained throughout the testing period. I also found no accumulation on the stylus, other than the typical dust that falls on the LP while it's played. One LP I sacrificed to a thumbnail scratch test ... to see if I could detect any increased brittleness, or at the other end of the spectrum, softening of the vinyl. As crude as this latter test may be, I could detect no changes in the vinyl ... and after the tests, the LP made a great (albeit dangerous) frisbee. This testing was mentioned in the prior thread, but in more summary fashion. After this testing, I tried the fluids on my UHQR "Crime of the Century." It sounded excellent.

Sean's appeal to common sense is, appropriately enough, good common sense. For example, when testing these formulas, I hope no one would use their prized $300 (used) Fred Jackson Blue Note original LP (per jes45). But I disagree with one thing Sean said (which I think is a first, Sean). Sean suggests that if you don't have a vacuum RCM, then let the LP air dry. I believe that would allow the gunk you've loosened-up or dissolved to re-deposit into the grooves. I think it would be better to absorb the fluids and the gunk with lint-free cotton toweling (used in photography) or lint-free cotton pads. In fact, if your LP is heavily soiled (or has something strange or really sticky on it), using lint-free cotton toweling or pads is probably a preferable first step. It will keep the fabric surrounding your suction apparatus from getting fouled.

I look forward to the feedback from the testers.

Best regards,
Paul Frumkin

Jjmali,
As you can see, Mr. Frumkin himself is open to suggestions and ideas from others, and has just explained some of his safety testing in response to Sean. If the thread starter is willing to respond constructively then by definition the post was useful.

I will of course honor your request by never offering any thoughts or suggestions on any thread of yours. Now that I understand your sensitivities, I wouldn't dream of intruding on your private space.

Hope you enjoy talking to yourself,
Doug

ANOTHER PRECAUTION:

This was on the prior thread, but I should repeat it here.

1. Do not use the formulas on 78s. They are made of shellac, and the isopropyl might dissolve them.

2. I also have no experience with acetates, and therefore cannot comment at all about the formulas' safety on acetates.

3. Lastly, do not use a natural bristle brush with the enzymatic solution. Natural bristle = hair = protein ... and the enzymatic is designed to dissolve protein deposits. Hence, over time, the enzymatic would dissolve the natural bristle ... and perhaps leave its remnants on your vinyl.

Please feel free to write with any questions or concerns. Again, I look forward to the testers' feedback. Thanks!

Best regards,
Paul Frumkin

Do you recommend a carbon fibre brush? If so, which? They all seem to be intended for dry brushing.

Hi Jyprez,

Carbon fiber brushes have advantages and disadvantages. On the plus side, carbon fibers have incredibly small diameter. They are therefore capable of going deeper into the grooves. But even carbon fibers are not capable of brushing most modulations in the grooves -- high frequency modulations are so small that they're measured in the same units as are lightwaves: microns (one one-millionth of a meter).

Further, carbon fibers are so soft that they provide very little "scrubbing" action. Further, most of the cleaning occurs because of the agitation of the cleaning fluid, and not because of direct brush-into-groove contact. The softness of carbon fibers makes them not very effective agitators.

I tried using a carbon fiber brush for a while with the cleaning solutions, thinking (as perhaps you are thinking now) that their small diameter would allow better penetration into the grooves. I concluded that their drawbacks outweighed the advantages; it also didn't let the fluid flow on the LP very well, and acted more like a squeegee than a brush. I used the Audioquest carbon fiber brush. Perhaps another brush -- such as the Hunt EDA Mark 6 (whose fibers are "backed up" by a velvet-like bar) -- might be more effective.

Certainly, nothing was harmed by using the carbon fiber brush that I could tell. If you try one or more carbon fiber brushes, I think all of us would be interested in your results. FYI, I contacted Audioquest with this very question before trying their carbon fiber brush with the solutions. Their terse response was that their brush was meant to be used dry.

Best regards,
Paul Frumkin