Jano, I use a 10L tank and clean 4 records at a time in that tank, spaced about 1-inch apart. I may clean up to four sets of 4 records in a cleaning session, but the tank is not running continuously. I turn off the cavitation in between sets, and I run a filter pump to cycle the tank solution for 4-5 minutes as I'm rinsing. Then put in the next set of 4 records and turn the cavitation back on.
I start my cleaning with a mildly warm tank temperature of about 31 degrees Celsius. It may rise to 36 degrees over the four sets of 4 records with the described breaks. I do keep the tank heater turned on throughout the session but at a max temperature of 35 on its digital control. I've not experimented with temperatures higher than 36 degrees, but I've read recommendations to go higher.
Last edited:
Hi all,
I chimed in a couple of times to this thread a while ago as I'm planning a US cleaner but got distracted by another project, a very successful bearing investigation and upgrade of my diy arm.
My fantastic wife was stuck with an idea for a Christmas present for me then she remembered that I was planning a cleaner and offered to get me all the bits to build one. All of the components for a basic system have been ordered. No filtration system as yet, I'll experiment without one to start and then add one if I feel it would be beneficial.
I have a couple of questions. Having read this and other record cleaning threads it looks like the rinse stage is quite important. How are you guys rinsing your records after US cleaning? I was contemplating a two stage rinse. First a quick spray with dh2o to wash of any floaters that may have been picked up from the water surface as the records are removed from the cleaner. Then using a second motor system, similar to the one used with the US cleaner, and a separate tank to rotate the records through a rinse for a couple of minutes. This rinse tank would be filled with dh2o that is warmed to aid its action. A splash of IPA might be added to aid evaporation. Does this sound like a good idea?
As my wife is buying the cleaner I thought I would thank her by cleaning her record collection. Her records have lived a very punk existence and a lot of them are filthy, I mean really filthy, (and currently banned from my deck). Have any of you experimented with enzyme cleaning? This would seem like a good idea to remove years of finger prints, coffee stains, jam etc. If so is this best done as a separate pre-wash or can the enzyme be added to the main US cleaning solution?
Thank you in advance and I will of course post what ever I come up with and report on its effectiveness.
Niffy
I chimed in a couple of times to this thread a while ago as I'm planning a US cleaner but got distracted by another project, a very successful bearing investigation and upgrade of my diy arm.
My fantastic wife was stuck with an idea for a Christmas present for me then she remembered that I was planning a cleaner and offered to get me all the bits to build one. All of the components for a basic system have been ordered. No filtration system as yet, I'll experiment without one to start and then add one if I feel it would be beneficial.
I have a couple of questions. Having read this and other record cleaning threads it looks like the rinse stage is quite important. How are you guys rinsing your records after US cleaning? I was contemplating a two stage rinse. First a quick spray with dh2o to wash of any floaters that may have been picked up from the water surface as the records are removed from the cleaner. Then using a second motor system, similar to the one used with the US cleaner, and a separate tank to rotate the records through a rinse for a couple of minutes. This rinse tank would be filled with dh2o that is warmed to aid its action. A splash of IPA might be added to aid evaporation. Does this sound like a good idea?
As my wife is buying the cleaner I thought I would thank her by cleaning her record collection. Her records have lived a very punk existence and a lot of them are filthy, I mean really filthy, (and currently banned from my deck). Have any of you experimented with enzyme cleaning? This would seem like a good idea to remove years of finger prints, coffee stains, jam etc. If so is this best done as a separate pre-wash or can the enzyme be added to the main US cleaning solution?
Thank you in advance and I will of course post what ever I come up with and report on its effectiveness.
Niffy
Hi Niffy,
I have not experimented with enzyme cleaning. I've never had LPs with coffee, jam, blood, or other bodily fluids, etc. on them.
But, if you're going to use enzymatic cleaners, I'd advise NOT to use them in the ultrasonic machine. Once you get above body temp, these enzymes tend to denature and break down, so they won't be effective. The bath in a URC tends to get warm even if it's not a heated unit, so most enzymatic cleaners -- even if marketed for use in an ultrasonic cleaner! ----- don't do much at elevated temps.
The best procedure for medical instruments for example, is a room temperature pre-soak in an enzymatic cleaner, rinse, and then put in the ultrasonic cleaner for a cavitation clean, rinse.
Cheers,
B B
I have not experimented with enzyme cleaning. I've never had LPs with coffee, jam, blood, or other bodily fluids, etc. on them.
But, if you're going to use enzymatic cleaners, I'd advise NOT to use them in the ultrasonic machine. Once you get above body temp, these enzymes tend to denature and break down, so they won't be effective. The bath in a URC tends to get warm even if it's not a heated unit, so most enzymatic cleaners -- even if marketed for use in an ultrasonic cleaner! ----- don't do much at elevated temps.
The best procedure for medical instruments for example, is a room temperature pre-soak in an enzymatic cleaner, rinse, and then put in the ultrasonic cleaner for a cavitation clean, rinse.
Cheers,
B B
niffy, I agree with bbftx about the enzyme cleaning. I have used an enzyme cleaning step and it can be very effective, but it needs to be done outside your ultrasonic tank. Also, the best enzyme cleaning is with a powder so you mix it up with distilled or DI water as you need some. It will have an 8-10 hour shelf life and them be discarded. Enzyme solutions break down and I'm very skeptical of the premixed ready to use products offered for sale.
I've used this enzyme cleaner product from Walker Audio, one jar will last forever:
Walker Audio Prelude Active Enzymes Record Cleaning Fluid (2 Ounces)-Elusive Disc
If you go a diy route on finding an enzyme cleaner, be careful. Some have a strong acid in them which can be harmful for your vinyl. Do your research by starting with this thread and paying attention to the advice from the chemist (posts as guest110 and phantomrebel):
Record cleaning- you're doing it wrong! | Page 27 | Audiokarma Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums
As to rinsing, if you use a detergent in your tank solution like one of the Tergitols or Triton X-100, you need to rinse! I do a double rinse and vacuum dry on a VPI RCM I've had for many years. Others use the soaking-in-a-tank approach (with 5-6 gallons of distilled water) to highly dilute the tank solution off the records. I've not tried the soaking rinse, but some report good success with it. I believe the vacuum dry is an important step in getting the best results because I'm not leaving fluid on my records to dry and leave behind any residue. But either way you choose to go, you must rinse if using a detergent in your mix.
As to whether using a detergent in your tank solution is important to getting the best results, you need to experiment to see what will be important to you for your results. I've tried both with and without the detergent, and I've found that the combination of adding Tergitol and Hepastat, double rinsing and vacuum drying is the combination that gives me the best result and, for me, is worth the extra steps.
I've used this enzyme cleaner product from Walker Audio, one jar will last forever:
Walker Audio Prelude Active Enzymes Record Cleaning Fluid (2 Ounces)-Elusive Disc
If you go a diy route on finding an enzyme cleaner, be careful. Some have a strong acid in them which can be harmful for your vinyl. Do your research by starting with this thread and paying attention to the advice from the chemist (posts as guest110 and phantomrebel):
Record cleaning- you're doing it wrong! | Page 27 | Audiokarma Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums
As to rinsing, if you use a detergent in your tank solution like one of the Tergitols or Triton X-100, you need to rinse! I do a double rinse and vacuum dry on a VPI RCM I've had for many years. Others use the soaking-in-a-tank approach (with 5-6 gallons of distilled water) to highly dilute the tank solution off the records. I've not tried the soaking rinse, but some report good success with it. I believe the vacuum dry is an important step in getting the best results because I'm not leaving fluid on my records to dry and leave behind any residue. But either way you choose to go, you must rinse if using a detergent in your mix.
As to whether using a detergent in your tank solution is important to getting the best results, you need to experiment to see what will be important to you for your results. I've tried both with and without the detergent, and I've found that the combination of adding Tergitol and Hepastat, double rinsing and vacuum drying is the combination that gives me the best result and, for me, is worth the extra steps.
Last edited:
Hi bbftx, RRushton,
Thanks for the replies. I have the triton surfactant already on order and will test with just this first. If this proves insufficient for the more stubborn records then I'll go for a pre-soak in an enzyme solution, thanks for the links. Although the enzymes are quite expensive it will probably be worth it as my wife has some really nice titles in her collection. Hopefully the pre-soak won't be necessary.
I don't have a record vacuum system at the moment, though I can definitely see the advantage in having one. This may be a diy project for the future, are there any good proven diy designs out there? One of my major limitations is storage space. I don't even know where the US cleaner is going to live let alone a vacuum system as well so compact when not in use is a must. For now I'll probably fast spin the records to throw off surface water then air dry. The last thing I want to do is put the record even slightly damp into a new sleeve, as this would be just be asking mould to grow, but I also don't want to leave a freshly cleaned record sitting out collecting dust for too long whilst it dries.
Niffy
Thanks for the replies. I have the triton surfactant already on order and will test with just this first. If this proves insufficient for the more stubborn records then I'll go for a pre-soak in an enzyme solution, thanks for the links. Although the enzymes are quite expensive it will probably be worth it as my wife has some really nice titles in her collection. Hopefully the pre-soak won't be necessary.
I don't have a record vacuum system at the moment, though I can definitely see the advantage in having one. This may be a diy project for the future, are there any good proven diy designs out there? One of my major limitations is storage space. I don't even know where the US cleaner is going to live let alone a vacuum system as well so compact when not in use is a must. For now I'll probably fast spin the records to throw off surface water then air dry. The last thing I want to do is put the record even slightly damp into a new sleeve, as this would be just be asking mould to grow, but I also don't want to leave a freshly cleaned record sitting out collecting dust for too long whilst it dries.
Niffy
I used to develop film at home with open windows and somewhat dusty conditions. What I did was hang the film in one of these: Honey Can Do Short PEVA Garment Bag
Never a bit of dust collected on the film. I would give the interior a spritz or two of distilled water just as I hung the film to hopefully drop out the dust. Worked perfectly. I would do your ultrasonic thing and then hang the records in the garment bag. a dowel or two hung in the bag should allow drying your records without getting dust on them.
Never a bit of dust collected on the film. I would give the interior a spritz or two of distilled water just as I hung the film to hopefully drop out the dust. Worked perfectly. I would do your ultrasonic thing and then hang the records in the garment bag. a dowel or two hung in the bag should allow drying your records without getting dust on them.
Agree with you, niffy. Even with vacuum drying, I still leave my records out to air dry for an hour or so before trusting them to go inside a poly sleeve.
There are a variety of ways to go about making a diy vacuum drying system. Hi*ball on AudioKarma had posted a nice diy design for vacuum cleaning machine, but all of his photos have disappeared. One of the simplest is a slot cut in the wand of a portable wet vac machine with appropriate protective felt glued to the edges of the slot. Here are links to Hi-ball's article and more over at AK. There may be similar threads here at diyAudio.
DIY record cleaning machine (RCM) consolidation and resource thread | Audiokarma Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums
Last edited:
To add, I have used a bottle of L'art Du Son (with enzymes, I believe) in my first testings and I worked very well, but over time I got the idea the results became less good. I then read somewhere this happens if enzymes are in the 'open'. Therefore I now only use it as a prewash. After that record goes into US with iso+distilled water. I vacuum off and do 2 rounds of distilled water rinse on my Okki Nokki. This is my current regime.
WOW.
Loads of great replies and links. It might take me until Christmas to fully explored all of them, ploughing into the audio karma you're doing it wrong thread right now. This guy seems to know his stuff and explains the chemistry both in a detailed and easy to read way.
An adaptation of your idea, Wntrmute2, a dish rack type of thingy to hold the records and a simple, collapsible, fine mesh box sitting over it, thanks for the inspiration.
Niffy
Loads of great replies and links. It might take me until Christmas to fully explored all of them, ploughing into the audio karma you're doing it wrong thread right now. This guy seems to know his stuff and explains the chemistry both in a detailed and easy to read way.
An adaptation of your idea, Wntrmute2, a dish rack type of thingy to hold the records and a simple, collapsible, fine mesh box sitting over it, thanks for the inspiration.
Niffy
Hi all,
I've read through the audio karma thread by Dr. Vince up until the point where he was trolled and left. One of the additives he recommends is quats (Quaternary ammonium compounds). These have already been introduced to this thread by RRushton. They appear to have two benefits, they are a strong anti-fungicide and help to give the record surface a positive charge, decreasing static. The quats recommend by Dr Vince, Behentriammonium Chloride, does not appear to be available in the UK.
Thinking anti-fungicide I dug under my kitchen sink and dug out a bottle of Ronseal 3in1 mould killer. A bit of intensive googling. The active ingredient is indeed a quats, at 1.3-2%. The other main ingredients are water, about 3% alcohol, and a buffer to stabilize ph which is I believe is purpose of the EDTA also recommend by Dr Vince. Could be two birds with one stone. There were only a couple of ingredients that looked at all worrisome from a vinyl point of view, the worst being BENZISOTHIAZOL-3 which has a benzene base. It was low on the list of ingredients so probably very low in concentration. Most of the other ingredients looked like they were more likely to be beneficial rather than detrimental. I'm not a chemist so I don't know for sure. At £8 per 500ml it's also cheap. However to get the recommended 0.05% concentration of quats would require about 30ml per litre, about 150ml per tank, which seems a lot until you take into consideration that it's 95% water to start. Any thoughts? Any other sources for quats?
Niffy
I've read through the audio karma thread by Dr. Vince up until the point where he was trolled and left. One of the additives he recommends is quats (Quaternary ammonium compounds). These have already been introduced to this thread by RRushton. They appear to have two benefits, they are a strong anti-fungicide and help to give the record surface a positive charge, decreasing static. The quats recommend by Dr Vince, Behentriammonium Chloride, does not appear to be available in the UK.
Thinking anti-fungicide I dug under my kitchen sink and dug out a bottle of Ronseal 3in1 mould killer. A bit of intensive googling. The active ingredient is indeed a quats, at 1.3-2%. The other main ingredients are water, about 3% alcohol, and a buffer to stabilize ph which is I believe is purpose of the EDTA also recommend by Dr Vince. Could be two birds with one stone. There were only a couple of ingredients that looked at all worrisome from a vinyl point of view, the worst being BENZISOTHIAZOL-3 which has a benzene base. It was low on the list of ingredients so probably very low in concentration. Most of the other ingredients looked like they were more likely to be beneficial rather than detrimental. I'm not a chemist so I don't know for sure. At £8 per 500ml it's also cheap. However to get the recommended 0.05% concentration of quats would require about 30ml per litre, about 150ml per tank, which seems a lot until you take into consideration that it's 95% water to start. Any thoughts? Any other sources for quats?
Niffy
niffy, good research! Somewhere farther along in that AK thread, Dr. Vince recommends looking at beauty products compounds. He says the quats we want are also in the chemicals used in mixing specialty shampoos. I believe someone posting to the thread said he'd found some in dry form and Vince identified it as the correct substance. Sorry that I don't have that post bookmarked.
Hi RRushton,
Thank you for the links and quotes. I've rechecked some details on the audio karma site. Dr Vince recommended to avoid using a buffer with a phosphate base. Unfortunately the ronseal mould killers buffer is a phosphate base so that one's out of the game. I'll investigate the leads you've supplied and see if there is a supplier who is willing to ship to the UK or if there is a UK supplier of one of the alternative quats and maybe check out the EDTA additive as well. If I'm going to follow the man's advice I might as well follow it all the way and make his "ultimate wash solution".
Niffy
Thank you for the links and quotes. I've rechecked some details on the audio karma site. Dr Vince recommended to avoid using a buffer with a phosphate base. Unfortunately the ronseal mould killers buffer is a phosphate base so that one's out of the game. I'll investigate the leads you've supplied and see if there is a supplier who is willing to ship to the UK or if there is a UK supplier of one of the alternative quats and maybe check out the EDTA additive as well. If I'm going to follow the man's advice I might as well follow it all the way and make his "ultimate wash solution".
Niffy
Zg, the reason to consider adding it is for its antistatic, antibacterial, a bit of residual groove lubrication at the molecular level functions. I've added it to my USC tank solution for the antistat and the antibacterial functions. The antistat is for the records (yep, works) and the antibacterial for the damp areas that will always remain in USC drains and in my USC filtering setup (copied from bbftx's design). For an understanding of why and how, I suggest reading the posts linked above and the further commentary by the chemist in that AK thread.
Folks, please note that we are pretty much off-topic to what bb originally started this thread to discuss. My apologies for contributing to us moving so far away from discussion of construction of our USC equipment. But to be courteous to ashok...
ashok, I'm not a chemist so someone who is might weigh in here. From the AK thread, the chemist has cautioned that the glycol is a coating agent. Polyethelene glycol is the same ingredient contained in Photo-Flo and the reason people are recommended not using Photo-Flo in our record cleaning formulations. See: Record cleaning- you're doing it wrong! | Page 56 | Audiokarma Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums
The chemist is recommending nonionic ingredients.
For anyone interested in cleaning solutions and various formulations, I highly recommend using the AK thread above as a resource and posting questions there. The chemist, posting as phantomrebel, is very open to answering questions about solutions and that is the topic of that thread.
ashok, I'm not a chemist so someone who is might weigh in here. From the AK thread, the chemist has cautioned that the glycol is a coating agent. Polyethelene glycol is the same ingredient contained in Photo-Flo and the reason people are recommended not using Photo-Flo in our record cleaning formulations. See: Record cleaning- you're doing it wrong! | Page 56 | Audiokarma Home Audio Stereo Discussion Forums
The chemist is recommending nonionic ingredients.
For anyone interested in cleaning solutions and various formulations, I highly recommend using the AK thread above as a resource and posting questions there. The chemist, posting as phantomrebel, is very open to answering questions about solutions and that is the topic of that thread.
Last edited:
Thanks RRushton,
The link to making cosmetics Inc was just the job. They have both the quats and edta and ship internationally. The postage is a bit of a killer. Having pure ingredients without additives of unknown and possibly negative effects is worth it to me.
I now have pretty much everything required to build the ultrasonic record cleaning system and the cleaning solution ordered. A couple of bits still to work out.
Thanks to all for your input.
Niffy
The link to making cosmetics Inc was just the job. They have both the quats and edta and ship internationally. The postage is a bit of a killer. Having pure ingredients without additives of unknown and possibly negative effects is worth it to me.
I now have pretty much everything required to build the ultrasonic record cleaning system and the cleaning solution ordered. A couple of bits still to work out.
Thanks to all for your input.
Niffy
Folks,
We are indeed getting off-topic here, particularly since most of the record cleaning solution threads referenced are primarily about NON-ultrasonic cleaning solutions. What works in an LP vacuum cleaning solution is not what is needed, or effective, or safe in ultrasonics (particularly due to elevated temperatures found in most ultrasonic cleaning regimes). And some, not all, audiophiles tend to go off the deep end by taking theoretical logic to far edge extremes sometimes.
There is some incorrect information flying around, so let me offer a correction and some math sanity:
There is no polyethylene glycol in Photo-Flo ---- it's propylene glycol.
And if PhotoFlo is used at intelligent concentrations (i.e. a few drops per 6 liters) you're talking about 0.0025% Photo Flo in a cleaning tank. This amount will not harm a record in any way, particularly if followed by any kind of water rinse. Regardless, I've personally moved away from Photo-Flo and get by very well with 3% isopropyl alcohol and purified water or distilled water (again, check the math on what that difference in water purity means for % contaminants -- i.e. not much).
I like keeping it simple,
B B