Record Cleaning - digging deeper - in conversation with Steve Evans of Perfect Vinyl Forever
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 дек 2023
- Following up on my previous record cleaning videos (linked below) I caught up with Steve Evans of Perfect Vinyl Forever.
Despite not having tried Steve's cleaning service myself (yet), I have heard very positive reports of Steve's process from friends who have. I've read through the entire www.perfectvinylforever.com website and watched several videos on the subject, and wanted to find out more, so here I dig a little deeper to establish some of the finer details of Steve's process and hence what might / might not be the salient points.
I have tried some of the ideas suggested in this video and am still working through others. As ever, I do not claim to be an authority on record cleaning, just a very interested party...
More to follow...
If you've not already seen them, do please take a look at the previous videos in this series:
Record Cleaning - part 1: the myths, the theory, the practise unravelled:
• Record Cleaning - part...
Record Cleaning - part 2: Ultrasonic machines: The HumminGuru intro and demonstration: • Record Cleaning - part...
Record Cleaning - part 3: Ultrasonic machines: The HumminGuru - should you buy one? My verdict: • Record Cleaning - part...
FOUR your aMUSEment: Ultrasonic Record Cleaning Machines - TEASER: • FOUR your aMUSEment: U...
Record Cleaning - part 4: Ultrasonic machines: The Degritter Mk2 - full in-depth review & verdict: • Record Cleaning - part...
Record Cleaning - part 5: The Gruesome Truth! Ultrasonic Cavitation killed my vinyl: • Record Cleaning - part...
Dave, thanks so much for this video. I'd never heard of PVF until now. I'm absolutely going to try Steve's services. It's kind of hard to believe that PVF is the only service of its kind in the U.S. Big fan, Dave. Have learned a lot from your videos. Please keep them coming.
Glad you’re the videos Brett. Thanks for your support!
Great discussion. Very detailed and informative. Would love to hear another one of these! Thanks to both of you for taking the time to do this, very much appreciated.
Thanks Brad. I’m sure we’ll be revisiting this soon.
Bless up Dave! Best of the season to you and thanks for the content this year. Looking forward to more excellent content in 2024 ✊🏾
Thanks DMD.
Happy Christmas Dave, wishing you and your family a lovely break. Thanks so much for all the videos
Thanks SpyderTracks!
This is enormously helpful. Thanks so much.
Glad it was helpful Dr David.
Excellent discussion and eye opening, Well done again Dave for your time and dedication to Vinyl cleaning
Thank you kindly
Yes it's on many most all my 60s and 70s Stones lp's and Pink Floyds...I did make the mistake of cleaning with tap water 10 years ago when I did not know to use distilled water only could that be the cause ya think? Thanks
Years ago I bought a Spin Clean, cleaned over a hundred records, but was too lazy to do a rinse cycle since I only had the one basin. Found out the crackly way why that was not a good idea.
I finally got a Vinyl Vac, did the lazy susan thing, and now I can use the solution, vacuum, rinse, vaccum each side. Once you get into a flow, it really doesn't take that long and my dad's old Sam Cooke record which is full of scratches actually sounds really good. Now someone needs to invent silent shop vac technology.
Thanks for your feedback Mark.
Hey, can you detail your process and the products. I was thinking since spin clean is inexpensive to maybe get two- one for cleaning and one for rinsing. i am exploring a reasonably priced vac. What solution do you use? Thanks
@@photoslum I'll describe it the best I can but a good resource that I used was a video by Vinyl for Miles entitled "Vinyl Vac Full Review - Before and After Audio Comparison!" My method is close to that.
You need a small Wet/Dry vac for this. I bought the Vinyl Vac kit from Amazon ($45 or so). It has the PVC pipe, pads, and cleaning solution. I then bought a cheap plastic lazy susan from Amazon ($10), glued a screw to it to make the spindle, and put a cork slipmat ($5-10) on it to make my "turntable". The record goes on there. I have a gallon jug of distilled water that I poured the cleaning solution into. That solution is then used to fill a spray bottle with which I spray onto the record. I also bought a label saver so I don't damage the label. I let the spray sit for 10-30 sec, then use a Record Doctor Wet/Dry brush ($15-20) to scrub along with the grooves around a few times each way. I vacuum that up and then use a second jug of distilled water to fill a small plastic container to soak a 4" foam paintbrush and paint over the grooves a few times as a rinse. I vacuum that off and then flip to Side 2 to repeat the process
It sounds very labor intensive but it took longer to type all that than it takes to do a full LP. It really is kind of therapeutic and each record only needs to be done once. Just make sure you use a good inner sleeve and keep a separate dry brush handy before each play.
@@mark4406 thanks for the detailed reply. last question is- what solution do you use? Thanks again.
@@photoslum The solution came with the Vinyl Vac attachment. It's a 2oz bottle that you pour into the distilled water jug, swirl, and leave it for a day or so. I don't know what is in it but it is alcohol free
Dave, crazy coincidence! I’m market testing a cleaning service in Switzerland called Precision Vinyl Restoration (PVR) using a Klaudio. If it works, I’d expand it to the any viable countries in Europe. I’m in the first stages of this and would love to speak with PVF. So grateful you did this video.
Cool, do keep me posted Austin. I’m keen to know how you get on. I’ll look up PVR.
Good luck with your endeavor! I think you’ll get better sonic results with a Degritter for cleaning then use a Klaudio for rinsing.
This is so useful Dave, many thanks!
Glad it was helpful!
This was helpful. Steve's perspectives on all of this make a LOT of sense in relation to what I've learned over time. I still find my manual Liquinox dilution pre-clean and Ilfotol dilution second clean (rinse passes between each) incredibly tedious, but it seems that without an atrocious investment even beyond just a Degritter, I'm just not going to get better results. Steve's process does seem that it would be superior, but I just can't handle that kind of expense.
I'm still lusting after the Degritter MKII from the perspective of making my cleaning process less labor intensive, but it does seem that I'd still have to do all that chemical pre-treating anyway to get optimal results. Yeesh. If multiple cleaning passes with Degritter's own cleaning solution concentrate still just doesn't do enough, it's a harder sell for me. More the shame, since I almost talked myself into buying one used just to bypass how discouraging I find the manual scrubbing process, given my already too-limited time and obsessive nature in trying to get the best results. Ah well.
Hi @packgrog. Glad you found it helpful. To be honest my investigations / experiments are on-going but I have formed a few conclusions after several months of having the Degritter in my arsenal.
First thing is that I do still do all the manual pre-cleaning. In fact since chatting with Steve I now use both a chemical solvent type stage (Clearaudio Pure Groove), followed by (if needed) a biological / enzyme clean using L’art du son.
Then a rinse, then into the Degritter for ‘power rinsing’ as Steve calls it.
I’m still waiting to follow up with Steve but IMO the Degritter beneficially adds to, not replaces any steps in my cleaning regime.
Takes even more time, but my records sound even better than they did.
@@DaveDenyer yeah, if it's just another tool in the arsenal, rather than an actual time saver, then I just can't justify the expense. A damn shame.
Interesting Dave! He suggested using 6:47 6:47 😮😢 two degritters, one for cleaning and one for rinse. I have been using that for some time with very good results. Three heavy washes with two drops of tergikleen / liter and after that a dry. Then a rinse in the second degritter on heavy wash and finally a dry.
Thanks for your feedback! If I had two Degritters I’d almost certainly do this, although I think I’d leave the washed lp wet (not air-dried, so not baking the wash / tergikleen residue onto the lp ready for rinsing).
Great video. Thank you Dave and Steve.
😊
Thanks Reiner, glad you enjoyed it.
@@DaveDenyer I hoped he would react to your 0.03% ilfotol solution, but he didn’t. When Steve opens his own RUclips channel we can probably ask him directly.
Regarding Steve’s Ethanol recommendation it will be interesting to test.
I also really liked Steve’s insight what the different frequencies do. But obviously Steve had not tried to destroy a record by overuse of 40 kHz like you did. So it would be fascinating to see what happens if you try his suggestion and get one Humming Guru overcleaned copy and put it in the Degritter MK2. Will it get better again? I understand you like to keep the vinyl you have like it is but maybe the guy who bought the Humming Guru from you is willing to let you clean another LP 20 to 40 times?
Hi Reiner, OK, I have now attempted to 'resurrect' the HumminGuru over cleaned copy and failed, it still sounds worse than the uncleaned copy...
I will be sending it to Steve to see if he can restore it, but to honest, having now tried this now myself, I do think it is damaged.
FYI. I'm still in contact with Steve and we will be making more videos on the subject as our investigations progress.
@@DaveDenyer Hi Dave, so cool that you tried this. So the hypothesis at the moment is that even a weak 40 kHz ultrasonic can damage the vinyl over time. That fits to the video link I send you where the Klaudio owner/developer explained that he found a way to use 40 kHz but still do not harm the vinyl. It will be interesting to see if Steve will able to change anything about the damage but I highly doubt it. Thank you so much for keeping me in the loop.
I know it sounds weird but a German guy on YoutTube and a German vinyl forum on Facebook has connected a brush usually used for wet cleaning and agitating the wet vinyl eg on a Keith Monk with a “ultrasonic” toothbrush. I am thinking about trying it because as long as one uses no pressure at all the agitation of the fluid on the vinyl might increase strongly.
Hi @@Vinyl-Movement, Would you mind re-sending the link to the KL Audio owner talking about 40kHz?
The 'toothbrush' idea seems to be using similar theories to the Cleaudio / Audiodesk machines. Both work well from what I hear, but neither are actually cavitation machines, or so I understand.
Next version of Humminguru should have a variable frequency range for different stages.
That would be great!
Realy great Job!
Thank you! Cheers!
@Dave Denyer , Out of interest, did you ever try his suggestion of putting the Muse record in the degritter for a few cycles?
Hi Eliot, Good question: yes I did and I'd say that definitely improved things, although the Degritter-only-cleaned LP still sounds by far the best...
Thank you Dave, Thank you Steve. A great and very informative video. Just a question to Steve; AS well as the different ultrasonic frequencies you discuss, have you compared the effectiveness of ultra sonic cleaning on records with the position of the Transducers i.e. some people are using DIY set-ups with ultrasonic baths that have the Transducers on the bottom of the bath and firing upwards to clean multi batch records on a rotating spindle across the record surface and Degritter, Huminguru and KLaudio (to name just a few) have the Transducers at each side of the bath firing directly at the record surface of a single record. I would imagine the side mounted Transducers firing directly at the sides of one record is far more effective than bottom mounted Transducers ! Could you possibly clarify this for me Steve ?
I built a vacuum cleaner (vinyl vac) and use detergent and surfactant, rinse, then use a humminguru as a pure rinse … no idea if this is a good process.
I do the same.
It’s essentially the same process I use. Thanks for the feedback!
A little confused though, with only water as a rinse agent in the guru, am I really clearing the grooves of any residue from the cleaning process?
@@TripleE76 the jury's out on that. Personally I think pure distilled water does effectively rinse the grooves, especially when 'Ultrasonically' powered. I think a tiny amount of wetting agent (Ilfotol, in solution at 0.03%) will improve the rinse, but is certainly not necessary.
Hi Dave is it normal to see glass like refections in grooves on older lp's and tiny white specks even after several deep cleans, rinses then put in ultrasonic cleaner no matter how many times done still shows refective spots in groove?thanks
Is this on several of your records, or just a few? I do have some LPs (eg. a couple of 1950's Prestige pressings) with poor quality (recycled?) vinyl.
Fantastic video Dave. I use a Project vacuum cleaning machine. When we talk about rinsing in respect of a vacuuming machine does this simply mean to repeat the cleaning process n number of times with distilled water? Or indeed distilled water with 20% ethanol? Cheers, Paul
Thanks Paul.
Yes, you’ve got it: simply wash and vacuum your LP then do a second cleaning with pure distilled water (possibly with a tiny amount of wetting agent (eg Ilfotol)).
I think you’ll hear the difference over just washing without this rinse stage.
Ethanol can be beneficial as it aids in wetting the water and dissolves the detergents. Experiment with 5% - 20% concentrations. No argument against Ilfotol. You can always to a final rinse step with pure water.
Festive greetings to you and your family. Wow it took me a few watches to get through the whole video but it was fascinating indeed. I still think it'd be great if you can send him a brand new copy of that Muse album (if you haven't bought them all) and see how it compares then to your other copies that you have cleaned to see if there is a discernable difference.
Thanks Ian. I will see if I can get another copy of the Muse album, and also will now see if I can 'resurrect' the 'HumminGuru copy'.
Oh yes that would be an even better plan. Hope that there are still some copies left!!!@@DaveDenyer
Ian, this plan is in motion! Stay tuned…
Great video! I've actually heard sticky pads like ds audio and onzow will ruin your stylus and records. Is this true? It leaves a residue on the tip apparently.
Hi, I have heard this too. However I have not noticed any such problem with either the DS Audio which I've used for perhaps two years now, nor the Onzow, which I've been using for maybe 5 or 6 years (until I got the DS Audio).
Good to know. Thanks!
Dave you made the comment about being able to use hi end carts for twice as long by cleaning your records properly.....do you think the same applies to lower end carts like the Nagaoka MP series, e.g. the MP-110 is $150.......is dust and dirt damaging the needles a lot?
Hi, I can only assume that playing clean records produces less wear, it just makes sense, to me at least, and of course this would apply to any cartridge / stylus, regardless of cost.
@@DaveDenyer remembered you yesterday at xmas sale at the record store in shinjuku/tokyo as I came across SSB-4502 a Japan pressing though at 45 not listed on discogs, and 360r56004 (which I bought, cheap :)
@@tokioPK nice! Merry Sherherazade!
Really interesting thanks. From this I surmise that suction RCM's are a good thing but we need to rinse throughly afterwards. What would be considered to be the best rinsing solution (no pun intended :-) )
LOL - very good.
I have used 100% distilled water, same with 0.03% - 0.05% Ilfotol, and same again with about 3-5% ethanol added. To be honest I'm struggling to hear / see any real difference. With no wetting agent at all the water tends to bead on the record surface and so I'm concerned I'm not rinsing the inner grooves.
Vacuum RCM are good for removing contaminants from the surface of the record. A few tips - use a detergent that foams. The foaming action with good agitation from swift brush movements are the only way you can “get into the groove”. The foaming action lifts contaminants from within the groove and suspends them in the cleaning solution. Then the vacuum sucks the solution from the surface of the record and from within the groove.
Try a rinse with ethanol. 5% minimum and experiment up to 20%. Ethanol helps lower the surface tension of water and dissolves the detergents. At the surface of the record, the carryover of detergents should lower the surface tension of water enough to be effective. Then, consider a final rinse of pure water. Like during the cleaning cycle, good surface agitation with the brush is very beneficial.
Using the Pro-ject liquid I am able to get a good foam going. I can repeat after 2-3 mins and thus get 6-9 mins of bubble bursting action. Is the cavitation effect from this foam as good as from an US cleaning machine?. Also I don't add surfactant for rinsing as there is sufficient left on the surface of the record after cleaning and suctioning to prevent the water beading.
Hi, thanks for the feedback. The foaming you get from the Project liquid is not actually 'cavitation' which is an active, powered, effect of high frequency energising a fluid bath. That doesn't mean you can't get good results from chemical & vacuum cleaning such as you're doing.
It makes sense that there will probably be sufficient Pro-ject liquid residue left in the grooves to act as surfactant for the rinse. In fact I don't think adding surfactant / wetting agent to the final rinse is a 'deal-breaker', as long as it is in extremely small quantities. I use 0.03% Iliftol, I'd prefer to use none than, say, 0.5%...
@@DaveDenyer Well maybes :-) Some stain removers are powders which when mixed with water cause cavitation. It's probably the implosion of bubbles which has the desired effect. I have done comparison washes with and without foaming and with foaming I can hear distinct improvements, especially in the upper registers. Equally soaking in the RCM cleaning fluid for 10 mins is superior to a quick clean and suction. I dare say though that an US machine would be even better.
I was unaware of this. Will look into it, thanks for pointing it out.
I agree with Dave on all his points. The surface foam provides benefits, but not the same as cavitation implosions. The benefits you observe has to do with the foam getting deeper into the groove, loosening and dissolving contaminants, then keeping them in suspension until you vacuum it all away. Spirited agitation of cleaning solutions with an VRCM does bring significant improvements, but not for the reasons you mentioned.
I think a lot of us overthink cleaning records! I don’t think you need to spend thousands on a record cleaning machine Taking care of your vinyl records is important Cleaning your stylus saves me from having to buy expensive cleaning equipment I own a 400 dollar humminguru that cleans the records wonderfully Don’t overthink this
Thanks for the feedback Dave.
There is cleaning then there is sonic optimization. If you are satisfied with the sound of your records, by all means, leave them be and simply remove surface dust with a good record brush. For those who want a sonic experience closer to the recording session, there are things that can be done to optimize records that will get you there. You are free to opt-out at any time and enjoy your records as-is…
Didn‘t Steve Evans say that he would open his own RUclips channel? Just haven‘t seen it so far. Any ideas?
Yes I think he did say that…
@@DaveDenyer Which means you also did not hear anything from him …
@@Vinyl-Movement not regarding his RUclips channel...
@DaveDenyer Isn‘t it strange? It is now 2 months since Steve Evans announced his channel but nothing has happened?
@@Vinyl-Movement Hi Reiner, I just think Steve's very busy. We have been in touch since this video...
Maybe the 40khz restriction prevents damage to vinyl? We are talking about cleaning plastic and not jewellery or surgical steel which US is most efficient in cleaning. Thanks Dave
I'd still be cautious about too much 40kHz ultrasonic cleaning. In fact, personally, I'd probably rather leave it out altogether. Muse discs 5 & 6 were cleaned to test whether 40kHz then 120kHz was better / audibly different to 120kHz cleaning only. Personally, I didn't feel that 40kHz added anything. If the extra 'energy' in 40kHz cavitation cleans more aggressively, I'd rather do two, three 120KHz cleans to achieve as thorough cleaning but doing so more gently.
I concur with Dave. Cheers and happy listening!
I think id be tempted so send some in internationally, but i cant see any shipping cost information on there site. Has anyone tried?
I was recommended PVF from a friend who uses the service internationally. I'd suggest contacting Steve as every country's shipping cost is likely to be different.
Thanks Dave for replying, really helpful. As I have you there just wanted to say I always really enjoy your videos, many thanks@@DaveDenyer
Thank you!@@ibanezbuyer
If you're putting detergent in the groove with 220 kh, why does the rinse (at 80kh) only want to rinse the surface? Wouldn't you want your clean rinsing water to also get all the way into the groove since detergent was in there?
Hi Jeff, thanks for your feedback: good question, although one I can't answer.
Excellent question and the answer is long and technical, but I’ll address it briefly here. There are two beneficial stages to a cavitation bubble imploding. The first is the concentrated jet, which is beneficial for removing substances from the surface of the record. The second occurs when the jet recedes back into the partially imploded cavitation bubble, causing waves of agitation. This is beneficial for removing dissolved contaminants and cleaning solutions from the surface of the record.
Additionally, the stronger cavitation agitation at 80 kHz works better with rinsing solutions where the surface tension cannot be lowered as thoroughly as the cleaning solution. Rinsing solutions must be 100% volatile, meaning they evaporate completely and leave no residue behind. You can only reduce surface tension of pure water to a certain point with 100% volatile chemicals. Therefore, cavitation induced by lower frequencies of ultrasonic waves yield a better rinsing result.
@Steve-PerfectVinylForever thanks so much for the response. However, this has confused me more, I'm afraid. (likely why you are the expert and not me!) Can pure water get into the bottom of the groove with 220kh? If so, it seems you would rinse with that. If it can't, and I understood correctly, you can't completely rinse the entire groove of residue?
Maybe I'd be better off asking, if all you had access to was a 40kh Humminguru, what process would you follow? The 'Surface Power Wash' only... with pure water? Or would you try to swap tanks w partial groove wash, followed by clean rinse? Thanks for your time 🙏
@DaveDenyer thank you Dave. This was the best cleaning video I've seen in some time. I believe it's incredibly important to figure this out now that the genie is out of the bottle, because we are all swapping records with one another, and future generations will have all types of things on their records that we put on. 🙏
@Steve-PerfectVinylForever I have re-read this answer, and my understanding of the answer provided, is there is no way to get cleaning agents that will 100% evaporate, small enough to clean the bottom of the groove.
I do understand the point of 'if I can't get the surface tension to break low enough to get down in there, I may as well rinse it with a stronger/larger cavitation bubble (80kh) to rinse it the best I can.
That all being said, I'm guessing thisprocess relies on the initial cleaning steps to lift everything out of the grooves and onto the surface, where the 80kh can 'reach' it all. If that is all true, then you can't get it 100% rinsed. But the main goal seems to be to remove as much releasing agents from the groove, even if that means leaving behind a little bit of wetting agent.
Steve mentions he prefers Ethanol to Isopropyl alcohol. Isopropyl is chemically compatible with PVC, but Ethanol is listed as possibly damaging to PVC. Any insights on this please?
Hi Miguel, good question. I was very interested in this myself so have since invested in some ethanol and am currently trying it out for myself. I do note that ethanol rather than ipa is recommended by Clearaudio as part of their Pure Groove cleaning solution, which I’m a fan of & have used for many years.
I’ve also read about using ethanol in some pretty impressive studies.
Steve may be able to add more on this, but I’m ok with it (except it’s a lot more expensive than ipa, and I am cautious of its low flash point etc.)
@@DaveDenyer Ok thank you. I imagine that the low concentration allows for some leeway in its use on vinyl. Would love to know Steve's take on it as well.
PVC is inert to ethanol up to concentrations of 20%. That upper limit is higher in the practical application of cleaning records. Records are only exposed to ethanol for minutes as it evaporates very quickly. I have personally have no concerns of flashing in my process. If you do, consider adding a small fan to circulate air in the area where you clean your records.
@@Steve-PerfectVinylForever Interesting. I did some reading and people seem to recommend non-denatured 190 proof vs denatured 200 proof. What is your take on that? Thx a lot for your reply.
Would water from reversed osmosis do?
Hi Evert, I've not tried it myself but I think this is what Steve uses. I would imagine it would be ok.
Great conversation. So apparently you didn't destroy your album with 40khz is what I understood from the chat? That's good news for ultrasonic as a whole don't you think. Nice that you followed up with an expert. Nicely done.
Hi Mark, maybe not… at least Steve suggests it’s possible that it’s not permanently damaged. I do still need to try ‘resurrecting it’ with the Degritter. What I’d take from this is, if it is not permanently damaged, but rather incompletely cleaned, that remaining residue id left in coarse, uneven (& high frequency masking) layers, it would indicate that the Humminguru is doing a bloody awful job: 25 cleans and the lp is still covered in muck??? I remain sceptical, but will do the Degritter cleans to try…
All Sonic cleaners are going to damage your records the more you use it only one time it should I used. And mark on your label as well so you or anybody knows. It's not just about frequenciesIt's its about the intensity of the bubbles,They need to be very low intensity for soft substance like plastic for records, to the extent it will not really clean. A industrial Sonic clean actually remove metal particles and even glass. Methanol and ethanol not safe with pvcs should never be used. and even isoproponel should be kept to a low percentage probably no more than 10% just wash your records in ad-blue what is mainly dionised water and a cleaning sterilising agent urea. It is the most purified cleaner you can get on the market. What is safe for the environment and safe for humans, it will have no reaction with nonorganic compound like pvc but will break down organic compounds. Always use dionised water instead of distilled, it is a much pure water of no minerals are removed that's why it's dionised to the atom level, distilled is not it's still contains some minerals.
Thanks for the input jedi-mic.
I’m only just beginning to experiment with ethanol vs isopropanol, but do note that it’s a major component in my preferred record cleaning solution.
I’ve not even heard of using ad-blue, I might well give that a go.
I don't know what strength dilution you have the ethanol but it will attack plastic and rubbers it will cause the plastic to become soft and can crack plastics. you could use the AdBlue in the sonic cleaner shouldn't be a problem, keep your sonic time low maybe three minutes at the most, and a couple of times I wouldn't advise to do it anymore than that. There's not enough information they don't give these manufacturers about Sonic cleaners what I can see. If you take the foil test you can see the impact it's doing on aluminium foil if you did that long enough it would just make holes in it. Vinyl has very sharp edges in it's grooves you don't want to round these edges off with the impact from a sonic cleaner or them to break off. What it looks like I've scene in some Sonic cleaners debris like that, have you noticed any black bits when you've been Sonic cleaning a lot of it would be microscopic tho@@DaveDenyer
You're right no form of alcohol ever.
@jedi-mic I do share your concerns about ultrasonic cleaning: that's why I did the experiments I did. However the results, especially of the Degritter-cleaned LP make me think that higher frequency cavitation is OK / beneficial for vinyl records. This is demonstrated on the listening, and as we know you can hear these microscopic differences, much better than you can see them, even with a microscope.
There are so many inaccurate record care myths proposed on this comment it is impossible for me to address them all here. If Dave is willing, we can have a follow up conversation to address these points.
No alcohol ever on vinyl.
What’s the source for your thinking in this? I’ve used between 20% - 30% ipa in my cleaning regime for around 40 years with no obvious ill-effects…
That is a myth perpetuated by record cleaning solution manufacturers who wanted to differentiate themselves from other record cleaning solutions at the time. PVC is 100% chemically inert to common alcohols (isopropyl and ethanol). This has been lab tested up to 20% but in practice, is safe at higher concentrations too. Alcohols are 100% volatile, meaning they evaporate leaving no residue behind. Also, in a proper record cleaning process, they are exposed to alcohols for a very brief period, then the alcohol evaporates.
I recommend you update your knowledge before posting a platitude like “No alcohol ever on vinyl”. There is no chemical basis for the statement.
I use the Vinyl Styl Deep Groove Record Washer that uses the goat hair brushes that supposedly gets into the grooves (marketing mobile jumbo?). I use a solution of one part isopropyl alcohol to three parts distilled water. After about 20 spins in each direction I take the record over to the sink where I have a spray bottle filled with distilled water that sprays pretty hard and I thoroughly rinse the record. Then I dry with a clean microfiber towel. There will still be some lint and stuff which I can't help personally but I always use a brush before playing. I will say I'm quite impressed with this simple process with this manual unit. I rarely ever have any clicks or pops. I have an original Supertramp breakfast in America album in really good visual condition. Even going through my process there are numerous clicks, pops, and surface noise, so I've been thinking about an ultrasound cleaner and have been researching the humming guru. Unfortunately it seems that it's not what it's cracked up to be even though you see tons of rave reviews. I really can't spend more than what a hummingbird goes for so I cannot afford the degreiter. So, do you think the hummingbird would be worth it because of my limit of affordability for getting rid of those pops and clicks or a waste of money?