[BobM]

I recently bought the reissue of Joey Defrancesco "Plays Sinatra His Way" 180g. took it out of its sleeve and put it on the VPI to wash. I was in a hurry so I just used the VPI fluid and vacumed it off, put it on the turntable and listened. It sounded OK, but there was some surface noise and the soundstage was disappointing.

So I bellied back up the the 16.5 and went through my usual cleaning routine with Disk Doctor solution and 2 rinses, then gave a listen again. A very nice improvement - quiet, spacious, more dynamic even.

This really isn't about what is the best solution to use, I know we all have our favorites (e.g. Disk Doctor, L'Art du Son, some home-made solution, etc.) it's more about the fact that there is indeed an improvement to be had by cleaning new vinyl and the fact that different solutions do indeed make a difference in the resulting sound.

[Quiet Earth]

I can relate. I often wonder if it was the different solution that got me better results, or was it just the fact that I gave it a second cleaning?

 

[BobM]

I've actually tried it the other way - used the VPI fluid on a previously cleaned with DD record. I think I've heard more surface noise after, but not necessarily any change in soundstaging.

IMO doing a thorough rinse is sometimes the most important part of the routine, so using fluds that say they don't need a rinse will inevitably leave something on the record.

[vinyl_lady]

I always clean new vinyl. Pressing plants are not hospital operating rooms. In addition to dust, there is the mold release compound used so the record easily separates from the press.

[Wayner]

I believe that the "mold release agent" is formulated right into the vinyl puck blank itself, and I also think it leaves residue in new pressings. I use my shop-vac to remove this. I now have found that I have a renewed interest in Friday Music offerings, as a really good vacuum cleaning seems to take the GGRRRR out of the recordings that they are remastering, but not all of them.

[Minn Mark]

And, maybe begs the intellect of the crowd reading these, but when "mold release compound' is mentioned as part of the LP pressing process, it means the physical mold used to make the LP, not mold as in fungi. Just a point of clarification.

PS- I've ruined a few LPs using (Stylast?) fluid record protector, and I tried and did not like Gruv-glide (thumbs down).

Cheers,

Mark

[Quiet Earth]

Back in the day, "Last" record preservative went on the records, and "StyLast" went on the stylus. I can't say that I ruined any of my records with the bottle of Last I used back in the '80s. I still play those records today and they sound fine to me. Of course I have wet cleaned and vacuumed them again since I bought a nitty gritty.

I do believe that I ruined a stylus assembly on my Dynavector by using StyLast. That stuff probably migrated up into the suspension and gunked it all up. I don't put anything liquid on my cartridge anymore. Just a gentle dry brushing of the stylus as needed.

when "mold release compound' is mentioned as part of the LP pressing process, it means the physical mold used to make the LP, not mold as in fungi.

I'm glad you said that. I just learned something new today. Thank you for sharing that! 

[BobM]

There is a difference between "Stylast" and "Last Stylus Cleaning Fluid" and brush. I've used the latter to good effect for many years now.

[woodsyi]

... I don't put anything liquid on my cartridge anymore. Just a gentle dry brushing of the stylus as needed.

I have been doing this since a tip came off from what I suspect is an overuse of MOBILE FIDELITY LP-9 STYLUS CLEANER.  Soundsmith recommends not using liquid cleaners too much. 

http://www.high-endaudio.com/Magic.html

So far so good.  I do this and dab with ZeroDust before playing.

[Quiet Earth]

Good call there Woodsyi,

 I will occasionally "dip" my stylus into a dry piece of Magic Eraser (wait, that doesn't sound right). I think that the Magic Eraser does make a difference but I am weary about using it too often. I'm glad to hear that you are not having any issues using it on a more regular basis.  Good to know.

 

[Photon46]

I've used Stylast before EVERY side is ever played for over a decade and have never had any issues with Grado, Ortofon, Goldring, or Garrot cartridges. I've always been very careful to always wipe away excess liquid from the brush and only give a quick swipe with a lightly loaded brush tip. Stylast is VERY volatile and evaporates extremely quickly. If you spill it on a flat surface, it evaporates quicker than naphtha or ether (that was an slightly expensive lesson at $35 a bottle.) I'd think it would take a heavy application with a heavily loaded brush to be wicked up into a cartridge. Also use the Magic Eraser before the Stylast and I never play a record before it's wet cleaned on the Nitty Gritty machine.

[poseidonsvoice]

I've been doing three step rinses lately and it does take a long time. At first I used to think that just using Nitty Gritty Pure 2 alone on new vinyl was enough, however, on the same piece of new vinyl I tried an enzyme cleaner, then Pure 2, then AI Pure water rinse and there is definitely a positive difference. Of course, old used vinyl always gets the 3 step rinse. Just because the vinyl appears clean on the surface really means nothing in my book. At this time I am using the 3 step series from AI which seems good enough. 

Best,
Anand.

[Photon46]

Yes, three step cleaning does take a while. I've settled on a two step stem out of laziness - clean with L'art du Sond cleaner and then a rinse. Definitely like results with the L'Art du Sond better than the Nitty Gritty solution. I've got all the accouterments for steam cleaning, but only resort to that for the worst cases.

[Wayner]

Good call there Woodsyi,

 I will occasionally "dip" my stylus into a dry piece of Magic Eraser (wait, that doesn't sound right). I think that the Magic Eraser does make a difference but I am weary about using it too often. I'm glad to hear that you are not having any issues using it on a more regular basis.  Good to know.

 

You did say "dip your stylus", so your off the hook......I wouldn't put anything else in a magic erasure....

[Minn Mark]

Maybe a bit off topic, but I have a many years old Record Doctor (Audio Advisor) vacuum RCM that I use. I had always stuck to the dogma to clean "with the grooves".  Lately, though, I've found I get better (and audible) results by also cleaning across (against) the grooves. I use Disc Doctor or Audio Intelligent solutions and MoFi cleaning pads.

Reader's experience cleaning 'against the grain' similar, or do I sin alone?

Mark

[richidoo]

Mark, I too scrub at a small angle to the grooves. It makes better suds and I think it forces the bristles to penetrate the grooves, if that's even possible. Grooves are only .003" bristle fibers on wet brushes are bigger than that. We're kidding ourselves with the scrubbing part.  Its the vacuum that puts the kinetic energy into the groove to break loose some of the gook. I'm interested in putting more kinetic energy into the groove, to blast out the dirt with high speed molecules of fluid, wither water or air.

Inspired by Wayner's experiment with high speed air from vacuum cleaner I tried blasting an old Brubeck LP today with 100psi compressed air with a trigger nozzle. I didn't hear any noticable change, but could be due to scratches, this record has been though hell. I'll do a more scientific attempt, compare the results by recorded waveform.  But I don't really think I'll see anything with just air. Wayner's success might be due to combination of airflow and electrostatic repellent from Zerostat.

[Wayner]

I have a jeweler's loop that allows me to take a pretty close look at the grooves. My frustration came about after a good soap and water cleaning, playing the record and still hearing stuff in the grooves. After looking at one particular spot on the record, I could see it looked like a boulder sitting right in the groove. you'd think that would have come out in the wash, but it did not. That was the inspiration for the shop vac method. I don't know why the shit sticks into the grooves. Is it from static, is it somehow pasted to the grooves, is it "growing" in the grooves, and for that matter, what the hell is the little specs made of?

In the end, brute force from my shop vac took away the offender. However, I't does not remove everything, so I am coming to the conclusion that our offending particles are of many different natures, and that in fact some of the specs are growing into the vinyl. Obviously, we can't repair the damage from scratches and stylus drops, but a nice 80 to 90% reduction in surface noise would be a nice goal.

[richidoo]

Yes, a great goal. Worthy of maniacal scheming and experiments!   

I think most of the noise is from microbes. The paper sleeve or cardboard cover feeds mold in summer humidity, then dry winter air makes molds spore which puts them into the grooves of the record. Bacteria will eat the molds, molds eat the dead bacteria, you have a swamp of sticky organisms that glue themselves to any surface and when they die the glue dries.

But I still have some brand new audiophile pressings that come in plastic sleeves which are still noisy on the first play. That is annoying for high priced vinyl. I wonder if it is removable dirt or a permanent defect stamped into the vinyl. My cleaning technique is not powerful enough to know whether I'm getting everything that's not vinyl off of the record.

The loupe sounds like a good idea for inspecting the grooves.

[*Scotty*]

Rich, I think a lot depends on the how virgin the vinyl is and the specific formulation of the vinyl used in the pressing. In the good old days audiophile pressings from Crystal Clear, Nimbus and Sheffield labs were consistently very quiet. The Mobile Fidelity pressings were also pretty good as I recall. Another variable in play is how the records are stored immediately after they are pressed. If the records sit around in a dusty environment before being placed in a sleeve they will pull the dust right out of the air and be dirty from the get-go. A near clean room environment may be required to produce a quiet pressing, assuming the vinyl formulation is any good.
Scotty

[dlaloum]

Back in the day, "Last" record preservative went on the records, and "StyLast" went on the stylus. I can't say that I ruined any of my records with the bottle of Last I used back in the '80s. I still play those records today and they sound fine to me. Of course I have wet cleaned and vacuumed them again since I bought a nitty gritty.

A few users have done long term tests of the LAST products and have found that over the long term (years and many 000's of hours use) needle wear appears to be absent ... (using LAST cleaner, preservative, stylus cleaner and stylast)

The LAST patent has details of several formulations, and the key seems to be "Fomblin" a proprietary synthetic lubricant that bonds very well to vinyl..

Patent is here: http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&S1=%22record+preservative%22&OS=%22record+preservative%22&RS=%22record+preservative%22

Amount of Fomblin in the solution seems to be very small (0.05% to 0.2%) and actual tests comparing it to other lubricant methods (such as ArmorAll) seem to show negligible lubricating effect. Tests were to measure vinyl roar (ie any reduction in background noise on blank grooves), and stylus friction (reduction in platter spin down time with stylus in groove). But the effect seem sufficient to reduce wear on both vinyl and needle (based on long term tests as mentioned above)

I am considering concocting my own preservative brew, but till I get around to it (or a round tuit), I still use LAST ....

bye for now

David