Vinyl record anti-static cleaning brush?

Not recommended, but when I was given a batch of albums that had been wet and were mouldy, I used a 1% solution of Teepol and a baby toothbrush followed by rinsing with distilled water in a reagent bottle (search - camlab laboratory wash bottle).

I moved to a Discoantistat and found that reviews about dirty fluid after 8 or 10 discs were true so got in the habit of filtering every six records and rinsing. The hand spinning was tiring so I modified the clamp with a nylon bolt that fitted into a small battery screwdriver.

A bit of good fortune and an absolute recommendation that clean records are better than cleaning a stylus led me to Audio Desk Systeme, a definite reduction in static, and improvement in sound. As I don't have black boxes, it's difficult to equate, possibly the same sort of difference as a cirkus or balanced mains transformer.

I have read that with the Exstatic brush, it has a piece of velvet  within it, which can cause static? Not sure if this is the case or not?

Plus 1 for the Project RCM simply on cost grounds compared to others. It does the job perfectly now that I have pure medical grade water (thanks Richard). Zero static now!

Stu

stuart.ashen posted:

Plus 1 for the Project RCM simply on cost grounds compared to others. It does the job perfectly now that I have pure medical grade water (thanks Richard). Zero static now!

Stu

Where do you purchase the medical grade water?

Hmack posted:

wenger2015 posted:

After reading through all the really useful advice, I am thinking it may be best to purchase a record cleaning machine ... 

I have a lot of original vinyl which I purchased back in the days of  the £2.99 album. All of which needs probably more then just  a brush.

The Clearaudio Smart Matrix has been suggested, so will put that on the shortlist..

Are their any other recommendations?

I'm sure that the Clearaudio Smart Matrix will be very good, but it looks pretty expensive to me for what it does. 

I recently purchased a Project VCS Mk II rcm (following recommendations on this forum) to replace my Keith Monks Discovery rcm. Results have been very good - almost on a par with the very much more expensive Keith Monks when it was working well.

It's a lot cheaper than the Clearaudio and works in a very similar way. Is the vacuum on the Clearaudio any better than that on the Project? Possibly, but I doubt that it is around £700 better.

 

Thanks for the recommendation. 

wenger2015 posted:

stuart.ashen posted:

Plus 1 for the Project RCM simply on cost grounds compared to others. It does the job perfectly now that I have pure medical grade water (thanks Richard). Zero static now!

Stu

Where do you purchase the medical grade water?

Take a look online. Look for medical grade distilled water.

when rolling my own RCM fluid for my KM m/c, i use deionized water. I got quieter results with deionized water than with distilled water.

paul

drps posted:

when rolling my own RCM fluid for my KM m/c, i use deionized water. I got quieter results with deionized water than with distilled water.

paul

Interesting, ‘quieter’ results? Very intriguing...

both deionized and distilled from the same supplier apc pure, along with Industrial Methylated Spirits to roll my own fluid. 

I use the KM fluid if its a un played record, if its a second hand record i use my 50/50 IMS fluid first, then the KM fluid.

paul

Wenger, got mine from the River. Just typed in medical grade distilled water and got a few choices. I found ordinary deionised water left me with more surface noise. Just my experience of course. Richard also advised keeping all brushes clean and uncontaminated which I am now more careful of.

Stu

stuart.ashen posted:

Wenger, got mine from the River. Just typed in medical grade distilled water and got a few choices. I found ordinary deionised water left me with more surface noise. Just my experience of course. Richard also advised keeping all brushes clean and uncontaminated which I am now more careful of.

Stu

Thanks for the recommendation 

drps posted:

both deionized and distilled from the same supplier apc pure, along with Industrial Methylated Spirits to roll my own fluid. 

I use the KM fluid if its a un played record, if its a second hand record i use my 50/50 IMS fluid first, then the KM fluid.

paul

Interesting, I grasp the concept of deionized and distilled, but why Methylated Spirits??

I would presume it’s a degreasing agent to release trapped dust particles.

wenger2015 posted:

drps posted:

both deionized and distilled from the same supplier apc pure, along with Industrial Methylated Spirits to roll my own fluid. 

I use the KM fluid if its a un played record, if its a second hand record i use my 50/50 IMS fluid first, then the KM fluid.

paul

Interesting, I grasp the concept of deionized and distilled, but why Methylated Spirits??

I used a 50/50 mixture of IMS and distilled water very successfully with my Keith Monks RCM for a number of years following recommendations from a number of people on this forum. I stopped using IMS when a fellow forum member pointed out to me that IMS can contain significant amounts of Methanol, which if handled over a lengthy period of time can be pretty dangerous. It was extremely effective at cleaning records, but I value my health more than my LPs.

I am not a chemist, so my rationale might be faulty, butI'd rather be safe than sorry. Google 'Methanol' if you are unsure.

I now mostly use L'Art du Son, but the sample of Project cleaning solution that came with the Project VCS RCM also seems to be pretty effective.  

Hmack posted:

wenger2015 posted:

drps posted:

both deionized and distilled from the same supplier apc pure, along with Industrial Methylated Spirits to roll my own fluid. 

I use the KM fluid if its a un played record, if its a second hand record i use my 50/50 IMS fluid first, then the KM fluid.

paul

Interesting, I grasp the concept of deionized and distilled, but why Methylated Spirits??

 It was extremely effective at cleaning records, but I value my health more than my LPs.

I am not a chemist, so my rationale might be faulty, butI'd rather be safe than sorry. Google 'Methanol' if you are unsure.

I now mostly use L'Art du Son, but the sample of Project cleaning solution that came with the Project VCS RCM also seems to be pretty effective.  

Agree for sure, health is everything.

I don’t want to end up using face masks, breathing apparatus, ect  ect 

The Project formulation seems pretty good to me Wenger. It comes with a small quantity to try and I have since purchased more.

Stu

Yup, the no alcohol Pro-Ject fluid works well.

Just had a look on line, reference RCM’s.

The Project VCS has mixed reviews, mainly concerning build quality.

The okki Nokki fares better?  But apparently costs more. 

wenger2015 posted:

Just had a look on line, reference RCM’s.

The Project VCS has mixed reviews, mainly concerning build quality.... 

 

Yes, however, Pro-Ject has obviously been listening so they have steadily improved the aspects that were initially criticised. First the screw clamp and label mask was improved, then the suction arm base was improved, and with the Mk.II just released the stick on labels (that didn't) have been changed for proper printing on the cabinet and also there's a new quieter motor.  So, most all of the niggles have been addressed, which is impressive and inspires confidence. 

My own VC-S is a later Mk I, that replaced my old Nitty Gritty, and I'm very pleased with it.

Thats interesting Richard, so the mk 2 is the one to go for. 

Is it useful to purchase a lid, I notice this comes as an additional extra?

Given the choice then yes, go for a Mk II unless the MK I comes discounted.  Barring the very first units that had some issues with the clamp, the Mk I is still an excellent machine. I bought a lid for mine (It's like a turntable lid) mainly because it keeps everything covered and clean when not being used.  I would recommend anyone else to do likewise.

I’ve also recently bought a Mk2 and it seems to do a very good job. A few Questions linger For me and would be interested in any views:

* The manual suggests best results if the fluid is warmed to 40C. Do people do this? If so, how to keep it at that temp throughout a cleaning session?

* How long do you leave the fluid on the disc and how many revs with the brush and how many with the vacuum? I’ve looked at some YouTube vids and those all seem to be doing things pretty quickly with just a few turns for each process and vacuuming very soon after brushing. I’d be interested in what users have found to work best.

* I’ve been using water from my filtered tap in the kitchen. Is this pure enough or do I really need fully distilled water?

Kevin, in answer to your questions; no, I don't warm the fluid before use. I make sure I use enough fluid to fully cover the LP and, when I scrub the disc with the brush to allow it to get quite a foamy lather - that gives you the best chance to dislodge any crud and to ensure it is suspended in the fluid when you come to vacuum.  I engage the vacuum arm first with the platter running one way for 2 revolutions, then switch to the opposite direction until I can see that all the fluid has been completely removed from the LP.  Some LPs this takes just a couple of revs, with others it can be a a few more.  Interestingly, with the slightly more pliable US vinyl it's usually quicker than with UK vinyl.

Whatever you do, don't use tap water, whether filtered or not. There will still be trace minerals and impurities that will be left in the LP grooves. For best results make sure the water you use is as pure as possible - medical grade purified water is best.  Ensure you have completely decontaminated anything that has been in contact with the tap water though before you move to the purified water.

There's no substitute for a wet record-cleaning machine to eliminate static, and it seems to be pretty permanent. I've yet to read a totally feasible explanation for this, anyone got a definite answer?

We all believe our record cleaners do a wonderful job, but assessing this is very difficult if you think about it (leaving aside convenience and noise issues). One good way to access the machine's ability to remove crud is to clean an album once, using your preferred fluid, soaking time etc., then play it. If it's still noisy, will a further clean improve this? If it doesn't, is this because the cleaning process isn't good enough, in which case a third clean will either make things better or it'll still be the same. If the latter, then the album's probably permanently damaged.

With my trusty DIY Moth, one clean's nearly always enough - very occasionally I'll try a second time, but it's seldom this makes any difference. Seems to me that, as long as you're using good fluid, as long as the machine in question sucks all the fluid off easily, then it's a good 'un.

FWIW, I spread the cleaning liquid on the records with a basting pipette (I think you get the drift) - one for the putting on and another for the clean/rinsing water. One of the initial issues I encountered was how to spread the cleaning liquid effectively (prior to brushing) as, of course, you don't need that much - and I like to protect the labels although it seems most can tolerate a little fluid. I've seen some guiding videos where records are dipped fully and the labels seems OK but ..not for me. 

I also do a minimum of 2 rinses. So far so good - although IME a good clean still won't 'recover' a poorly maintained LP e.g. some of those with the 'sandpaper' cardboard inner sleeves.

Some of the used vinyl vending sites seem to have a different and very generous definition on an LP's qualitative factors than I do, which leads me to avoid them. A friend purchased some LPs which had been cleaned so aggressively (assume with IPA) they had material finger imprints burned on/in to them.