Cellulase for cleaning mold from vinyl records

bibliojim

New Member
Aug 3, 2024
15
7
3
70
Madison WI
In a quest to find a way to clean a couple of boxes of my records that got very moldy (mildew), I have found a method I have not read about elsewhere which seems to have worked when other tried-and-true methods did not work for me. I want to share it in case it will help someone else. I think I may have found a method that will restore records that have been in a bad state for many years. The records I have cleaned and seem to have brought back to perfect playing condition were covered in mildew for six years. The records went slowly from wet to dry over a long period of time.

First, a description of how the records got into a bad condition and a description of what I started with.

I had two cardboard boxes of records sitting on the basement floor. Each box contained about 75 to 100 records stored vertically in the boxes. The records and jackets were mostly new or almost new, but there were a few that I had bought used at record sales. A few of the records were still sealed. Some records, sealed or not, still had the original cellophane over the jacket, but 90% did not. Albums from Mobile Fidelity, Reference Recordings, Angel, RCA Victor, Warner Bros., Geffen Records, etc.mostly from the 1980s and early 1990s. Almost all the records were still in the original inner sleeves which were of various materials ranging from paper to high quality archival HDPE sleeves.

My city was struck by a 100-year flood in August, 2018. My home had never had water in the basement and I simply was not worried. I should have been. Three months after that heavy rain I went into the basement and found that some water had come into the basement to a depth of perhaps 1/4" or 1/2", hard to tell exactly. The two boxes of records had sat in that water for as long as it remained in the basement. There was no water in the basement at that time, but boxes sitting on the floor still had wet bottoms. I tipped the boxes of records on their sides so the bottoms would dry. I did not have time or energy to deal with all those wet records, and they sat there in the unopened boxes until late 2022.

In 2022, I pulled the records from the boxes. If two adjacent records remained in their cellophane wrappers they could be pulled apart, but there was virtually no record jacket without a cellophane wrapper that was not stuck to the jacket next to it, so record after record had to be ripped apart from the record next to it, destroying the jackets. I looked at a few of the records, pulling them from the jackets and inner sleeves. An odor of mildew came off every record I pulled out, and every record I looked at showed at least a couple of small patches of mildew. The worst ones seemed caked with mildew inside the sleeves. Pretty disgusting. After looking at a dozen or so, I leaned them all against a wall in a corner where I could get at them one by one to clean them.

I spent time researching how to clean records and found three methods that seemed to have promise for restoring the records to playability, but during this search I saw more than once comments to the effect that if a record has been moldy for a long time it may not be possible to restore it. Thus, I was not very hopeful, but I persevered.

The three methods that seemed worth investigating were:
1. Handcleaning using a well-researched method devised by Neil Antin, and available here: https://thevinylpress.com/app/uploads/2024/03/PACVR_3rd-Ed-Ch1_2024-03.pdf
2. Ultrasonic record-cleaning machines (USC)
3. Wood glue record cleaning method. No particular reference, but here is one:
For initial evaluation of the results of a method, I looked at the record under a 60x jeweler's loupe with LED illumination, readily available from amazon.com for a few dollars. That magnification is not enough to see individual mold spores or mold organisms, but one can easily distinguish the grooves and flat space between them, and the reflections from inside the grooves such as there may be. I was looking for any signs of grooves that were "clogged" with mold.
 
I started trying the handcleaning method. I obtained exactly the chemicals and materials Neil Antin mentioned in his publication and followed his procedure to the letter, slightly adopted for mildew issues. I put each record through the process one at a time. I temporarily saved the jackets so I could create home-made printed labels using information from the jackets.

1. Wearing nitrile gloves, I wiped the mildew off the labels with cotton balls such as used for removing makeup with 95% isopropyl alcohol on them. I did not wipe hard because the paper on some of the labels was fragile. I wiped harder in the runout area around the label, making a clear spot where the label protector could touch the record and have all the mildew outside the label protector.
2. Took the record over to a wash basin sink in the basement and ran water over it gently to try to moisten the entire surface without sending mold spores into the air. (I would recommend an N90 mask for this stage, but if you don't have one, be careful.)
3. Once the surface was moistened I turned the water force up a bit, but avoided unnecessary splashing, and turned the record under the water to remove whatever would come off from that force.
4. On both sides, one side at a time, I ran the record brush around the grooves about five times, keeping the record where the brush was moving under the running water. This sent all the remaining visible mildew down the sink drain.
5. I sprayed one side with liquinox solution from a hand spray bottle, prepared as Neil's book describes. I scrubbed the record as Neil described, turning the record quite slowly and thus taking about four or five minutes to clean one side of the record.
6. Without rinsing, I turned the record over and scrubbed the other side with liquinox in the same way.
7. I turned the record over and rinsed the liquinox off this side. With the record under running water, I ran the record brush around the record five times. Then turned the record 1/3 revolution and ran the brush over it five more times. The turned 1/3 revolution and ran the brush over it five more times.
8. On this side of the record from which liquinox had been removed, I applied citranox from a spray bottle, diluted as Neil Antin describes. Again took about 4-5 minutes to clean the side of the record.
9. Without rinsing off the citranox, I turned the record over and rinsed liquinox from this side.Then I scrubbed this side with citranox.
10. I flipped the record over and rinsed off the citranox.
11. I flipped it again and rinsed the citranox from this side.
12. That was all with tap water. I then sprayed each side of the record with distilled water, wiped each side with the clean room sponge recommended in Neil's book, and set the record to dray.

I did that to about six to ten records in a cleaning session.

When I inspected the records I had cleaned this way with a loupe I found there was obviously material filling some of the grooves on many of the records, perhaps 50% of them. The number of grooves affected on some records was quite high. On some I had to look for a while to find affected grooves. The 60x loupe shows so little surface area that it isn't practical to try to look at the entire surface. I looked closely at different areas for maybe a minute. If I didn't see any, I might have missed some that was there, or maybe that record was "clean". All the records looked clean to the naked eye; it was only with the loupe that I could see it was not clean.

I judged the hand-cleaning to be a failure at restoring the records to their original condition based on the 50% that still have gunk in the grooves, though indeed about half of them did seem fine after my loupe inspection.

I need to add two comments about the hand-cleaning:
1. If the records are not moldy, hand-cleaning with this method normally does a fantastic job.
2. Neil Antin himself says he has successfully cleaned mildew from records using the hand method. There must be something particularly groty about the condition of my records that led to mediocre results with the hand-cleaning method.

I sorted the several dozen records I had cleaned into two groups, records that looked clean and records that did not. For the records that did not look clean, I cleaned them by hand one more time. After I'd cleaned about six to ten of them the second time I inspected them again, and I didn't notice any improvement in their condition. There was still gunk in the grooves.
 
I got a cheap ultrasonic record cleaning machine, thinking the vibrations from the ultrasonic cleaning would get the crap out of the grooves. The machine I used for this ran only at 40 Khz frequency. I loaded the records on spaced as this machine seemed designed to space them, with spacers about 1/4" in thickness. I have learned since then that this close spacing reduces the effectivness of the cleaning, but that's what I did. I Used ilfotol as a wetting agent and sonicated them fo 15 minutes.

I did this to ten records, then put all ten through the handwashing process with only the citranox (acid) wash and rinse. After they were dry I inspected them with the loupe again. Their condition was not noticeably improved.

I read that you get better cleaning force if the records are further apart. I cleaned a couple of records all by themselves a couple of times to see if that let them come clean. If that had worked, then I just had to find a good spacing for the records. However, even cleaning only one record at a time for ten or fifteen minutes left the record with stuff in its grooves.

I can't say it wasn't "better" - but it wasn't restored to its original condition.

I read a thread somewhere where somebody said "You have to soak those records in water overnight before you can get that old mold off." I got a couple of 14" x 14" x 4" plastic containers and went through many of the records again, soaking two at a time overnight with ilfotol wetting agaen and sonicating them again immediately after that together with some other records. I think I must have cleaned about twenty or thirty records after overnight soaking. When I inspected them all with a loupe, they were no cleaner than before, as far as I could tell. Soaking overnight was not the solution.
 
I had not yet tried the wood-glue method, but another thought came to me, which ultimately proved to be a successful approach to cleaning these records. This is the method that works, i.e. after this process is completed none of the records showed stuff visible in the grooves under a 60x loupe. It requires use of an ultrasonic record-cleaning device which preferably sonicates at 80 Khz, but 40 Khz might work as well.

1. Purchase a bottle of cellulase, an enzyme that breaks up cellulose. Here is one source, from Carolina Biological Supply Company:
Cellulase from Carolina Biological Supply
(https://www.orientaltrading.com/car...lulase-laboratory-grade-25-g-a2-14353643.fltr)
2. Purchase a scale that will weigh substances in quantities less than one gram. Here is what I use:
Weighing Scale
(https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ESHDGOI)
2a. Purchase weighing paper to help weigh small substances - buy the paper with dimension 60 x 60 mm
Weighing Paper
(https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08MZT2NRG)
2. Put moldy records through the handwashing process as described in my second post to this thread. After ten of them (or more) have been washed by hand:
3. Turn on the power to the USC device. Add distilled water to capacity and add wetting agent. Set the temperature to 35-degrees C. Run the sonication for 30 minutes to degas the liquid. Towards the end of the 30 minutes, add 1 gram of the cellulase.
4. Load the USC spindle with ten records. After the degassing sonication has been completed, place the rotation device into position so the records can spin in the bath and turn on the spin motor without turning on any sonication.
5. Set the rotation rate to one rotation every 1.5 to 2 minutes.
6. Run the sonication (cavitation) for two minutes.
7. Let the records spin quietly on the spindle for ten minutes without any sonication.
8. Repeat steps 6 & 7 nine more times,
9. (optional) Increase the rotation rate slightly, to perhaps 1 rotation every 30 seconds - the exact amount is not important. This is to reduce the probability of all the liquid evaporating from some location of the record while that portion is out of the bath. Let the records spin at the increased rate without cavitation for two more hours.
10. One at a time, remove each record from the spindle leaving remaining records spinning and apply a record label protector to the record. Take the record to the sink and follow these steps:
10a. Under running tap water, run the record brush around the record a few times, on each side of the record.
10b. Do a manual wash step with liquinox, turning the record as you scrub at a faster rate than usual, so you can clean a side of the record in only a minute or so. After you do one side, flip the record over and do the other side without rinsing.
10c. Flip back to the first side. Rinse the record under tap water with the record brush extremely well. Run the brush around the record 10 times, then turn the record 1/3 and brush another 10 times, then 1/3 and another ten times, for a total of 30 runs of the brush around one side of the record.
10d. Flip the record and rinse it the same way.
10e. Spray the record well with distilled water.
10f. If possible get especially high quality water and submerge the record in the high quality record and rock it a bit to encourage the water to flow into the grooves. Whole Foods is one place that sells this water in "refills". You can find a good container to use for this here:
14" x 14" x 4" containers
(https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CB92X7P7)
I actually use two of these, submerging once in one, then submerging again in the second one. This whole step may be overkill, but I'm doing it.
10g. Wipe the record with the clean room sponge Neil Antin recommends in his publication. Be sure it has been sitting in a bowl of the super-pure water if you use it. Change that water every day or two.
10h. Place the record on a drying rack to dry.
Drying Rack

A word about optional step 9. Judging strictly by the appearance of the records after wiping with the sponge in step 10g, the records are cleaner with the extra two hours' spin. Since that is two hours of unattended time it doesn't add a big burden unless you start too late in the day. Once the records are in the bath with the cellulase, you probably want to complete the entire process for the whole batch. One could turn off the heat and let the records spin in the bath overnight in step 9 for a break, but I think the evaporation might be too much and wind up depositing bad water with mold in it back onto the record. It might be worth trying if you don't mind the possibility of having to clean it again if it causes too much evaporation.

When I say step 9 gets the records cleaner, I mean, old fingerprints are usually gone by this time. I don't think this is due to the cellulase enzyme. I have been using a mixture of Triton X-100 and Tergikleen as the wetting agent in the bath, and one or both of those is probably helping the fingerprints to "dissolve off the record" as it simply spins in the bath. However, it's debatable whether those fingerprints can be heard in playback at all. If they can't be heard, there is no need to do this. But it does give a warm fuzzy feeling on more records if you have time for the extra spin. Or so I have found.
 
Last edited:
Another very important point about the cellulase. On the link I provided, the company says "This laboratory grade cellulase must be refrigerated and the optimal pH for activity is pH 5. The optimal temperature for activity is 55 degrees Celsius. This 25 gram supply contains 1,000 to 150,000 cellulase units per gram. This product is specially made for use in science education laboratories and no certificate of analysis is available."

I wasn't able to find precisely how one unit of cellulase is defined, but it is not a weight unit. It is a measure of enzyme activity, and it varies by up to 150-fold in what you get in the bottle. In other words, a specific weight of the enzyme may work 150 times faster from one bottle than the same weight would measured from a different bottle.

This is absolutely horrible for reproducibility. I only bought one bottle, and one gram works well. I tried 0.5 grams and it seemed to work about as well. I don't know what the minimum amount would be, but even if I determined it for the bottle I bought, it would not be a reliable amount for the bottle you would buy.

There are certainly other sources of cellulase. I found one place that sold cellulase from a number of different organisms, and they had pretty high optimum temperatures. This one has an optimum temperature of 55 degrees Celsius, but 35 C is what you want to use for vinyl, and it worked at 35 C. If the optimum temperature is 70 degrees Celsius, the activity might take a much bigger hit for working at 35 C.

In general, the variability in the activity or "strength" of the enzyme in this product is the biggest drawback to using this method to clean records. On the other hand, I only bought one bottle and it was good with 1 gram, and at 0.5 grams. In other words, I didn't have to search through ten or fifty bottles to find one that had enough enzyme activity. If anybody tries this method, it would be very helpful to mention your experiences with how much enzyme is needed. If we were in a biochemical lab we could assay the activity of each bottle individually, but the company is the only logical place where that would be done and they state that no certificate of analysis is available. Another product from elsewhere could provide such a certificate that would allow calculation of the amount of enzyme to weigh out from a given bottle to get a reproducible result. Maybe somebody could find and post a source of such, for a product with a reasonable price.
 
Last edited:
The proof is in the pudding, as they say. How do these records sound? I have not had time to play many of them yet. However, I played eight of them. I chose eight that had been like new when I put them in the boxes that were on the basement floor, each played no more than two or three times if at all. Seven of the moldy disasters played like brand-new records after the cellulase cleaning process. One of the eight had some patches with a low-level static-y sound in the background. I attributed it to incomplete cleaning. It was either that, or a destroyed record. I put it through another ten cycles of treatment with cellulase and liquinox clean/rinse. Then I replayed it, and it sounded like new.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing