tima's DIY RCM

[Kingrex]

Thanks. I think I'm gonna hotdog it and make a wooden frame. Put my fishing rod epoxy spinner to work turning the records.

 

[tima]

Sorry if I missed this. Have any of you used Triton X114 as a surfactant. Do you find it washes away or remains. I make a mix with 99% alcohol, distilled water and Triton x114.

Hi Kingrex - Triton X114 is likely the non-ionic surfactant most likely found in Kodak Photo-Flo. In an ultrasonic tank (UST) it should be used at room temperature. It is judged an environmental aquatic toxin and being phased out. *

@Folsom - Triton X100 is a nonylphenol ethoxlate (NPE) chemical compound. NPE is shown to have aquatic toxicity and possible material compatibility risks and it is being phased out.**

If you want to use Tergitol, the recommendation is for Tergitol 15-S-9. Similar to Tergitol 15-S-9 is Ilford Ilfotol, which I use. Ilfotol was originally used in photograph development as a rinse agent.***

For solution I've been using ~12.75L of distilled water, 312ml of 99.9% pure IPA and 16ml of Ilford Ilfotol. As you know, IPA vapors are flammable at concentrations of 2% and higher. At 2% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 65°C; at 20% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 30°C. The concentration I use is 2.4% with heated tank temperature topping out at ~32°C to ~35°C so I've been taking a slight risk but have had no problems. Going forward I plan to reduce the IPA concentration to ~2.0%. ****

During ultrasonic cleaning, the Tergitol and Ilfotol products will leave residue in the grooves. To remove it requires a pure water rinse.

References: Precision Aqueous Cleaning of: Vinyl Records (PDF) by Neil Antin, published at The Vinyl Press
* - section VIII.7
** - section IX.4.c
*** - section VIII.6
**** - section VIII.8.c

 

[tima]

Should have also asked. Is the P60 the same power of cleaning as the P120 when you consider tank size.

See the Elmasonic comparison chart in post #62 of this thread.

What is the rack tima and others use. I don't see a link or brand. Is it home made.

First, I suggest you read post #1 in this thread and look at the articles linked there. My DIY system and its evolution are described, with equipment brands, descriptions, photos and links.

I use the Kuzma RD rotisserie. See my first article which describes it along with photos of assembly. It is stainless steel, top quality construction and more expensive than the VinylStack type products.

If you want to build your own rotisserie, allow ~1.5 to 2.5 inches between the records.

He's using this one. It's nice but doesn't protect labels in the same way.

Yes the Kuzma RD does not cover record labels in the same way as the VinylStack product shown in your photo. Then again, it doesn't need to. Approximately 1/3 of the records' surface areas are in solution as they rotate on their spindle and water never touches the labels.

 

[Folsom]

Hi Kingrex - Triton X114 is likely the non-ionic surfactant most likely found in Kodak Photo-Flo. In an ultrasonic tank (UST) it should be used room temperature. It is judged an environmental aquatic toxin and being phased out. *

@Folsom - Tergitol X100 is a nonylphenol ethoxlate (NPE) chemical compound. NPE is shown to have aquatic toxicity and possible material compatibility risks and it is being phased out.**

If you want to use Tergitol, the recommendation is for Tergitol 15-S-9. Similar to Tergitol 15-S-9 is Ilford Ilfotol, which I use. Ilfotol was originally used in photograph development as rinse agent.***

For solution I've been using ~12.75L of distilled water, 312ml of 99.9% pure IPA and 16ml of Ilford Ilfotol. As you know, IPA vapors are flammable at concentrations of 2% and higher. At 2% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 65°C; at 20% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 30°C. The concentration I use is 2.4% with heated tank temperature topping out at ~32°C to ~35°C so I've been taking a slight risk but have had no problems. Going forward I plan to reduce the IPA concentration to ~2.0%. ****

During ultrasonic cleaning, the Tergitol and Ilfotol products will leave residue in the grooves. To remove it requires a pure water rinse.

References: Precision Aqueous Cleaning of: Vinyl Records (PDF) by Neil Antin, published at The Vinyl Press
* - section VIII.7
** - section IX.4.c
*** - section VIII.6
**** - section VIII.8.c

Interesting. I'm glad I don't use Tergitol.

 

[tima]

Interesting. I'm glad I don't use Tergitol.

I meant Triton X100. My error, corrected above.
I don't believe there is a Tergitol 100. There is a Tergitol TMN-100X

 

[Kingrex]

Thanks Tima. I got a little lazy. I read your other 3 post a while back. Just got to this one. Im onto the 3rd phono cartridge that is building up black gunk. I need to make something better than what I have, hence rhe questions.

I saw the 62 post. What I did not see was an effective power when you take into accound the ultrasonic waves have to penetrate a lot more water. Wondered if the smaller 60 machine was working as well on 3 records as the 120 on 6.

 

[Kingrex]

I hope Im not asking another answered question. There is a lot of material to sort through. Here goes.

In order to get the soap out of the groove, dont you need a second ultrasonic machine with pure water in it to pull out the soap. Running distilled water over it wont get deep Lfotol residues, will it???

I think I read somewhere a bath in a spin clean is a solution???? I have a jug of distilled water I hang over a sink. I have a 1/4 inch tube I lower to start the flow. That is my rinse. But I cant see it washing deep groove soap film out. X114 residual may be part of my issue.

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

Hi Kingrex - Triton X114 is likely the non-ionic surfactant most likely found in Kodak Photo-Flo. In an ultrasonic tank (UST) it should be used at room temperature. It is judged an environmental aquatic toxin and being phased out. *

@Folsom - Triton X100 is a nonylphenol ethoxlate (NPE) chemical compound. NPE is shown to have aquatic toxicity and possible material compatibility risks and it is being phased out.**

If you want to use Tergitol, the recommendation is for Tergitol 15-S-9. Similar to Tergitol 15-S-9 is Ilford Ilfotol, which I use. Ilfotol was originally used in photograph development as a rinse agent.***

For solution I've been using ~12.75L of distilled water, 312ml of 99.9% pure IPA and 16ml of Ilford Ilfotol. As you know, IPA vapors are flammable at concentrations of 2% and higher. At 2% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 65°C; at 20% concentration the IPA flashpoint is 30°C. The concentration I use is 2.4% with heated tank temperature topping out at ~32°C to ~35°C so I've been taking a slight risk but have had no problems. Going forward I plan to reduce the IPA concentration to ~2.0%. ****

During ultrasonic cleaning, the Tergitol and Ilfotol products will leave residue in the grooves. To remove it requires a pure water rinse.

References: Precision Aqueous Cleaning of: Vinyl Records (PDF) by Neil Antin, published at The Vinyl Press
* - section VIII.7
** - section IX.4.c
*** - section VIII.6
**** - section VIII.8.c

Why would you waste a good IPA to clean records?

 

[Folsom]

Tima I can't find any reports of Triton X-100 being a problem. The Tergitol 15-S-9 is $84 for 100ml, which means about 6 uses of replacing your bath's. Seems expensive compared to X-100.

All the photo stuff have lubricants in them, which doesn't sound appealing, but maybe it makes records sound like they have LAST on them or something?

Looks like you can get some Tergitol at a decent price. (I'm not real interested in pay prices set for making money of off contract deals where no one looks)

 

[tima]

Running distilled water over it wont get deep Lfotol residues, will it???

Actually, it will if you lightly agitate the record surface with a brush while rinsing.

 

[tima]

I saw the 62 post. What I did not see was an effective power when you take into accound the ultrasonic waves have to penetrate a lot more water. Wondered if the smaller 60 machine was working as well on 3 records as the 120 on 6.

I don't think in terms of sound waves penetrating water. I think of ultrasonic transducers creating vacuum bubbles which disperse through the water. Those bubbles are what do the 'work' (implosion). The cavitation bubbles form on the bottom where the transducers are. On a low frequency you can point a flashlight at the tank and see their movement.

While the feature set (software) is similar across the Elma P-Series, I strongly suspect the machines are spec'd to their tank size. You might think in terms of material coverage vs tank size and compare the two machines that way. I'm vaguely recalling a record side can be considered ~1sq/ft for simplicity. The P120h has 6 transducers. I don't know how many transducers are in the P60h. I would check the Elmasonic Web site for that info. Or contact Tovatech who is the US distributor; they are good answering questions.

 

[tima]

All the photo stuff have lubricants in them, which doesn't sound appealing, but maybe it makes records sound like they have LAST on them or something?

??? do you have a reference?

With regard to cost Ilfotol is about half the cost of the Tergitol 15-S-9 on the Web site you posted.

 

[Folsom]

??? do you have a reference?

With regard to cost Ilfotol is about half the cost of the Tergitol 15-S-9 on the Web site you posted.

It's been talked about a lot. There's many forums discussing it. For example. Overall though if you don't have any build up on your stylus it's probably more nit-picky than anything.

 

[tima]

It's been talked about a lot. There's many forums discussing it. For example. Overall though if you don't have any build up on your stylus it's probably more nit-picky than anything.

Ah, yes, the famous 'Photo-Flo is bad' thread. I read that some years back. I think I cited London Jazz Collector in my first DIY article. I don't think a conclusion of that SH thread was "All the photo stuff have lubricants in them...". Fwiw, depending on pressing plant the vinyl 'biscuit' itself may have some lubricant in it to aid in mold release. It is possible that and other chemicals can 'rise' to the surface of the record - part of the rationale behind cleaning new records before first play. I do agree wrt Photo-Flo and do not recommend it.

I think we concur cleaning is preferable to using one's stylus as a trowel.

 

[Folsom]

Here's mine just finishing a 15minute interval. After this then vacuuming a lot of stuff sounds clean like digital. But some simply will never get rid of the small pops because it isn't stuff in the grooves. They still sound cleaner even if it's a little beat up. There really is no comparison in cleaning methods in my experience. And you can't beat a post vacuum either. The all-in-one units just can't compete. When you look in the water afterwards you see stuff in it, that stuff can resettle on the LP, so a rinse of some kind is mandatory IMO.

 

[dminches]

When you look in the water afterwards you see stuff in it, that stuff can resettle on the LP, so a rinse of some kind is mandatory IMO.

That isn’t the case if you are constantly filter the water during the cleaning process. I can’t say that I ever see particles in the water, ever. The TDS meter readings after I have cleaned 50 records may still only be 6 Ppm.

 

[bazelio]

The Degritter water passes through a filter when filling or draining the cleaning reservoir. There's nothing to prevent one from draining and then refilling for a "Quick" rinse after the initial cleaning. But with that said, I've never needed to do so. My records look and sound squeaky clean.

 

[Folsom]

That isn’t the case if you are constantly filter the water during the cleaning process. I can’t say that I ever see particles in the water, ever. The TDS meter readings after I have cleaned 50 records may still only be 6 Ppm.

Depends how long it takes for you to completely filter the water multiple times over. A vacuum and having a filter is best.

If you don't want to have to change water frequently then using a filter system is great. But the water needs something in it to inhibit growth. So if you put in IPA that works. However the problem then is that IPA causes static. So when you do a rinse and vacuum you can use pure water and in my case I use a touch of hepistat, and this leaves you with zero static, instead of tiny amounts.

 

[dminches]

Depends how long it takes for you to completely filter the water multiple times over. A vacuum and having a filter is best.

If you don't want to have to change water frequently then using a filter system is great. But the water needs something in it to inhibit growth. So if you put in IPA that works. However the problem then is that IPA causes static. So when you do a rinse and vacuum you can use pure water and in my case I use a touch of hepistat, and this leaves you with zero static, instead of tiny amounts.

I can only speak for what I do. I never have any issues with static, even in the dead of winter when my house is pretty dry. That wasn’t the case when I used a KLAudio or AudioDesk. I like the fact that once I am done cleaning I am not touching the surface of the record with anything else prior to playing it.

 

[Folsom]

I can only speak for what I do. I never have any issues with static, even in the dead of winter when my house is pretty dry. That wasn’t the case when I used a KLAudio or AudioDesk. I like the fact that once I am done cleaning I am not touching the surface of the record with anything else prior to playing it.

What mixture do you use?