Craig's Record Cleaning Concoction

[steeve]

I would not think it necessary to use Photo-Flo as a pre-conditioner because "Craig's Concotion" includes two ingredients that are surfacants. Please refer to the formulation at the top of this thread for details.

True enough, but my initial experiments have indicated that "Craig's Concoction" works better if I first apply distilled water with Kodak Photo Flo to my albums, some of which are filthy dirty and some have only been played once or twice. My thoughts on this are why not use an additional surfactant- since Photo Flo doesn't seem to harm photographs (which are very sensitive) it probably wouldn't harm the vinyl in albums.

BTW I was checking the MSDS for Cascade Complete Gel at the PG site and noticed that the specific gravity is 1.26 grams per cubic centimeter which would mean that the quantity you specified would be roughly 26% too high. Your initial post in this thread suggested that "all ingredients have the same density as Distilled Water which is a pretty reasonable assumption".

Steve Ahola

[Craig Maier]

Steeve,

It is hard to argue with success and so if the the Photo-Flo pre-conditioner helps, go for it.

Yes, I did make the assumption that all ingredients had the same density as water, so that would have made the Cascade concentration somewhat on the high side compared to the patent. Next batch, try reducing it by around 25% and see if that improves the performance of the concotion - - - it may make it less sudsy.

[sus4chord]

What's the ratio of PhotoFlo to distilled water? I noticed when I looked up PhotoFlo on the web that it says mix the concentrate to 200 parts water. Is that what you all are doing?

I saw a 16 oz bottle for around $8, so that's not too expensive. (Especially for a 200 to 1 mix ratio).

[steeve]

Steeve,

It is hard to argue with success and so if the the Photo-Flo pre-conditioner helps, go for it.

Yes, I did make the assumption that all ingredients had the same density as water, so that would have made the Cascade concentration somewhat on the high side compared to the patent. Next batch, try reducing it by around 25% and see if that improves the performance of the concotion - - - it may make it less sudsy.

Craig:

I looked up the Discwasher patent number from your archives and two of the suggested ingredients from the text of the patent are exactly what is contained in Kodak Photo Flo (3 if you count the distilled water):

25-30% propylene glycol (CAS# 000057-55-6)
5-10% p-tert-octylphenoxy polyethoxyethyl alcohol (CAS# 009002-93-1)
[plus 60-70% distilled water]

Propylene glycol is similar to ethylene glycol (AKA automotive antifreeze) but it is less toxic. Amana used to use it in their HTM (heat tranfer medium) systems for heating and hot water.

Speaking of toxicity, the antifungal ingredient suggested in the patent, sodium azide, is highly toxic and can explode when exposed to water so I think I'd agree with your substitution of SoftSoap antibacterial soap.

The other ingredients spelled out in the text of the patent include distilled water and alcohol. Working out the proportions for 1000 mL of cleaning fluid, the following quantities would put you in the ballpark (there is usually a range listed in the patent rather than a specific figure):

1mL Kodak Photo Flo (20-25 drops)
2mL SoftSoap Antibacterial (1/2 tsp)
1 to 5 tsp 99% alcohol [I used 4 tsp- YMMV]
1000mL distilled water (1 liter- a little more than a quart)

I just mixed up a batch and I think that it is very close to the original D3 fluid- much closer than what RCA has been selling in recent years (with the strong smell of alcohol!) However, while it does work great as directed with the Discwasher brush, it doesn't seem to have as much "oomph!" as your concoction for what I would call "power cleaning" (the wet brushing and optional vacuuming). Adding the Cascade in your concoction seems to make it cut through grease, dirt and fingerprints better. So I do give "Craig's Concoction" a big thumbs up (just cut back on the Cascade a bit )

Steve Ahola

P.S. The Discwasher patent also mentions a "nonyl phenoxy polyethoxy ethanol" surfactant which I was unable to locate. [EDIT - the patent suggested that you could use *either* nonyl or octyl phenoxy polyethoxy ethanol, which are sold under the trade name Triton N-57 and Triton X-114] I'd probably try to track down some Tergitol (which is recommended by the Library of Congress). "Tergitol 15-S-3 is an oil soluble surfactant and 15-S-9 is a water soluble surfactant. Combined they remove a wide range of dirt and greases and can safely be used on sound recordings. Use 0.25 part of Tergitol 15-S-3 and 0.25 parts of Tergitol 15-S-9 per 100 parts of distilled water." from the Canadian Conservation Institute.

EDIT I did find a source for the Tergitol 15-S-3 and 15-S-9:

http://talasonline.com/

[Craig Maier]

Hi Steeve,

Just a sidebar note; the "Concotion" actually includes two glycols which are:

- Ethylene Glycol (107-21-1)
- Diethylene Glycol (111-46-6)

Craig

[Geebster]

All this research in finding the "perfect" record concoction is fine.....BUT....all of it is in vain if you don't have a scientific methodology to test the said solutions for effectiveness.

In my mind you would have to take a sample LP that was consistently dirty throughout and then after cleaning a section with the different formulations, compare them scientifically for cleanliness. Maybe by looking at all cleaned sections through magnification to see how much dirt remains would be a good approach.

Short of doing something like that, I can't see how one could be certain one formula is better than the next. It would all be subjective reasoning rather than an actual clinical test.

GB

[Craig Maier]

GB -

Of course, you are right. For anyone wishing to conduct such a study, I would recommend using the Spectrum Analyzer (or the CNF Spectral Display) as a measurement of the records cleanliness. I would simply measure the noise floor between two grooves on a record. The hard thing here is setting up the control, however. You would have to perform all tests on one record else other variables come into the equation. You would have to carefully clean just one track of a record with solution 1 and then just another track with solution 2, etc. It would be a pretty tricky exercise, but it could be done if done carefully.

Or, another method could be to take several records and characterize their noise floors before cleaning. Then, clean each record with a different solution and then measure the delta noise floor result with the software. The larger the delta, the greater the performance of the cleaning solution.

[steeve]

All this research in finding the "perfect" record concoction is fine.....BUT....all of it is in vain if you don't have a scientific methodology to test the said solutions for effectiveness.

In my mind you would have to take a sample LP that was consistently dirty throughout and then after cleaning a section with the different formulations, compare them scientifically for cleanliness. Maybe by looking at all cleaned sections through magnification to see how much dirt remains would be a good approach.

Short of doing something like that, I can't see how one could be certain one formula is better than the next. It would all be subjective reasoning rather than an actual clinical test.

GB

I agree with your comments about scientific methodology completely, and did not mean to suggest that one formula was inherently better than another. The tests I have been doing are of 24bit/96kHz digital recordings using various concoctions and methods, and I can post samples if you like. The differing methods I've been trying might include two or more applications of a particular formula, or two or more rinses with distilled water followed by a thorough vacuuming. I've been looking for something that isn't too expensive and not too time consuming, and will get a record about as clean as it will get.

I'll try one method and when listening to the resulting recordings I may notice a lot of "crap" in the background, especially noticeable in the gaps between songs. So I will try a different solution or method, and see if the recording turns out any better. Sometimes it doesn't- the damage could be permanently etched into the vinyl or it could even be on the master recordings used to cut the album. However, if I notice a lot of "crap" I can usually make a better recording by cleaning it again, sometimes with the same solution, sometimes with a different one.

Obviously there are limitations to this method of testing- we can't do an initial test of formula X on one album side and then do an initial test of formula Y on that same album side. So there is a lot of interpolation of the results, and I basically come up with an obsessive compulsive routine that may be very time-consuming but seems to cover all bases and will generally produce very decent vinyl rips.

Another limitation concerns long-term damage to the album, for example a cleaning fluid might cause fungus to grow in the grooves, or contain enough alcohol to strip out some of the good stuff in the vinyl, or whatever potential problem we may discover next. This doesn't concern me a lot because my main concern is to produce a high quality digital recording of some of my all-time favorite LP's.

There are other observations I have made during the testing of various recipes. With "Craig's Concoction" used alone on an LP, when I wetbrush it with the $36 VPI HW16 brush, it feels very gritty- one reason why I decided to pre-treat the record with Kodak Photo Flo (5 to 20 drops in a quart of distilled water). And use a final rinse with a generous helping of distilled water. When following this procedure, the brush works a lot more smoothly and the vinyl rips do seem to have less "snap, crackle and pop". FWIW a friend had asked me how I was certain that my cleaning routines were effective and I explained that it was very visible on the Spectral View in xxxxxxxx: the background would be a lot darker- a much sharper black. (Pre-RCM, the background would be speckled with small dots, like distant stars in the sky.)

I tried a solution without the Cascade Complete in it last night and it didn't seem to clean as thoroughly as "Craig's Concoction" so I just now made up a special bottle of prepared Cascade. I mixed in 1 teaspoon of Cascade Complete with one cup of distilled water heated up in the microwave, stirred it up very well and then filtered it through a very clean white t-shirt- twice. I did the same with the SoftSoft but only filtered it once. With these two bottles I'll be able to experiment with different ratios more easily (the Discwasher patent often listed a very wide range of percentages for some of the ingredients). It took quite a long time for the Cascade to filter through the t-shirt so I believe that it removed a lot of stuff- hopefully what was causing the grittiness mentioned above. [EDIT- Yes, it did! Borrow a clean t-shirt from your wife and try it out! LOL]

I am not sure how Cascade Complete fits in with the Discwasher patent but I think that when used sparingly it can be an excellent addition to a record cleaning solution. I do think that Kodak Photo Flo is a better ingredient than Prestone Antifreeze, and I have a hunch that it is what they used in the initial batches of the D3 Discwasher fluid, while it was still in development. Of course, it might not fit in with the initial requirement that all of the ingredients be something you might have in your kitchen (I guess it depends on your kitchen! )

Steve Ahola

P.S. And I give Craig a hearty three thumbs up for this project- and for coming up with something that seems to be absolutely unique- not just another "me too" formula that comes up repeatedly in a Google search!

[Craig Maier]

Quoting Steve,

"P.S. And I give Craig a hearty three thumbs up for this project- and for coming up with something that seems to be absolutely unique- not just another "me too" formula that comes up repeatedly in a Google search!"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks,

Craig

[steeve]

Quoting Steve,

"P.S. And I give Craig a hearty three thumbs up for this project- and for coming up with something that seems to be absolutely unique- not just another "me too" formula that comes up repeatedly in a Google search!"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks,

Craig

Craig:

I've been experimenting with different formulae- more of this, less of that- let's try this bottle instead- and thought I came up with something pretty slick. Less toxic than your concoction and it doesn't require as much rinsing afterwards (I assume that everyone is rinsing this stuff off with distilled water- right? right? )

So I was cleaning an album I ripped about a year ago (pre-RCM)- Jim Capaldi's "Oh How We Danced"- and after using my formula, it sounded like crap! So I get out your concoction, put it on a bit thick and it is sudsing and foaming away... I vacuum it up and rinse it twice with distilled water and the record sounded much better than when I cleaned it with my own formula. For all I know it may be the grittiness I noticed in your formula that helps it do a great job cleaning...

But I do hope that everyone is rinsing it off well with distilled water, and if you are using a manual wet brush like the VPI HW16 it might be a good idea to wear gloves (I can still feel my fingers tingling a little bit! )

"Craig's Concoction" is not a replacement for D3 or D4+, but it is a darned effective vinyl cleaner, inspired in part by the text of the Discwasher patent...

Steve Ahola

[Craig Maier]

On record albums that I care about, I will rinse the disc with distilled water after cleaning. But, for records that I do not care about (most of them), I just use a one-step process using the concotion. Most of the time, I make a transfer of a record to the digital domain and then I no longer really care much about the analog artifact unless it is an extremely rare record, in which case I go to the extra effort to rinse. After a transfer to digital, it is very unlikely that I will ever play that particular record again. It just goes back onto the shelf as a dust collector.

[Geebster]

On record albums that I care about, I will rinse the disc with distilled water after cleaning. But, for records that I do not care about (most of them), I just use a one-step process using the concotion. Most of the time, I make a transfer of a record to the digital domain and then I no longer really care much about the analog artifact unless it is an extremely rare record, in which case I go to the extra effort to rinse. After a transfer to digital, it is very unlikely that I will ever play that particular record again. It just goes back onto the shelf as a dust collector.

Yes, Craig. That is exactly what I do. Once recorded and restored, I almost never re-visit the original LP.

I am in the process of finding homes for the albums I have already transfered. It is far easier to store a few hard drives than the space it takes for a sizeable record collection. At this point in my life, I'm in it for the music, not the "collection".

GB

[glenntsc]

Hey, All;

I was getting tired of manually cleaning my vinyl library, so I recently bought a new VPI HW-17F record cleaning machine. (Oh, Yeah? So what if I groveled before getting the wife's blessing.) Scary price indeed for the unit ($1300.00), but I have a large (1973-1993) Mobile DJ collection that I've been transferring to digital via DC6, then DC7. I admit to having respectable success manually cleansing discs with Craigs cleaning formula prior to the RCM purchase. But, it was becoming pure drugery, considering the voluminous number of discs I am looking at. That was more scarier!

Anyhow, I want to congratulate Craig on his "Craigs' Cleaning Concoction". (I've dubbed it, "C3" fluid. Ya' all can use that!) It works great with this machine. The VPI fluid that was included with the RCM, was rather conservative in it's cleaning abilities and surface wetting. By comparison, the C3 creates some gentle rotational lathering during scrubbing operations, with a very fast initial flow-out/wetting, and the results are positively audible every time. The spectrograph and the CNF samples validate the results too. This combination has expedited my conservation efforts greatly! I'm very pleased. Thanks Craig!

My method is: 1. Clamp the disc down to the RCM platter. (Duh.) 2. Place the brush on the disc. 3. Apply sufficient C3 from a squirt bottle. 4. Turn the motor on for several forward and reverse cycles, depending on my judgement of the condition of the disc. 5. Vacuum the spent fluid off. 6. Next, using the VPI fluid pump, I then dispense distilled water on the cleaned surface to flush out, vacuum up and dry, any remaining residual. 7. Do the reverse side the same. 8. Off to the DAW.

Sometimes, I'll do a whole stack at one sitting in preparation for digi-transfers. I've personally justified the cost of the VPI from the savings I'm getting from Craigs C3 brew alone. It's good stuff.

I gave a sample of some C3 to a doubtful (The anti-freeze component.) audiophile friend of mine, and he later called and wanted the recipe. He was a beliver too.

I was wondering, if the "JetDry" dishwashing product would be a safe wetting agent to experiment with or possible to include in the C3? I've never seen it referenced elsewhere. The products web site does not give the ingredients listing, nor does the package I have. Any speculations? But hey, the original C3 works perfectly anyhow! (Just a thought.)

Again, thanks Craig for C3. And not to forget, the forum and it's participants have been a great collective resource of knowledge for my vinyl to digital convictions. Thanks.

Respectfully,

Glenn P.

[Craig Maier]

Hi Glenn,

Thanks for the testimonial regarding "C3"; just keep in mind that all that I did was to translate someone elses patent into the proper ratios of readily available ingredients. I too did not want to spend a fortune on record cleaning solution as I also have a fairly large record collection that required cleaning.

As for Jet Dry, I do not know anything about its chemical makeup. I would be reluctant to use it without knowing more about it.

[glenntsc]

Hi, All;

Craig, you're too modest. You applied your knowledge to "decode" the earlier patent out of necessity, to recreate an old standby vinyl cleaner. What you came up with may not be the exact product, but it works very well!

I was curious about the JetDry as the "wetting" agent for the DIY cleaning formula wizards. Several individuals here and on other vinyl related forums, are at times seeking a substitute for the Kodak Photo-Flo agent, which seems to becoming harder to locate since print film developing is not that common as a hobby anymore. Photo-Flo always seems to be a mentioned ingredient. Like I said, I couldn't locate the JetDry ingredients to see if it would be safe. It's a mystery blue fluid.

Respectfully,

Glenn P.