LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  December 2014

ARSCLIST December 2014

Subject:

Re: VINYL AND STYLUS AT 1000X MAGNIFI CATION

From:

Eric Jacobs <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:25:00 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (305 lines)

Hi Tom,

It would help to know more about the LAST chemistry, which is probably
a trade secret rather than a patent.  But if there is a patent, that
would help us understand how to remove it.

A quick bit of surfing turned this up:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1145024035&openflup&16&4#16



I cannot speak to the veracity of the comments, but it implies that
LAST changes the chemistry of the vinyl near the surface.  If that is
in fact true, it may not be possible to remove LAST, without removing
some vinyl in the process.

~ Eric


On 12/18/14, 8:10 AM, "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Hi Eric:
>
>Do you think ultrasonic cleaning could successfully remove LAST fluid
>coating from an LP record? I
>don't know of any other safe method.
>
>-- Tom Fine
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Eric Jacobs" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 10:46 AM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] VINYL AND STYLUS AT 1000X MAGNIFI CATION
>
>
>> My apologies for being a bit late to this discussion.
>>
>> Although I do not have experience with ultrasonic disc cleaning, I would
>> think it would be fine for vinyl and possibly shellac discs, but would
>>be
>> reluctant to use it on transcription discs (aka lacquers or acetates).
>>
>> Ultrasonic cleaning works on the principal of mechanical vibration to
>> detach contaminants from a surface.  I would expect the vibration to not
>> discriminate between contaminates and laminates.  In other words, if
>> there was even the slightest compromise in the laminate - a crack or
>> exposed
>> substrate edge, for example - the vibration could also detach the
>>laminate
>> from the substrate.
>>
>> I©öm also curious what sort of impact ultrasonic cleaning has on the disc
>> labels, if the disc is fully submerged in the ultrasonic cleaner.
>>
>> Again, my comments are nothing more than hypotheses.  It would be very
>> interesting to hear from the National Film and Sound Archive in
>>Canberra,
>> Australia, about their experience with ultrasonic cleaning on disc media
>> and under what circumstances they deploy ultrasonic cleaning:
>>
>> - what types of disc media?
>> - what types of contaminates?
>> - pre- and post-ultrasonic processes?
>>
>> I©öd also be curious if they follow up the ultrasonic cleaning with a
>> secondary rinsing process to remove or neutralize any remaining
>> Cetrimide on the disc and to remove any contaminates that were dislodged
>> but might still remain loosely on the surface of the disc.  In general,
>> disc cleaning is a two-step process, where rinsing is just as critical
>> as the cleaning for best results.  I cannot emphasize enough the
>> importance of proper rinsing to the final results of audio playback.
>>
>> The Cetrimide (CTR) is an interesting compound.  A quick search online
>> indicates that it is an antimicrobial.  An ultrasonic cleaner with CTR
>> could be an interesting way to handle moldy media to minimize airborne
>> mold spores.
>>
>> It also appears that Cetrimide in aqueous form is a weak base (pH < 7)
>> and a surfactant.  As a weak base, it might be useful for dissolving
>> acids (like palmitic and stearic acid formations on transcription
>>discs).
>> As a surfactant, it helps dislodge dirt and grease and then suspends the
>> contaminants on the surface of the liquid.
>>
>> I provisionally disagree with the comment:
>>
>>   "that with the Monks machine some buildup may look like it is cleared
>>   but can reappear in time.  The sonic disc cleaner does a find job of
>>   permanently removing the buildup."
>>
>> If the buildup is palmitic and stearic acid deposits, these are formed
>>by
>> the exuding of plasticizer from the laminate.  After cleaning, there
>>will
>> still be plasticizer in the laminate.  Plasticizers are, for the most
>>part
>> a good thing, because they keep the laminate ©øplastic©÷ (i.e. not
>>brittle)
>> and as plasticizer is lost (exuded), the laminate shrinks (which causes
>> long-term delimitation from the substrate).  In any case, cleaning
>>cannot,
>> and should not, remove all the plasticizer from the laminate.  And any
>> remaining plasticizer in the laminate will eventually leach out over
>>time,
>> then hydrolize and reform as new palmitic and stearic acid deposits.
>>
>> So whether a disc is cleaned ultrasonically or with a conventional
>>record
>> cleaning machine like the Keith Monks, palmitic and stearic acid
>>deposits
>> (aka ©øbuildup©÷) will reform as the plasticizer continues to exude from
>> the laminate over time.
>>
>> And whether a disc is cleaned ultrasonically or conventionally, the
>> cleaning process, such as rinsing, and the chemistry used are equally
>> important as the cleaning device.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> _________________________
>>
>> Eric Jacobs
>> Principal
>> The Audio Archive, Inc.
>> 1325 Howard Ave, #906
>> Burlingame, CA 94010
>>
>> tel: 408-221-2128
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Disc and Tape Audio Transfer Services and Preservation Consulting
>>
>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/18/14, 7:25 PM, "Rebecca Feynberg" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>>I visited the National Film and Sound Archive in Canberra, Australia
>>>this
>>>summer. They use an ultrasonic disc cleaner. It is quite mesmerizing to
>>>watch the mold and residue lift from the grooves into the water
>>>dissolving
>>>into a cloud.
>>>
>>>Here is a link to the company the makes the sonic disc cleaners. They
>>>are
>>>not made specifically for discs but the cleaning process works well for
>>>them. Elma is the company that makes the machines.
>>>
>>>http://www.elma-ultrasonic.com/en/products/ultrasonic-units.html
>>>
>>>They use a solvent in the water, called Cetrimide.
>>>
>>>I have heard that with the Monks machine some buildup may look like it
>>>is
>>>cleared but can reappear in time. The sonic disc cleaner does a fine job
>>>of
>>>permanently removing the buildup.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Rebecca
>>>
>>>On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 9:51 PM, [log in to unmask]
>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Has anyone used the current generation of ultrasonic record cleaners
>>>>for
>>>> professional or home use?  Very pricey in the $4500+ range.
>>>>
>>>> Eric Nagamine
>>>>
>>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>>> From: "Dennis Rooney" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] VINYL AND STYLUS AT 1000X MAGNIFICATION
>>>> Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2014 9:17 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I note in this thread that no one has mentioned the device that cleans
>>>> discs better than any other, viz. the Keith Monks machine. Forty years
>>>>of
>>>> use on vinyl, lacquers and shellac confirms it.
>>>>
>>>> DDR
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Tom Fine
>>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I have looked with an optical microscope at records before and after
>>>>VPI
>>>> > cleaning. Chunky dust as shown in those photographs can be greatly
>>>> reduced
>>>> > by wet-brush cleaning and vacuum-drying as is done by the VPI and
>>>>several
>>>> > other brand machines. I also looked at records cleaned with
>>>>DiscWasher
>>>> > (original brush and fluid) and the new velvet brush and fluid sold
>>>>under
>>>> > the "stanton" brand. Both left clumps of dust, wherever the brush
>>>>was
>>>> > rolled backward and taken off the record. I also looked at a record
>>>> cleaned
>>>> > with Sleeve City's spray-on fluid and their "shammy" type cloth. Not
>>>>only
>>>> > was dust left, there were visible small scratches caused by the
>>>>cloth. My
>>>> > conclusion was, I only want to use the VPI machine.
>>>> >
>>>> > Also, regarding syluses, I'm a big believer in that relatively new
>>>> > Japanese thing that's basically a blob of tacky gel. You lower the
>>>>stylus
>>>> > onto the gel blob and let it sit a few seconds, then use the lifter
>>>>arm
>>>> to
>>>> > take it up. Dust on the stylus stays on the block of gel. The gel is
>>>> > water-washable and I recommend washing it regularly. Stylus
>>>>dry-brushes
>>>> of
>>>> > the type that come included with some cartridges work OK but don't
>>>> dislodge
>>>> > all dust. I still have some old LAST fluid and brush from the 80s
>>>>and
>>>>it
>>>> > does a nice job of cleaning crud off the stylus and cantilever. I
>>>>use
>>>> that
>>>> > after every couple dozen sides.
>>>> >
>>>> > -- Tom Fine
>>>> >
>>>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Smolian"
>>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 3:05 PM
>>>> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] VINYL AND STYLUS AT 1000X MAGNIFICATION
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >  Victor Campos wrote an article, "Gunk in the Grooves," that was in
>>>>an
>>>> >> American Record Guide in the 1960s.  He published a group of
>>>>photographs
>>>> >> with it that were groove close-ups of great quality (on coated
>>>>paper),
>>>> >> showed all kinds of dirt problems and discussed their solutions (if
>>>> that's
>>>> >> the proper word.) This is well before Disc Doctor came to the
>>>>rescue, of
>>>> >> course.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Steve Smolian
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Don Cox
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 2:22 PM
>>>> >> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] VINYL AND STYLUS AT 1000X MAGNIFICATION
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 11/11/2014, Carl Pultz wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>  Pretty neat images. Makes it that much more amazing that records
>>>>work
>>>> >>> at all.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>>http://dangerousminds.net/comments/vinyl_and_stylus_at_1000x_magnifica
>>>> >>> tion
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>  Not sure about the first two, but the third picture is a scanning
>>>> >> electron
>>>> >> microscope image that has been around for decades.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Certainly worth pointing out for those who haven't seen them.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Carl
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> Regards
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Don Cox
>>>> >> [log in to unmask]
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 1006 Langer Way
>>>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
>>>> 212.874.9626
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> 
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager