As I'm getting some of my old vinyl equipment out, I found my old Parastat record cleaner. As I recall, I would place a drop or two of Discwasher solution on the edge, use the bottom of the bottle to spread it out, then turn album slowly using only the soft edge of the cleaner. Is this still the preferred method and will distilled water work just as well? I have used it very lightly dry and it seems I'm creating pops instead of removing them.
You might consider modernizing your routine. sells the Ionoclast device which reduces static charges (also sold on, and the Static Draining Record Brush (replaces the older generation Audioquest style carbon fiber brushes) for picking up dust and debris while reducing static charges.
There are a zillion threads on record cleaning, with nearly as many methods as there are posters. That said, few Audiogoners would regard the Parastat, the fluids you mentioned or the techniques you described as adequate. I tossed mine many years ago.

Frankly, I expect you're doing more harm than good. What you're doing is dissolving (some) groove grunge, spreading it around then leaving it until the liquid evaporates. What's left behind? The same grunge, broken into smaller particulates that even the best methods would have a difficult time removing.

IME the most effective method for removing clicks and pops are the enzyme based cleaners sold by AIVS, MoFi and Walker. They do, however, require multiple cleaning/rinsing steps (though AIVS offers a One-Step solution that works reasonably well).

Many others swear by steaming, which I've found insufficient for my purposes. YMMV.

Whether you use multi-step cleaners or steaming (or both) there's near universal agreement that vacuum removal of grungy fluids is essential. You have to get that scum out of the grooves before it dries, and no amount of wiping can match the results of a good vacuum. Vacuum record cleaning machines (RCM's) cost from $200 to $Thousands, or you can DIY one for < $100.

I'm afraid you're in some research and some expenditure of time and money. FWIW, very few people who've cleaned a record well ever go back to playing uncleaned ones. The differences are noticeable.
Listener57: Have you used the Mapleshade brush? In your opinion is it appreciably better than the Audioquest style? Thanks!
I have personal experience with the Ionoclast which is quite impressive at allowing better playback of records already cleaned with the old established Deema (Audioquest equivalent) and Audioquest Carbon Fiber Brushes.
The Mapleshade brush looks intriguing, and I find his presentation of interest having successfully used so many of his products over the years.
But, being out of stock, I have not yet tried it. Also, there is money-back guarantee which reduces buyer anxiety.
I seem to recall with the Parastat, that it had an insert that you wet with water in order to add some humidity without actual dampness. I don't recall putting anything on the brush itself.
Yes-you're correct. Thanks for your input.
More to discover