Deep Cleaning Records With Steam?

I'm gonna wave my Reverse Osmosis flag again. It is the only fluid you will need to make your records pristine. You will probably never have to buy expensive record cleaning fluids again. I have a VPI 16.5 RCM and use only cheap 50 cents a gallon RO water, nothing else. They couldn't get any cleaner and quieter. Using expensive RC fluids is throwing money away and not needed. Try it, try it, try it and you will hear it and know. My disclaimer, If your happy using other waters and fluids, then discard my post.

"I'm gonna wave my Reverse Osmosis flag again. It is the only fluid you will need to make your records pristine. You will probably never have to buy expensive record cleaning fluids again. I have a VPI 16.5 RCM and use only cheap 50 cents a gallon RO water, nothing else. They couldn't get any cleaner and quieter. Using expensive RC fluids is throwing money away and not needed. Try it, try it, try it and you will hear it and know. My disclaimer, If your happy using other waters and fluids, then discard my post."

I'll respectfully disagree with that. I currently use ultrapure water which is a far cry better than RO as both a cleaning and rinsing agent in a cleaning regimen that also includes steaming with the ultrapure.

When it gets right down to it, I still believe that a surfactant based cleaner is necessary with many records and is a real benefit with particularly dirty thrift store or garage sale finds as well as very old records (as in 40-50 years old).

I find that the Mo-Fi Super Deep (not the Super Vinyl Wash which I would not buy again) is very effective when combined with steaming and a couple of ultrapure rinses. Cost is about 8 cents a record which I don't find to be extreme in light of what it accomplishes. I've never used an enzyme based cleaner, but unless you have a real biological problem I'm not sure that it's necessary and I find it interesting that the recommendations as far as enzyme based cleaners allow 1) for serious soak time and 2) are followed by a stage or two of cleaning/rinsing with ultrapure water.

My question is: is the effectiveness of the enzyme based cleaners a result of a) the soak time to really loosen stubborn crap on the record or b) the result of using ultrapure as the final stage or c) both of the above and could that result be achieved using a surfactant based cleaner with a bit of extended soak time and an ultrapure rinse.

Whatever the case may be, my experience is that you do need a surfactant in the process. Then you have to get it off the record.

Hdm : My experience using live bacteria (that release enzymatics to assist digesting organics) , the results have been impressive for cleaning dirty used records. I also include a stage for record cleaning fluids & steaming that appears to improve upon the ultimate result. Note: I am told by the designers the bacteria I use are enviornmentally safe ; safe to us humans , our pets and the world-at-large.

What is interesting is that one class of the bacteria that I use are in a spore stage until hydrated. Perhaps, the bacteria's effectiveness could be related to the water source choosen for hydration. Perhaps, ultrapure may mate up well with those critters.

On the topic of enzymes and steaming, how about using a highly diluted enzyme laundry detergent?

It seems to me the a solution of laundry detergent and "good" water would provide both a surfactant and cleansing agent. All rinsed away with steaming several times.

I resent having to pay the prices charged by purveyors of commercial record cleaning solutions.

The question is, will phosphates in laundry detergent harm the vinyl? Has anyone tried diluted laundry detergent with and without steaming?

Regards,

Jan

I've been following this thread for some time and wanted to offer a few comments. My post is somewhat long but hopefully not too boring. It might even be useful to some following this thread.

Low, ppm levels of phosphate can precipitate with calcium. pH and temperature influence this solubility. Calcium phosphate solubility is reduced with increasing temperature and pH. Some detergents will include additives to address water hardness issuues. Modern detergents are something of technical marvels in and of themselves and along with "soap" and enzymes there will be a whole laundry list (pardon the pun) of other chemicals that would be be applied to the vinyl surface if used for LP cleaning. I do think Jan's idea is worth experimentation -maybe with some heavily soiled, flea market LPs that are beyond any other means of saving. I would probably do a thorough rinse with good quality water before any steaming.

On the topic of best process for producing high quality water...just an observation that for distillation, the number of stages, and for RO, the number of "passes" (times water is pushed through a membrane element) will influence the outcome. Single pass RO may reduce calcium and other dissolved minerals by 90% or so. Multi-pass RO can lead to a significantly better quality water than single pass. RO coupled with demineralization (charged resins that adsorb dissolved minerals) followed by electrically-based polishing steps will yield some of the highest quality water possible. All this to simply point out that citing RO water does not guarantee the same quality product from source to source since there is much potential variability in the process as practiced one location to another (not to mention post-production handling as in quality of transfer lines and storage vessels). Same things apply to distilled water. I'm not coming down on one side or the other of the RO vs distilled water discussion. I believe there are multiple paths to the same endpoint (clean vinyl). Find the best quality water you can afford and easily obtain. During the search, if possible, investigate the details of the process used to produce it. Personally, for steaming, I just use distilled water bought at the grocery store with vacuum as a final/drying step.

On the topic of cleaning LPs with bacteria and how water quality might affect this...
Many common, garden variety bacteria utilize organics [generically Cx(H2O)y]to generate energy and build new cell mass. They do need trace amounts of a range of minerals. The acronymn CHOPKiNS is sometimes used as a mnemonic for nutrients required by microbes: Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Phophorus, Potassium, inluding Nitrogen and Sulfur. Other elements like Mn are also needed though in even lower amounts. Typically H & O are in abundance from water. Carbon is what usually limits growth since they need more of this than N, P, K or S. If you supply only minerals to a population of microbes but limit carbon source to a specific compound, it is possible to determine whether that compound is biodegradable based on whether the organisms grow or not.

Regarding Charlie's musing about water quality influencing efficacy of bio-mediated cleaning...if water quality is such that the bugs have no other source of organic material than the crud in an LP groove...that can well become the primary focus of their attentions if it is organic and biodegradable. As a closing illustration, various industries require extremely high quality water (chip mftrs, for instance). Water treatment systems at these facilities represent major capital investment and are capable of producing extremely high quality water, chemically and biologically. The manufacturing equipment itself can still experience problems due to biological activity, however. In such systems - as nutrient poor as they are designed to be - microbes can extract sufficent material for growth from various plastics and other elastomeric compounds used in construction along with trace organic contaminants present on surfaces. Use of microbes to clean an LP groove is not far fetched at all given adequate contact time, the right environmental conditions and a microbial population equipped with an appropriate set of enzymes.