Yeah all that in the 70/80s about not cleaning records was part of the Linn is the only TT worth owning mythology. All hype.
It might have been hype but, then, it made sense. The analogy I would give is sugar granuals sprinkled on the surface of the vinyl. As nice big grains itâs easy to brush them off but splash some water on them and then they dissolve and settle into the bottom of the grooves. Itâs not so easy to clean the residue off then because itâs hardened to a sludge at the bottom of the groove. I could see the sense in the arguement.
Iâm not saying either arguement was right or wrong⌠just saying this was the thinking at the time. ISTR there was a test done when a stylus was examined after playing both before and after cleaning. Before it was clean. After cleaning they played the album again and this time, under the microscope, there was a sludge deposit on the stylus. I canât say who/when did the test or which cleaning machine they were talking about⌠I mean this is 40 years ago now! 
I donât think I have ever subscribed to âthe stylus is the best cleanerâ idea. I had a Transcriptors âsweep armâ on my Hydraulic Reference turntable back in the 70s from day one and used it regularly. Later on when I had a Manticore Mantra turntable for some time, I used carbon antistatic brushes to clean my records before playing them.
However, the real breakthrough for me came some 6 or 7 years ago when I purchased a Keith Monks Discovery record cleaning machine. I was astonished by the effect this had on LPs I played on my Michell Orbe turntable. Unfortunately, the Discovery has proven to be a little temperamental, so I have progressed to a much cheaper Project âwet cleaningâ machine with very nearly identical results.
I really canât understand why anyone with a good turntable and a decent LP collection would not want to invest in a âwet cleaningâ machine. Huge benefits and no negatives that I have come across.
Itâs a âno-brainerâ!
1 Like
Iâve been collecting records for 45+ years. Other than Roy Gandy Iâve never heard any recommendations against cleaning records.
3 Likes
I gather that it can work very well - assuming you use PVA wood glue, and definitely not the polyurethane type!
Modern cleaning methods can use both a âsolventâ and a vacuum to remove the loosened/dissolved debris. This is the method I would subscribe to.
Simply wetting the vinyl surface, brushing and wiping clean would indeed probably leave the sludge that you refer toâŚthe vacuum component is really the game-changer.
These types of machines are available at various price points- some quite reasonable for what they accomplish.
I seem to remember an article, possibly in HiFi Answers, a visit to Ivor Tiefenbrun for an LP12 demo where records were left on the carpet, he picked one up to play and âcleanedâ it by wiping it on his jumper.
In the late 1960s there was a system, possibly the Lencoclean, where the record was played wet. The problem then was that the fluid dried, leaving the groove contaminated so that the record was not playable when dry. Having just searched to check it looks as if that system still exists, called Analogis.
I chose to move from a Knosti to Audiodesk when the leaflet accompanying a Transfiguration Axia suggested that wet cleaned records were essential and suggested that stylus life could be doubled.
3 Likes
That ignores that you should vacuum the liquid off the record while itâs wet -> exactly so you donât get the sludge youâre mentioning.
The old recommendation assumed people didnât have access to this, so accurate in regards to most other cleaning methods. We all know better now.
Back in the 70/80s with the oil crisis LPs were often rubbish pressings. Then up popped the Compact Disc. Another story. Life has moved on and domestic affordable cleaners are around as well as better record players. The better the turntable the less background noise. Some classical pressings lasting a good half an hour can be totally silent. I did say some.!
Up popped the compact disc
Perfect sound foreverâŚ
Iâve thought the same thing. (And I too donât know anyone IRL whoâs a âdegenerate audiophileâ like me!)
I clean all records I buy, new and second hand.
Itâs amazing what a difference it makes to to sound and also removes all static.
I used a Knosti Disco Antistat for years and made my own fluid and it worked really well although was time consuming.
I now have a Pro-Ject vac machine and itâs very easy to use and the results are great.
âPerfect sound foreverâ - perhaps - but the actual SQ on some was terribleâŚ
Some early AAD/ADD discs were particularly bad in that respect, the majority of later DDD discs were much better, Dire Straits Brothers in Arms being one such example.
V_R
Back in the day when I had a deck I would wash records with a dab of washing up liquid under running luke warm water.
Worked perfectly.
2 Likes
If I want a quick clean and destatic I do the same!!!
Tho substitute washing up liquid (has salt in it) for liquid hand soap âŚwith a cotton wool budâŚunder running tepid (softened) tap water
Makes such a difference itâs untrue
Ps
CDâŚPerfect sound foreverâŚ
I was being soooooo sarcastic
Always find that works really well,no residue.And if you use actual Fairy,as opposed to other brands,you get four times as many albums cleaned,plus your hands stay as soft as your face ! The last bit will mean something to all of us of a certain age !
1 Like
Iâd love to see that TV ad
Rows of albums all pegged to a washing line with the tag line ⌠fairly goes so much further⌠right to the bottom of the groove
2 Likes
As I recall we never got to see Nanette Newmanâs record collection just her extensive marquee based selection of crockery.
1 Like
I never used to clean my records except for a gentle carbon fibre brush if there was anything obvious on the surface.
I ritually without fail give the stylus a brush after every side. I currently use a little carbon fibre brush supplied with my Dynavector.
I recently tried a Project VCS2 and most of my older records didnt seem to benefit significantly. But newer records mostly did, the state that many new records appear is shocking. Pressing plants are dirty places but I dont recall records being consistently dirty/gritty straight out the sleeve when new as some do these days.
I experienced quality control problems with the Pro-ject after having and returning 3 different units. I hope to get another soon that works properly as I still buy a lot of new records.
So my conclusion is that the old advice not to clean records was probably correct assuming the record was otherwise looked after. RCMâS have become more popular perhaps due to the fact that record plants are now working flat out to meet demand and manufacturing conditions are dirtier than they used to be.
It is perfectly possible to manufacture clean records that dont need a wet clean from new. In my experience for example records pressed by RTI are very clean and quiet straight out of the sleeve when new.
A caveat to consider is whats in the fluid used, which is usually kept secret by the manufacturer, so one doesnt usually know whatâs in the potion your slopping over your precious records. Most fluids, I would expect, will leave some residue behind even on a vacuum machine, which can end up gumming up the stylus. It might be worth considering that once one starts wet cleaning records that after time the residue build up could be problematic, records become ânoisierâ, leading to a repetitive cleaning merry go round. I dont recall who offhand but a high end cavitation manufacturer claims to have proven this point.
1 Like
Perfect Sound Forever is an interesting phenomenon - it seems that CDs were never advertised using that form of words. Iâm sure there were implications along those lines at the time (Tomorrowâs World and marmalade etc) but everyone Iâve read whoâs tried to track the quotation down has drawn a blank. It seems itâs just the hi-fi equivalent of an urban myth.
Mark