I agree with that but i want to play the devils advocate here!😉 It is not like you could drink the water after ultrasonic cleaning 30 records even if you used only distilled water. The water would be just too filthy. There are plenty of minerals already on the vinyl. I’ve had water be brown after only cleaning 30 records. That being said, Triton X-100 is a great way keep minerals off the vinyl. Whether it is minerals that is already in the water or if it is being cleaned off the vinyl. A good example of how Triton X-100 is used is Photo-Flow. Its job is to prevent minerals from water to be deposited on the film after drying. Is that not exactly what we are doing here? Distilled water or not, there will be plenty of minerals in the water unless you are changing out the batch of water after cleaning each record. I would still recommend distilled water for a personal collection just because I like the most scientifically anal method but i couldn’t actually assure or prove to you it’s any better.

Thank you sir! I try to bring it so people can dive right into the complex world of vinyl without getting insecure about it. Last month, this video got 40 repeat views so I am glad people like you are coming back again and again and maybe even possibly try to give this formula a shot.

That sounds like a great formula! Are you able to maintain temperature using the ilfotol? Ultrasonic cleaning really is the best. I get so many great reviews on the Ebay store where people are shocked how good it can sound. The best example I ever had was an old yellowed copy of Black Sabbath. I didn't even realize that the vinyl was supposed to be clear until after cleaning it. Cant believe it took the cigarette stains off!

The ilfotol is less than 5 ml in a 6 liter tank so no problems with it. The nice thing about Ilfotol is that I don't have to worry about immediately wiping records after the US cleaning cycle. I can let them air dry without any residue or streaks. @@fadingpetals3134

Great! Thank you for sharing. I can’t wait to experiment and switch out Triton X-100 with the ilfotol once I finish my vinyl office. It appears to have the same usage as the Triton X-100 antisurfacent that is in my formula. I like that benefit as well (With Triton X-100) as needing to touch the vinyl to dry it post cleaning adds risk of adding microfibers and static. It also looks like a pretty affordable solution which is great when building a scalable operation.

I spent the day going back and forth. If you are using my formula down to the same measurements, you need the dawn. I found that the records that had the dawn in the solution had much less surface residue post cleaning.

Update on this one… My final answer would be “It depends”. It’s not very necessary if your vinyl is relatively clean going in. However, I will even clean moldy/filthy records if they are worth saving. Even precleaning will not remove enough of the residue and you will require a stronger solution which is the dawn.

@@fadingpetals3134I guess I don’t understand the function of the dawn in the solution. People usually add it for the degreasing and surfactant properties which you are getting from the alcohol and Triton, and the cleaning is being done by the cavitation of the ultrasonic. I suppose it’s not doing any harm, but I just don’t get what it’s doing that isn’t being done already.

You are right but I don’t have a good recipe for adding more alcohol or Triton X-100. (Just for the filthiest of records) What I have tested is the dawn and am comfortable with the results.

I’ll give it a shot! I’m not sure I’ll be able to tell a difference but I like experimenting. In general, if someone was doing their personal collection, I would tell them to use distilled. (Stick to the best formula) As a business, I have to run things differently as almost all the vinyl I have has been ultrasonically cleaned. I have to really look at how much something adds value before adding it to the process. I have been hesitant to use distilled because I thought it may have just been pretentious. I feel that the water after 30 records have been clean will be equally as dirty with great tap water as with distilled.

​@@fadingpetals3134 tap water contains small amounts of dissolved metals, and other things like chlorine. The amounts vary depending on where you are. This is why you can get tap water residues on taps, e.g. lime scale. When the water evaporates, it leaves these "impurities" behind. Distilled or deionised water does not contain any of these. You might not see stuff left behind from the tap water, but it is still there. Distilled water is "pure" water and does not leave behind anything when it dries

I agree with that but i want to play the devils advocate here!😉 It is not like you could drink the water after ultrasonic cleaning 30 records even if you used only distilled water. The water would be just too filthy. That being said, Triton X-100 is a great way keep minerals/matter off the vinyl. Whether it is minerals/matter that is already in the water or if it is being cleaned off the vinyl. A good example of how Triton X-100 is used is Photo-Flow. Its job is to prevent minerals from water to be deposited on the film after drying. Is that not exactly what we are doing here? Distilled water or not, there will be plenty of minerals and matter in the water unless you are changing out the batch of water after cleaning each record. Now I have really great tap water and not everybody does but the results have been really good. I would still recommend distilled water for a personal collection just because I like the most scientifically anal method but i couldn’t actually assure or prove to you it’s any better.

Lol! I was one handing it with a camera, very easy to struggle to put on the vinyl while holding the camera steady. I find the easiest way to ruin the labels is having to much solution in the tank. Labels can generally touch the water for a second but if the water level is too high, it can get under the label and smear the lettering. I’ve done that far too many times. I need to add a fill line.

Most everything with vinyl can be summed up by the law of diminishing returns. 1. I have great tap water. The results are great. It’s is almost free. 2. You can use distilled water. It will be $1-2 per 30 records. It will also be about 5-10 minutes minimum of preheating in between batches. The results may be slightly better. 3. You can use deionized water. That is $16 per 30 records. This might be a great option for $200+ records where you want the ultimate purity. I doubt one would ever notice. With a private collection, I recommend distilled records. If you plan on ultrasonic cleaning 200 records a week to sell them, I recommend trying tap and checking the results. Using distilled water can prevent you from scaling up the business.

I must admit it sounds on paper like it’s a poor formula but it holds up! I have bought records from ultrasonic records cleaned with a degritter mark 2 and all sorts of other places and I find my formula to be superior. 1. I’ve cleaned 1500+ records this way. Hundreds of hours. Machine is never hot. I am more scared of my toaster. 2. Spacing has worked well for me. Record 2 and 3 are as clean as 1 and 4. 3. I usually don’t use the dawn. In other comments I’ve tested dawn vs no dawn. I would only recommend any dawn for records that are very dirty at this point. 4. Never heard of the process to degas the tank water! Would love to give it a try! Let me know more!! 5. I am behind tap water in my area. The water I have is from the submerged delta of the pilgrim river in northern Michigan. It is great water. Not some Wisconsin farm water. I am going to be testing back and forth on this in the next few months though. (Been too busy moving) 6. I would like a slower motor! Just haven’t got around to it. Would like a suggestion. It would eliminate the longer time that I have to spin the records for optimal results. 7. I never touch the grooves with my fingers unless I can help it. If you are talking about the pre cleaning with wipes, it is an excellent way to help loosen up debris clinging deep in the grooves that is hesitant to come off. I have just bought a spin cleaner to perhaps upgrade this process. If anybody else reads this, I would tell them to TRY IT. Try other methods too. You might just find, this method is the best!😉 If not, I would love to hear about it. We all are chasing the best method.

That is completely valid! That along with a slower spinning motor would reduce the amount that these need to spin for as well. I have cleaned with only 2 and 3. Never one. When I am at the end of cleaning 40 records, the last batch is usually 2-3. I haven’t got any cleaner of results. (Always spotless) This leads me to believe the longer spinning time of 30 minutes is effective and mitigates any loss in the strength of the waves.

I LOVE IT!!!This is the exact kind of chatter I was hoping for when I created this video. My solution is pretty standard across a few forums and I have gotten great results from it but love to hear different ideas. In my next video, I am going to try your method alongside the method I show in the video above. I am curious to see the results. I do believe chemicals certainly do something when cleaning records because of my past failures. There have been times I have accidentally left them in the ultrasonic cleaner for a couple hours and it will first create light spots and then strip the coloring completely off.

@@fadingpetals3134 Next time stick your finger in. The cleaning is instant and the water changes color from the dirt that is on your finger. If you have $500-1000 stylus you don't want to plow through a film of solvent that is left behind. We are talking about very small amounts but tolerances and differences of stylus are very small. And if you do need to clean your stylus it is very easy to damage. If you are unsure about your tap water just run it through a filter.

I am excited to try your method. Residue can be a problem with chemicals and your method is creative. I haven’t heard of it before. I really agree to your point that the vinyl industry wants to sell solutions that add that residue. I have seen vinyl solutions that make the vinyl look very clean and shiny but all it was was a film that hid the scratches and made the record sound worse. This video actually is against those expensive solutions. With my formula, I clean 50 records for about $1.30. I get the isopropyl alcohol at the dollar tree and that is my largest cost.

@@fadingpetals3134 Distilled water is used because some might have hard well water but most people live with soft city water that is filtered and chlorinated. Hard well water can stain when drying as it has lot of minerals in it. Same reason why you wouldn't wash your car with it. Solvents are useful when you do car parts for example that might have hard to move petroleum products on them or other type of greases and adhesives that repel water and you need something to break the surface tension to get to them. Records have none of that and don't repel water. Alcohol for example is a good way of removing finger prints but it also removes oils from the record itself making it brittle over time. Alcohol might be a good starting point before the ultrasonic to wipe the finger prints when your business is selling but questionable if it is your personal collection. Careful user shouldn't need to do it. If the record has really bad stuff on it like drinks and food stains etc. my first step would be just warm water and dish washing liquid and just let it spin for 30 minutes. Rinse with clean water and then do the normal 2-5 minute cycle with ultrasonic. None of my records have ever needed this but I can image if you get old records you find just about everything and anything on them. The goal is to be as gentle as possible and leave the record clean and nothing on it. New records often come dirty from the manufacturing. They are shiny but the groove can have stuff in it that can hide lot of the sound. As much as you might totally miss instruments that you never knew were there. That can also be the reason when people claim the old sounded better than the new release. The difference in sound can be huge.

I think your cleaning theory is sound! How often would you clean your records? I clean them once and they usually never need to be ultrasonically cleaned for another 20 years if stored correctly. Mold residue is usually the most common find that is difficult to remove. It always will stain even if it plays perfectly after. I like the theory on why people prefer originals. I have seen some modern records absolutely filthy. I have also seen them poorly made. I prefer originals for albums made before CD’s. 1. I think that the art of mass record production was not perfectly passed down from generation to generation. 2. I think that the music industry was much more reliant on records before the mid 80’s leading to talent in the masterings.

35 Celsius. (95 Fahrenheit)

Great comment! I really like the idea to spin clean and vacuuming at the end. I’ve always thought the best combination to cleaning would be to ultrasonic clean and then use use a Pro-Ject record cleaning machine. As a seller, I am always looking to find ways to add value but it cannot be too time consuming. What is your take on air drying? I have been doing really well when I air dry and there is good air circulation.

@@fadingpetals3134 Air drying is just fine. I bought a small usb fan and I move air across the drying rack. This is all time consuming and if I was selling I doubt I would do all this without a fee Good luck mate, be sure and do your homework before you showcase, ie, Jethro Tull Alice Cooper is another one. When I was a lad, I to thought Jethro was a dude, and Alice was, well a effin cool band

@@JeffN-A Thank you! Choosing how to add value is very difficult in the world of vinyl. The more time you spend, the more you charge. Everyone wishes that the record they buy has been play graded but very few want to pay for that. I can clean 100 records a day without raising my prices using this hands off process. I was in a record store today and bought John Coltrane Ballads for $50. It was ultrasonically cleaned but then they put it back into the 60 year old paper sleeve. I asked why they did it and they said the inner sleeves were expensive! My audiophile grade inner sleeves cost 20 cents each! I am still shaking my head at their process.

Someone said he adjusted the screw at the back of the motor and slowed the speed down, I'm trying to confirm if this is possible, have you tried?

That is an interesting thought Mantis. I’ll look into it. The first thing that comes to mind is the screw at the top of the motor which I would never recommend. That would only slow it by causing friction.

8 ML (milliliters) of anti-surfactant. BIG difference. 8 oz = 237 ML

Good point! I won’t heart the comment unless that is updated since I really wouldn’t want someone putting in a half bottle of anti-surfactant!