What do you do when nothing seems to get LP clean?


What do you do when nothing else seems to work? I have scrubbed with disc doctor brushes; used VPI fiber brush; tried multiple washings and nothing seems to get out this visible "gunk". Whatever it is, I've noticed it on a number of used LPs that I've tried to rescue. Its not raised, but just seems to have "attached" itself to the vinyl. Is it mold? I know its hard to know what exactly I'm dealing with without being able to see it, but what do you use as a last resort, when nothing else seems to do the trick?
128x128stew3859
I don't know, Dopogue. When do "living cells" quit eating? I remember 4yanx mentioning that he found that most plasticizers were fat based.

"Are these discs going to enzyme hell soon?"

It's hard telling. My Armor All'ed CD's looked and sounded great for the first several years, then became unplayable. A couple of months? It appears that you've placed as much study and research as anyone else.
Ignoring 4yanx's concerns or joking about them will not make the issues he raised go away. He may have come on a tad strong but let's be honest, his questions have never been answered. What other motive than concern for the safety and longevity of everyone's vinyl do you think he has? Here are my (incredibly long-winded) thoughts...

I. What scenarios have been hypothesized?

First, it has been suggested that in the 1-5 minutes these enzymes are on the record they could chemically alter certain plasticizers in the vinyl. If that happened, removing or deactivating the remaining enzymes would not undo that effect.

The additional possibility of incomplete removal or deactivation of the enzymes also exists, though this may be a lesser concern. Measures that should reduce this risk are easy to devise.

II. What effects would result from said de-plasticizing?

Despite Dopogue's little joke, one would not expect to see a record crumble into dust in one's fingertips. Removing the plasticizers from vinyl would - this non-chemist presumes - simply make the vinyl less plastic. Nothing more, nothing less. A one-word synonym for "less plastic" is "brittle".

III. How would a more brittle record react during play?

In this scenario, damage would occur due to the record's being physically played by a moving stylus. Multiple plays might be necessary to affect the damage.

Plastic deformation of the groove wall in response to stylus pressures would not occur so readily. Plastic return after deformation would not occur so readily or so completely. Instead, the vinyl would have a greater tendency to shatter and chip, or to remain permanently deformed.

We are discussing microscopic or molecular sized events. No one has suggested that a record will crack in half at the drop of a stylus. Presumably the most vulnerable groove wall shapes would be the most easily damaged.

IV. Where would this damage occur and how would it sound?

The most vulnerable groove wall shapes would be modulations of short duration and high amplitude. A tall, skinny guy like me is more easily fractured than a short, non-skinny guy like - oh - most of you I suppose. ;-) Dynamic HF sounds on inner grooves would be the most vulnerable, since they are physically thinner in the linear direction (ie, less mass to resist stylus pressure) and have faster rise times (so more abrupt stylus transitions).

Eventually the record might begin to sound like it had been played by a mistracking stylus with VTF set too low, ie, HF crackling or static sounds on dynamic peaks and/or harshness on sounds like loud cymbal hits and suchlike. This might take months or years to develop, but if it did the inherent brittleness of the de-plasticized vinyl would make the situation progressively worse with each play.

VI. Can this hypothesis be proved or disproved?

Probably, though not by me. An organic chemist could verify the core concern, that the enzymes used in AIVS solutions do or could interact with the plasticizers used in certain vinyl compounds. An engineering team could devise a stress testing procedure involving, say, intensive AIVS exposure followed by multiple plays. Of course they'd have to control with non-AIVS treated records played an equal number of times on the same equipment, with periodic and comparative measurements of damage between the treated and non-treated records.

VII. What should we do in the meantime?

I've only used the AIVS solutions on a couple of records so far, records that had refused to clean up satisfactorily with other means. The results were good, very good, but until the above hypothesis is convincingly disproved, I am reluctant to take unnecessary risks.

If the AIVS enzyme solution must be used, a complete vacuuming-to-dry followed by the recommended alchohol solution may remove or kill any remaining enzymes. For additional safety, we follow that with both RRL SDC/vac and SVW/vac cycles. This has the additional benefit of diluting any remaining alchohol for vacuum removal. Alchohol is also believed to present a risk for some vinyl plasicizers.

AIVS has been effective in some cases where the demonstrably safer solutions from RRL were not, but pending a convincing demonstration of its long-term safety AIVS will remain a cleaner of secondary resort, not my primary solution. I will use it when I have to, not because I want to.

This message has been approved by Moki and Neko, our two Ocicats.
Doug, thanks on behalf of many of us all for that very considered post. Your concerns reflect some of mine concerns and, from the correspondence I’ve received lately, I realize that while I may be one of the few to “vocalize” them, there are a number of others whom share them.

The discussion of enzyme reactions in a vinyl cleaning fluid contains salient issues and is not limited to one product or another – there are a few enzyme-based fluids out there. Based on my research, I found it on point that you divide the discussion into cause and effect AND a separation between whether a certain enzyme might cause permanent, irreversible damage, once applied, and whether the damage might occur only if the certain enzyme were not fully and thoroughly removed.

Let us just say for argument’s sake that whatever enzyme used as an ingredient can do its duty without damage to any composition of vinyl in most any record during a short exposure and can then be thoroughly removed – stopping its active process and without leaving any sort of residue . I am not convinced that the enzyme(s) used in some fluids would pass such a test because I don’t see any evidence of such being thoroughly tested, but let’s assume that it is so.

This leaves the whole process of complete rinsing and removal/neutralization (leaving aside your possible concern of using alcohol as a neutralizer). What of the brushes used in the cleaning process? Cross-contamination? Use of separate brushes only to be used with the enzymes? Alcohol or other rinse for brushes, tubes, wands, etc. before each pass, each record?

It also leaves the whole point you mentioned with respect to “future shock”. Some folks may not notice a gradual or eventual change in sonics, especially if they are limited only to certain HF modulations, etc. Based on your attention to detail, I’m thinking that you would! :-) While record cleaning fluids have been around for a long time, there seems to be a particular spate of efforts in the past five years or so to keep making improvements and provide a miracle washing cure in the face of the increasingly growing interest in vinyl. This can be good and bad. My ONLY concern is that such products, whoever produces them, undergo rigorous testing so that one can at least feel reasonably safe in their usage. Of course, this level of confidence will vary from user to user, and that’s okay.

Thanks for adding to the disussion!
I've mentioned before that certain concerns may be valid. I just don't know the answers and I doubt the manufacturers could answer them to anyone's complete satisfaction without disclosing the recipe. Also, anonymous attacks are childish.

Buggtussels Vinyl Zyme has been available for a number of years. Does anyone know of negative comments about this particular product? I'm curious. I've Googled this to the point where I don't think there is a negative review. So, since there aren't that many different types of natural enzymes I would think that we should look for criticism of Vinyl Zyme.

I realize I'm looking at this whole issue more simply than David or Doug but my viewpoint is based on what my records have been exposed to through my 35 years of collecting and caring for records. I'm not a newbie to vinyl and didn't abandon my records in the 80's like so many did. I started cleaning my records in the 60's with a tap water damped round felt unit made by Watts. By 1970 I had discovered inner and outer aftermarket record sleeves. I adopted Diskwasher cleaning in the 70's and had my entire collection cleaned in the late 70's by a Kieth Monks. At that time Kieth Monks simply supplied a recipe for a cleaning fluid which was about 50% alcohol and 50% distilled water. I eventually purchased my Nitty Gritty RCM and used their products but was not pleased with the results. I went back to the Kieth Monks recipe in various mixes until I bought RRL products recently and now the AIVS solutions. I wouldn't doubt that some of my records have been subjected to every fluid i've mentioned here. Since I've seen or heard no degradation of any of my vinyl library I'm just not concerned. Of all the produts I've used I will say that Diskwasher fluids were the worst with the Nitty Gritty cleaners coming in a close second.

My experience constitutes empirical data over a long enough time for me to have reached my comfort level with the AIVS stuff. I'd like to know your thoughts on my experiences. Also, again, what do you have to lose with an otherwise unplayable record.