Steam Powered Record Cleaning

treitz3

Kenneth Swauger wrote: »

Where have you been finding most of your records?

I actually never got rid of my collection and then about 7 years ago, my father gave me his . As far as how I get my new records? A place in Charlotte called Manifest Discs. They actually have new and used records that I'll browse on occasion. Other than that, the forums.

All I smell currently is the smell of new plastic from the Nitty Gritty and though I have never heard the older models, I do know that mine is quite a bit quieter than the VPI I heard at PF this year. I can actually hear myself think.:rolleyes:

Gretsch6136

Reading this thread has inspired me to give steam cleaning a go. I have always been very particular as to the care and cleaning of my records and therefore interested in any ways to improve the results.

My normal process with used records was to first brush them with a microfibre brush to remove as much loose dirt as possible. Next I vacuumed them using a soft velvet sleeve fitted to the hose of the wife's vacuum cleaner. I finished up with a spray of AM record cleaner and a good scrubbing with a velvet pad.

A couple of days ago I went to Kmart and bought a Pirahna branded steam cleaner. I pulled out a record that had undergone the aformentioned cleaning process but was still too crackly for my liking. I placed it on a broken turntable that serves as my cleaning station. I gave it a spin and hit it with the steam. I used a 45 degree angle at around 2-3 inches from the record surface. As the record was spinning I traversed its surface from lead-in to lead-out grooves a couple of times. I then reversed the direction of the spray and gave it another going over. Wiped off the water with a deep nap microfibre towel and finished up with the AM record cleaner, felt pad and a final polish with a dry microfibre towel.

For comparison's sake I had made a short recording of the record prior to starting the cleaning process. I then made another recording after cleaning. The difference was significant to say the least. The number of pops & crackles was down by approx 50%, and their volume was down by a similar amount. The overall effect was to lower the noise floor dramatically thereby giving the music much greater presence, dynamics, and clarity. Interestingly, more bass seemed to come through as well.

In the end I cleaned it three more times and recorded the results each time. Improvements continued to be made through to the third cleaning, but the fourth didn't seem to help any further. Overall, I reckon I achieved a 75% reduction in the number and amplitude of the crackles. I verified the results by getting my wife to listen to the recordings without telling her which was which. She could easily hear the results of the cleaning and was able to correctly identify the order of the first two recordings but could not distinguish between the third and fourth.

I cleaned about 6 records last night and they all benefited from this process. Interestingly, I could see a very faint reddish hue starting to develop on my yellow cleaning towel. Obviously this is whatever gunk was stuck down in the grooves. It would be interesting to look at it under a microscope!

My verdict on steam cleaning is a big thumbs up!!

Cheers,

Mark

strider

Just gave this a try on a couple of hard luck Goodwill records I had written off as unlistenable. Previously I had cleaned them as I had all my other lp's, a quick clean with a dry brush to get the surface contaminants off, a wet clean then vacuum with MFSL Super Deep Cleaner, a second wet clean/vacuum with their Super Record Wash and then a pass with a Hunt EDA carbon fiber brush immediately prior to playing. This process typically yields good results, I've rescued some gems from the thriftstore in the past year or so.

Using the steam cleaner I made one pass around the record, scrubbed it with an MFSL brush, steamed again, then vaccumed. Next was an application of the Super Deep Cleaner, then steam/brush/steam/vacuum. Last cleaning step sustituted the Record Wash for the Deep Cleaner. First go 'round I stopped there; the second side I added a rinse cycle after the final cleaning step using the steam cleaner then another vacuum. I'm happy with the results, the two albums I tried this on today were so noisey before I couldn't help but focus on the cracks and pops when listening to them. After the steam cleaning the surface noise was reduced by 60% or so. There is some noise evident between tracks, but it's all but completely unnoticeable while music is playing. I also feel that the there's better seperation of instruments and vocals, and that the bass is tighter as well. I'm going to keep playing around with the process, I don't believe I've gotten the most out of it yet. Thanks for taking the time to pst this method, jm1.

madmax

Oh crap, another thing to add to the cleaning process... So, is this shark steam cleaner the one for around $40?
madmax

treitz3

I haven't had the time to get it yet [holidays], but believe you me....first thing tomorrow I will have me one and I will let you know if my findings are the same.

strider

madmax wrote: »

Oh crap, another thing to add to the cleaning process... So, is this shark steam cleaner the one for around $40?
madmax

You said it. I've got the steam cleaner set up on the other side of the basement from my RCM, after cleaning a couple of records it felt like a circuit training exercise routine. I've got the Ultra Steam Shark and, IIRC, the ones I've seen were around that mark.

treitz3

Well, I didn't see the Ultra Shark but I did pick up the Shark and it was $42.89 including NC tax at Target. Do you know the difference between the Shark and the Ultra Shark? The Shark is 1000 watts with accessories that include;
Flexible hose
Steam/Garment diffuser and bonnet
Window squeegee
3 nylon bristle brushes
Angle adapter
Filling flask

The water capacity is 9.5 fl. oz.9 (280ml) Not that I would NEED one, but I was wondering at the same price if I should return it and look for the Ultra Shark....

Hopefully I will have time to demo the unit before tonight's Basketball game.

strider

treitz3 wrote: »

Well, I didn't see the Ultra Shark but I did pick up the Shark and it was $42.89 including NC tax at Target. Do you know the difference between the Shark and the Ultra Shark? The Shark is 1000 watts with accessories that include;
Flexible hose
Steam/Garment diffuser and bonnet
Window squeegee
3 nylon bristle brushes
Angle adapter
Filling flask

The water capacity is 9.5 fl. oz.9 (280ml) Not that I would NEED one, but I was wondering at the same price if I should return it and look for the Ultra Shark....

Hopefully I will have time to demo the unit before tonight's Basketball game.

I know for certain that the water capacity on the Ultra is 30 oz. As for the other differences I'm not certain, but I think I've got the same or similar accessories. I don't know why you'd need the Ultra model; also, I wouldn't go on my memory alone regarding them being similar in price.....

treitz3

Thanks for your reply. Think I'll stick with what I have and go ahead and open her up, but I won't be able to post results until later tonight. I'm anticipating the improvements!

How is yours working out for you? Good, bad, no difference, incredible? Does it affect the sound stage at all?

I'd love to use it on the needle itself, but I will not in fear of the glue getting weak.:eek:

madmax

All I could find today was the ultra shark for $39.99 at bed bath and beyond but they were out except for the display model.
madmax

strider

treitz3 wrote: »

How is yours working out for you? Good, bad, no difference, incredible? Does it affect the sound stage at all?

I'd love to use it on the needle itself, but I will not in fear of the glue getting weak.:eek:

I'd say it does yield better results then my previous cleaning regime. Bass is deeper and tighter, treble has a bit more sparkle. Plucked notes have more decay and sound more natural. The soundstage may be a bit better, more three dimensional, but to be honest I didn't note any improvement before I read your question, so it may be in my head. The most remarkable results are on the albums that I just couldn't listen to previously due to the noise. The sound of the used albums that are in better shape did improve, but not as noticeably. While I am convinced it is a useful method, the added time and effort would make this a once an album step for me. I think I'll use it on each album the first time I clean it, but afterwards I'll use just the RCM for maintenance.

I checked the manual of the Ultra, in addition to the added capacity, it is also 1450 watts instead of 1000.

Jed Leland

Hello,
Well Ole St. Nick brought a Shark steamer, blue in color, and I've been having a good time steaming some of my favorite records. Certainly made a difference giving them the once over and then cleaning them as I normally do. The vinyl is much darker black in color and transient response and inner details have gotten better. Much lower back ground noise and a feeling of hearing less obscuring of the sound.
Reminds me of some of reissued DVDs where they show you how they processed the older movie stock and now its less murky and the colors are brighter and less grainy. I tend to be a lazy cuss, but this is worth the effort, in my opinion.
Thanks to all you guys who blazed the audio trail! What about steam powered amplifiers? where's Robert Fulton when you need him?
Jed

madmax

Picked up the ultra model today. These sharks are damn hard to find.
madmax

strider

There are a bunch of different models of Sharks on Overstock.com, including this one for $29.99 that looks similar to the one Mapleshade sells for $150.

hearingimpared

Thanks Ben! Between your and Ken's recommendation, I just ordered mine.

BTW Thanks to JM1 too.

treitz3

Well, I just tested the Shark to see if it spit water and it did not. I have to wait for the unit to cool back down for a refill. Next test. An LP. Sorry to those who were expecting an evaluation last night. Beer got the best of me. Evaluation coming soon to a post near you...

BTW, it cleans a drain like no other.....;)

madmax

hearingimpared wrote: »

I just ordered mine.

I knew you would fold quickly.

I have played with mine a little but have not sprayed an LP yet. Very controlled steam output on mine, no dripping, very powerful, I can hold my hand maybe 6" away without being too hot. Closer than 4" would cause pain for sure. How far away from the lp are you guys holding yours?

treitz3

I'm gonna have to experiment with that.

hearingimpared

madmax wrote: »

I knew you would fold quickly.

I have played with mine a little but have not sprayed an LP yet. Very controlled steam output on mine, no dripping, very powerful, I can hold my hand maybe 6" away without being too hot. Closer than 4" would cause pain for sure. How far away from the lp are you guys holding yours?

Yes indeed!!! Your question as to how far has been the main reason I've taken so long to buy this thing. I'm afraid, with my heavy handed personality, that I'm gonna end up with a molten ball of black goo!!!

madmax

I guess I'll start with an old throw away lp and find the point where damage is done. Thats always the fun part. Then I'll back off a little and find where I can over use the steam and cause damage. Then I will stick to that place and not over use the steam. Does that sound like a plan?

madmax

Oh yea,
On the ultra I took the nozzle off and tried blowing steam. Truthfully, this may be the best way to use it. You get a much larger footprint of steam while still having good control.

treitz3

1st impression. 4" away w/ the 45 degree tip pointing down....improved separation, slightly deeper punch and an overall cleaner sound. Big difference? No. Difference? Yes.

The vinyl does look blacker than with a standard cleaning from the Nitty Gritty.

treitz3

strider wrote: »

There are a bunch of different models of Sharks on Overstock.com, including this one for $29.99 that looks similar to the one Mapleshade sells for $150.

Those are refurbished. Not that I care, just wanted to give everybody a heads up.

hearingimpared

treitz3 wrote: »

Those are refurbished. Not that I care, just wanted to give everybody a heads up.

How'd you find that out?

treitz3

"This high-quality item has been factory refurbished. Please click on the icon above for more information on quality factory-reconditioned merchandise."

'bout 1/2 way down the link.

strider

hearingimpared wrote: »

How'd you find that out?

Pro'lly that big "REFURBISHED" icon down in the lower left hand side of the screen.:rolleyes:










I missed it, too.:o:D

treitz3

We're all human. It happens. So far the difference in sound quality justifies the cost IMO. 5 more minutes prep....whoopdie do. We aren't listening to vinyl for convenience anyway.;)

hearingimpared

Hey reburbed is good. . . it brings it up to current spec!

madmax

I did 10 records this evening. I started out with a test record which I didn't mind destroying. I have the bigger ultra shark. I started out by pinpointing a spot where some paint or glue or something had splattered the record. 3/8" spot. I tried and tried but whatever it was wouldn't loosen up. I noticed the record warped up right where I was spraying. (Maybe 1 minute, 1/2" away). As it cooled it went back into position. Given this I picked a track that played fine, did it again, it warped up then back down. It played fine afterwards. This was an insanely horible test and it did not destroy the record. You could not do this by mistake. I have to say no matter what you do you are not likely to harm an LP.

Then I pulled out a 78rpm record. These are very sensitive and I totally expected it to crack in half given the heat. It did not. I cleaned both sides holding the nozzle at a 45 degree angle parallel to the grooves. I then vacuumed and played. It looked a lot better and lost a lot of high frequency noise. Very nice!

Next I pulled out an old copy of High Infidelity by REO Speedwagon. One song I really like on the LP is Keep on Loving you. I've picked up maybe 5 copies of this LP hoping to get one that sounded good. None of them did. They are not noisy, just never sound good. I picked the particular track I like, held the steamer at a 45 degree angle, turned on the vacuum and did a real long spray one direction, then another really long spray the other direction. (This LP had been VERY well cleaned previously). Then I quickly ran the normal cleaner once and vacuumed. I put it on the table and to my surprise it sounded awesome! There are a lot of cymbals which very intricately play on the left and right side speakers throughout the song. Previously all I really noticed were cymbals which sounded kinda trashy, not real at all, somewhat noisy, annoying and a little sibilence. Now they have a very nice depth, come from nowhere and became the highlight of the song. The depth of the sound increased quite a bit and it was very alive sounding. While I perceived an increase of soundstage I listened very closely and realized the treble had just cleaned up and let the midrange take over. Depth of the soundstage is what really came alive. The LP overall (crackles and pops) may have become slighly less noisy but nothing to write home about.

My next LP was an older one. I had played it on poor players previously and it was pretty noisy. Lots of dust had been on it at some point but it had been cleaned very well. Once again I turned on the vacuum and sprayed the whole lp at a 45 degree angle, took plenty of time then re-sprayed in the opposite direction. Then I did a quick run with the standard cleaning fluid. I didn't feel this lp got any quieter at all with ticks and pops. Again the midrange leaped out at me. I could hear all sorts of things going on and again noticed the depth of the soundstage. It sounded bigger too.

Next was a few new sealed lp's. They sounded great to start with. After cleaning they had a blacker backround (which I normally notice after a normal cleaning) but I also noticed some sort of intimacy of the sound which wasn't there before. It was the sound of the recording electronics and/or recording room that I had not noticed previously.

My listening session was pretty much over at this point but I went ahead and cleaned a few more. I didn't really compare the before and after sound of the rest but the feeling of the deep soundstage was still with me. I played one which was untouched (which I always enjoy the sound of) and noticed it wasn't as deep sounding as I remembered.


We have a winner here for sure with this steam cleaning. I'm hooked. I certainly am glad I finally got around to reading this thread. Thanks JM. Also thanks to Ken S. I started taking it a little more serious after his comments.
madmax


Edit: BTW, at some point I refilled the steamer with distilled water and slightly over filled. The next record got spurts of boiling hot water sprayed all over it. It didn't hurt anything but I suggest not filling up the steamer completely to the advertised limit.

jm1

madmax wrote: »

I certainly am glad I finally got around to reading this thread. Thanks JM. Also thanks to Ken S. I started taking it a little more serious after his comments.

Thanks for the vote of confidence.