December 1998

Home Brew Records Cleaners Are False Economy

In April, 1998, SoundStage! published a column by Greg Weaver entitled "Software Treatment San Revisited: Hearing Your Records for the First Time Cheaper." It compared the Disc Doctor’s Miracle Record Cleaner (Lagniappe Chemicals, Ltd.) and brushes with a home-brew cleaner and brushes which Mr. Weaver prepared from materials available from retail consumer sources. I am replying here to express my concern about the use of such an untested product on records as well as to address some issues raised in Mr. Weaver’s article.

Most importantly, the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner has been formulated to remove record surface soils (mold release agents, finger oils, mold and fungus growth, etc.) without damaging the record matrix or leaving a residue on the playing surface. the Cleaner has been in existence for over 16 years and has a proven track record of successfully cleaning records without producing any long-term adverse effects to the treated surface. For those who don’t have a bottle of our product handy, the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner is composed of the detergents ammonium dimethylbenzenesulfonate and triethanolammonium dodecylbenzenesulfonate along with sodium ethylenediaminetetraacetate and 1-hydroxypropane in a water-based solution.

Mr. Weaver’s home-brew record cleaner has not been evaluated for long-term record stability and therefore must be viewed with suspicion, particularly in light of the ingredients selected. The modern problem has become less a matter of finding a detergent/surfactant that is capable of removing soils than it is in finding a detergent which can remove soils of interest without attacking the surface on which the soils are resting. There are many cleaning products available with warnings about damage to painted, plastic or metal surfaces or about the need to rinse well after use. Lysol Direct is an effective cleaner designed to remove heavy soils from hard bathroom surfaces such as tile or porcelain. The actual content of the cleaning portion of the Lysol product is not declared in any detail, even on MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets), and is subject to significant change without notice as the cost of raw materials changes over time. On the finger tips, the current Direct formulation has a slightly slick or slimy feel, frequently an indication of free base (hydroxide ions), which resists rinsing off in water. The product is thus a very effective, indeed aggressive, cleaner of unknown composition which will probably not rinse freely from a record surface.

Lysol says that Direct is safe for polyvinylchloride (PVC) products such as plumbing fittings and casework surfaces. The Direct mix of "grease-cutting and detergent" ingredients has not, however, been tested on the vinyl formulations used in record pressing. Vinyl record formulation is one of the black arts which has varied greatly over the history of record production. Various vinyl formulations have been targeted to provide a high degree of conformance to the metal stamper and not primarily the physical strength and chemical resistance typical of Schedule 80 PVC pipe. The record vinyl is also more vulnerable than engineering formulations used in pipe and fittings due to the inclusion of various foreign materials into the vinyl matrix. The black color typically comes from carbon black. Vinyl records have various mixtures such as metal salts of stearic acid which provide for mold release and heat resistance. Some of the records pressed during the ‘60s and ‘70s contained recycled vinyl from earlier production, which often included paper labels. These inclusions do not exactly improve the chemical resistance of the resulting records. Consequently, the very effective "grease-cutting and detergent" ingredients of Direct, particularly the free base, have to be considered a risk to such a complex record matrix. Some of the adverse effects may be immediately evident in the leaching of color from the surface. Of greater concern is the probability of long-term musical degradation due to the progressive attack on components in the vinyl matrix near the play surface by cleaner or cleaner residue. The Disc Doctor’s Cleaner, on the other hand, is known to be both an effective cleaner and to be safe for vinyl record play surfaces.

Mr. Weaver’s discussion suggests that he may have misunderstood the rationale for the disinfectant ingredients in the Lysol Direct. Mr. Weaver carefully reports the composition of the Alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chlorides, known generically as quat salts (quaternary ammonium salts). These ingredients are listed as "Active Ingredients" on the Direct label because of their ability to kill microorganisms (i.e., viruses, bacteria and fungi) according to FDA standards; they probably do not significantly contribute to the cleaning ability of the product. The Disc Doctor’s Cleaner is not, contrary to Mr. Weaver’s statement, a "disinfectant" which specifically kills microorganisms, although such microorganisms are quite effectively removed along with the soils. We had considered adding some quat salts to the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner due their ability to suppress fungus growth, but we decided against the addition because we were not able to be certain of their long-term compatibility of the quat salts with the record matrix. The growth of fungal colonies appears to be suppressed by the cleaner, in any event, due to the removal of the soils which would provide nutrients to these microorganisms.

Mr. Weaver has added several other ingredients to his home-brew cleaner which heighten our concerns due to questions of long term-record stability. One of the more obvious components of his cleaning fluid is isopropyl alcohol (approximately 11% in the final concoction). We feel that the use of this alcohol in a record-cleaning solution is problematic. Isopropyl alcohol can solubilize finger oils, etc., but it is a very poor solubilizer of the stearic acid salts in the mold release agents and of the complex material in soils and fungal colonies which provide the bulk of the soils on most record surfaces. We are also concerned that the repeated use of isopropyl alcohol on a record surface may have some adverse effects; isopropyl alcohol can cause hazing of some plastics, and the effect on record vinyl has not been studied in detail. Note that the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner uses a small amount of n-propyl alcohol (normal propyl alcohol, 1-hydroxypropane) which serves to supplement the other surfactants and which is much less aggressive toward plastics.

Another addition to the Weaver home-brew cleaner is Photo-Flo from Kodak. Photo-Flo is a wetting agent designed to make the surface of photographic materials hydrophilic (water loving) so that the developing solutions can be more effectively rinsed away and so that water spotting will be minimized on the dried media. The ingredients in Photo-Flo are not selected to solubilize soils on the treated surface and, indeed, may merely coat some soils. Photo-Flo will almost certainly leave a residue which will not evaporate. Kodak has undoubtedly tested the effect of this residue on photographic films and papers, but it is not clear what such a residue will do to record surfaces or to future fungus growth or soil adherence.

Mr. Weaver’s selection of velvet for the production of his brushes certainly gets him into the ball park. We have found, however, that there are a large number of velvet compositions made of different polymers, of different fiber lengths and different fiber densities, etc. We have selected a velvet that provides for good grove contact and for high fluid-carrying capability; the actual composition DOES matter. The adhesive used to attach the Doctor’s brush pads to the handles is also a carefully selected item. There are many modern adhesives, and a good number of these are attacked by the water-based cleaners. It is probably not a great problem if the pads just fall off, but it is a problem if the adhesive is being transferred to the record play surface. The preparation of the Vermont America "belt cleaner" handle is also worrisome. As Mr. Weaver notes, many labels, even from the more modern vinyl era, are extremely sensitive to water and cleaners (especially if there is a high amount of free base). The length of the brushes and handle is therefore important in keeping the cleaner on the play surface and away from the vulnerable paper. The Doctor’s brushes are carefully sized to the type of disc to be cleaned to minimize the risk to the label. We are quite proud of the effectiveness of the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner and brushes.

Finally, we feel that the cost of the Disc Doctor’s Cleaner is a false issue. A quart of the Cleaner and a pair of brushes (with extra pads) currently costs about $84. These materials will clean more than 600 LPs, so the cost works out to about $0.14 per disc for a thorough cleaning with a product that has a 16-year track record for effectiveness and safety. Mr. Weaver’s concoction will certainly save a few dollars in the short run, particularly if the shopping and assembly time are ignored, but it will place the long-term survival of the cleaned records at risk. In summary, we think that Mr. Weaver’s concoction and brushes are an exercise in false economy.

...end

• Audio Online Main Page