![[The Talking Machine Forum - For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings]](/styles/we_universal/theme/images/the_talking_machine_forum.png)
Hi Mike -- Since I was the one banging on most in this thread about clean records, I'll answer that. In my opinion, the most important cleaning is the one that I do when I first get the record. That's when a record whose hygienic history isn't known gets a fresh start, so to speak. Someone in the thread (was it Larry?) pointed out that people didn't obsess about keeping these records clean when they were new. That's true, and it's the problem. Add to that seventy or eighty years of varying storage conditions in basements, attics, and barns, often in uncovered boxes, and it's almost inevitable that some very fine, hard grit is going to find a place in a record's groove. This was brought home to me with some force recently when I received the Harmony record (which I mentioned in another thread) from an eBay seller with years of experience. He had apparently play-graded it and recommended it in the listing as "a great player". But when I got it, it was unusually filthy, with a reddish dust embedded in the grooves that suggested to me that it had been stored, uncovered, in an old brick basement. I know that dust well, as my own 125-year-old house has a basement that, over time, deposits a thing film of brick dust on anything neglected long down there....how often do you wash your records after the initial cleaning, and do you brush them after each play with a record brush?
I cleaned that record well, in a half-dozen passes, and by the time I was done I was nearly astonished by how much dirt was left on the cloth I'd used. And I was sorry that the seller hadn't taken the time to clean it before playing it, because that kind of hard, gritty dirt, when a needle passes over it, is going to scuff up the interior of the groove and degrade performance. And this particular record has sustained the kind of damage that increases distortion and background noise tremendously. It looks better now that it's clean, but while it looks comparable to my other Harmony records, it plays more poorly than any of them. Every time I play it I'll hear the dirt that isn't there anymore. This was a fairly radical case of damage that could easily have been prevented.
So, one very thorough cleaning to start. After that I rarely have to clean a record unless it's really showing dust. Though I scoffed at first at the idea that one rag is better than another, I've been convinced by my friend Jeff (Woonetophone on the forum) to use micro-fiber cloths, the kind you can buy in a bundle at the auto-parts store, for cleaning records. They're really very good on records. I also use a "secret" concoction that Jeff dreamed up for cleaning records that's mostly water, combined with what he tells me is a common household cleaning agent, but apparently not dish soap. I think a mild dilution of dish soap in water, sprayed onto the cloth, works very well, but Jeff's solution is absolutely great, leaving records with a squeaky-clean feel to them. I keep telling him he should be selling it.
My method is to take a micro-fiber cloth, fold it into halves or thirds, and sort of roll it up until it's about the size and shape of one of the old oblong velvet record brushes. I spray the cleaning solution onto the cloth; Jeff sprays it directly onto the record -- we disagree on that little detail, because I think that a damp cloth gives more uniform coverage to the groove. But either way will work. I put the record on a flat surface with something protective (usually just paper) under it, and scrub, going with the groove, rolling the cloth to an unused portion and repeating the process as many times as it takes to get the cloth to show no stain on the last go-round. Other people use different pet methods, including washing records under running water and drying them in a dish drainer, but the above is what really works well for me.
Uncle Vanya's right (as per usual) about the importance of replacing hardened gaskets and flanges. A year ago, having two reproducers that were performing very well without rebuilding, I asked the forum whether there was really any need to rebuild them -- http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... be+rebuilt -- and I was persuaded as to the necessity of doing so. Though I never have rebuilt the Columbia soundbox, I did rebuild every other one in the house, and I'm glad I did. I can't say that the No. 2 that I was so pleased with in its un-rebuilt state sounds any better to me, but it produces virtually no black dust, depending of course on the condition of the record. Sean made what I felt was the most persuasive point:
He's written elsewhere, and others have mentioned it too, that the balance of those leetle springs under what I still (ignorantly, I guess -- what is the correct term?) call the torsion bar, are of major importance when fine-tuning a reproducer, so I've learned to pay special attention to those, too.You're risking record damage otherwise whether you actually see it or not. To me, it isn't worth the risk of damaging my records when for a few bucks in materials and a little time, you can minimize that risk.
Edited to add: WOW! You took your pictures with a camera phone and a jeweler's loupe? I seriously had thought hmmm...somebody has a nice macro lens! Great job!
