I am grateful to viewer ‘John S’ who has raised questions about which product to use on potentiometers - DeOxit D-Series (e.g. D5) or DeOxit F-series (e.g. F5). He also raised issues about the safety of these products (i.e. whether or not they damaged pots). I have now had extensive further discussions with the manufacturers and contained in this article are, I hope, the answers to these questions. Hopefully this one can now be ‘put to bed’. Here is a summary of the questions and concerns: 1. D5 lists many uses on the side of the can but it does not list ‘potentiometers’. The implication is that this product should not be used on potentiometers. 2. F5 specifically mentions potentiometers on the can. The implication is that only this (DeOxit) product should be used on potentiometers. 3. D5 contains mineral spirits. These are harmful to carbon tracks. F5 does not contain mineral spirits. The implication is that here is more proof that this is the one to use for potentiometers. All three of these implications are false. Summary TL/DR • Neither D5 or F5 are harmful to carbon track potentiometers. • Both D5 and F5 use mineral spirits as a flushing agent, in exactly the same proportions, i.e. 75% • D5 will work on all carbon track potentiometers regardless of if the problem is surface contamination or oxidisation of the metal wiper. • F5 was formulated for conductive plastic faders/pots. The lubrication is important in these components. F5 will not help with oxidized metal parts as it contains no deoxidization chemical. • In the latest packaging, DeOxit D5 has ‘potentiometers’ on the list of uses on the side of the can. Here is the full explanation. Since the earliest days of electronics the search has been on for a solvent which would clean switch contacts, potentiometers and suchlike. For decades the ‘go to’ solution was Freon. It flushed away contaminants and evaporated rapidly. However, as we now know Freon is very environmentally damaging and is banned in most countries. The search was then on to find an alternative. For some time MEK (Methyl Ethyl Ketone) was used as an organic solvent but this is still fairly damaging and attacks many plastics. Mineral spirits were then used as the ‘least worst’ option (environmentally). There are many different formulations and strength of ‘mineral spirits’ - it is a catch-all term. DeOxit D5 uses mineral spirits as the flushing agent. A ‘flushing agent’ is the chemical which washes away surface contaminants mostly via mechanical action. DeOxit D5 uses one of the milder formulations and strengths of OMS (Odourless Mineral Spirits). The sole purpose of the mineral spirits in D-Series products is to flush (wash) away surface contaminants. Despite ongoing myths to the contrary, mineral spirits do not attack or ‘eat’ carbon. In addition to the mineral spirit flushing agent, D-Series products also contains an anti-oxidisation formulation, the effect of which will now be explained. A potentiometer consists of two surfaces in contact with each other. Commonly this is a metal ‘wiper’ and a carbon track. The mineral spirits in D-Series will wash away surface contaminants (dust, grease, dirt etc.). Many other solvent sprays will do the same of course, even alcohol will do this. but sometimes the metal wiper contact is oxidised. In this case no amount of solvent spray will improve the potentiometer. The deoxidisation chemicals in all D-Series sprays will remove the oxidation from the metal surfaces. It is this dual action which makes it so effective on potentiometers. Aside: I have many times tried isopropyl alcohol and other solvent sprays on pots. It seems to work about 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time it does not work. If I then use D5 on the same pot, it is completely fixed. In these instances, I believe the metal contact was oxidised and required the deoxidisation chemicals in D5 to cure it - alcohol and many other sprays have no effect on oxidisation. There are 3 products in the D-Series. Here is what each one does. 1. DeOxit D5 - as described above. A mineral spirits ‘flush’ to remove contaminants. Then a powerful deoxidiser to remove oxidation from the metal wiper. Downside - you can overspray and as it doesn’t evaporate it needs mopping up. 2. DeOxit DN5 - if you don’t need a flushing action this product delivers the deoxidiser via a fast evaporation solvent. Good for more precise delivery of the deoxidation element and no residual liquid. 3. DeOxit D100S This is 100% deoxidation product with no solvent delivery chemical. FADER F5 Product This product was specially formulated for linear conductive plastic film slider potentiometers. E.g. Faders on mixing desks. It contains the same percentage mineral spirits (75%) as D5. It also has a lubricant to aid fader travel. This product can also be used on potentiometers. However, if the potentiometer is faulty due to metal oxidisation on the wiper, then a better product would be the D-series (e.g. D5). Very Old/Valuable Potentiometers. With very old and worn potentiometers it might not be advisable to use any spray with a flushing action as the mechanical action of this may under rare circumstances further loosen any material, Instead use DN5 for accurate delivery. Summary TL/DR • Neither D5 or F5 are harmful to carbon track potentiometers. • Both D5 and F5 use mineral spirits as a flushing agent, in exactly the same proportions, i.e. 75% • D5 will work on all carbon track potentiometers regardless of if the problem is surface contamination or oxidisation of the metal wiper. • F5 was formulated for conductive plastic faders/pots. The lubrication is important in these components. F5 will not help with oxidized metal parts as it contains no deoxidization chemical. • In the latest packaging, DeOxit D5 has ‘potentiometers’ on the list of uses. I hope this provides a full explanation and draws a line under this topic.
I just ordered a can of Dioxit for a rebuild that I have in progress. My amp tech also recommended it, but it's kind of speedy, so I ended up buying a can of WD40 contact cleaner. Since then, I've heard a few people explain that the product differentiator is the deoxidation agents in D5... Obviously, I want to keep my OEM pots on my audio equipment, and vintage amps. To be honest, I was searching for clarity on this exact topic. Thank you for digging into this. Cheers
@@JeremiahLGreat I'm glad you enjoyed it. To be fair its only about 1 in 10 pots which have an oxidisation problem. That's why the usual electrical contact cleaner solvent works 90% of the time.
Hello Stuart. Fist off it is a true pleasurer to see a gentle perform a non-bias analytical analysis. That is how we learn. Some do and some don't. I have been using and recommending Caig products for 50+ years. No comparison to other products. I did have an issue in the 90's. I am a retired Fender Amp Engineer/Tech and when Fender switched to plastic wiper hubs in the 90's it was a service nightmare ONE time for me. I had a warrantee claim on a 32 channel mixer. Well it had the sticky spilled drink issue so it set out to pull the PC mounted pot boards to start the cleaning process. Each PC board contains 8 channels. All the knobs, nuts and washers off to gain access for service. Painful at best. All cleaned with the staple at the time DN5. After completion the mixer worked great. I let it sit over night to "dry out" for final testing. Well the next day I went back and several of the pot knobs were laying over to the side. They had all become disconnected. At disassembly inspection all the plastic wiper hubs had softened to different degrees!!! A very bad feeling. I disassembled one and called Caig. As plastic use was just new they asked me the composition of the material. No knowing I call in to my Fender designers. Panic set in when I told the Caig informed me that DN5 attacks acrylics or styrene, because it contained Genetron 141B as a solvent. Resolution: D5S. You will see on the can. Safe for plastics. DN5 now has a warning. As for Fender, they honor all claims and paid parts and labor. Warnings were issued to all service centers. Two reputable companies! AND YES Deoxit does NOT dissolve carbon. It washes away loose carbon molecules and other "Crude" causing scratchy pots. I put it on all new build also for prevention to provide long term service free use. Now concentrated nitric acid can oxidize and dissolve elemental carbon at high temperatures over an extended exposure timeframe. It is used to make explosives and it "eats" skin also. Thanks again, Stuart it was a pleasurer! Ric
Great story thanks so much for sharing it. I don't take on mixers because it's a nightmare having to take off 140 or more pot nuts etc! Did you ever work on the Bluesbreaker 15? See my video on that!
Most excellent. Some of the most frustrating questions to find an answer to are ones about Deoxit D5. Everyone is an certified expert based on doing no research whatsoever. I appreciate your experiments, as I have heard these claims, and have used D5 for 30+ years on potentiometers with never an issue. New subscriber and looking forward to learning more. Well done! 👍
Excellent!! Intelligent, articulate, interested and wrapped up well in humility and common sense. A sense that seems to be not so common. You sir are what we need more of in this world!
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” I usually just shake my head and walk away. Thank you for your patience and dedicated research. Have an awesome day 🙂
Amateur Amp tech, auto mechanic. I have been using Deoxit for years,never an issue. I have also used mineral spirits to clean car parts , it cleans and loosens carbon put it doesn’t dissolve carbon. That’s just my experience over the last 40 years.
Thanks for this video. I had also heard these rumours and are pleased to see them dispelled as I am a D5 fan. We have some problematic input A/B switches on a mixer and while eventually the problem returns, it takes over a year instead of a month or two with another well-known switch cleaner. I also used D5 on the Input pots of two tape machines that were about 38 and 48 years old, the latter being an Akai 4000DS that I had as a teenager in 75. Both machines’ line input pots were almost laughably noisy but seemed to be as good as new after spraying with Deoxit D5. I spray, then waggle the pot a fair bit, then spray again to wash any debris away and this seems to work well.
I've used D5 for many, many years, on potentiometers, with no issues. I have, however, started using F5, just because it's formulated for them. Great video!
Just seen this video. Interesting points made by many. I don't normally comment, but couldn't resist, so apologies for the length of this. I am 72 and have been an electronics technician and repairer, mainly of audio equipment, since I was 13. During this time I have used lots of cleaners. Servisol used to be everyone's go-to product, and generally did a good job. However, I once had a good quality 12 channel mixer in for repair. It had several noisy pots. I can't remember the make of the mixer or the pot manufacturer, but foolishly as well as spraying the noisy pots with Servisol, I gave all the pots a spray for good measure. The mixer worked a treat and I sent it out into the world. About a week later, it came back full of faults, way more than it had originally. To my horror, I discovered that the metal wipers in the pots were held in place by tiny plastic pips, and the Servisol had destroyed all of them! I had to replace all the pots at my cost. After that I stopped using Servisol and went on to use a Phillips switch cleaner which was fantastic in every way. The Philips became unavailable, and I went over to Ambersil, which seemed OK. In my experience, most fader and rotary pot noise originates from oxidation of the metals, not the carbon tracks, particularly the deposited wiper track in faders such as ALPS etc., so I expect that the DeOxit will be very effective. So the moral is, shit can happen when squirting chemicals into things, so if it is something rare and valuable, strip the control down if possible.
Thank you so much for making this video. I fell for this myth and was only using the deoxit fader spray for pots and the d5 for contacts. I restored a old scope last week and it was a pain to keep switching the cans. At one point I forgot to switch back and sprayed a pot with D5 and immediately panicked. True statement. Lol. Thanks again!!
I'm the person he's referring to in the video. Answer me this then. DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots. DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason. DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here. Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders? Where is the logic in that?
I just watched a video on another tech channel about how Deoxit D5 damages pots. He never actually showed the damage on a pot that he was servicing. He completely disassembled the pot, but failed to demonstrate any damage. He said the pot was gunked up or something. Caig is correct and so are you Stuart. I need to see actual proven evidence of damage to electronic controls caused by Deoxit D5 cleaner before I will believe it. So, as I stated in my earlier comment, I'm gonna buy me some Deoxit D5 and safely clean my pots! Thanks again Stuart. Cheers.
Stuart, when I was only a kid, my dear old Dad gave me one of the best pieces of advice that I have ever received in my life, when he said, “Son, never ever, argue with ..a MUG”..! And could I humbly suggest that you, should do yourself a big favour, from this moment forward, and also, always from now on, remember that same, great ‘Fatherly’ piece of advice, because life is too short, to waste even a moment of it, arguing, with ..idiots. 😉👍
Your dad was/is a wise man! One problem with all social media inc UA-cam is that people can pretty much write what they want and press SEND with no consequences. Imagine if I was saying anything remotely contentious, e.g. a political view etc.! I heard of one guy who had to close down a popular KNITTING forum because it became a sewer of hatred eventually resulting in death threats to him and his family. That's knitting ffs!! (For your interest, it kicked off because some woke idiot accused him of 'cultural appropriation' over some knitting design or other. The carzy fool actually tried to defend himself....
Stuart, I have a can of CAIG DeoxIT D5 part no. D5S-6 with the L-M-H adjustable spray from the late 1990's and plain as day it says it CAN be used for potentiometers. I reached out to CAIG and they swear the current formulation works "identically" to the can I have - the only changes made is a reduction in the red dye used and a lower VOC propellent.
I like this video... I think soaking those thick pieces of carbon is definitely not the same as what you would see in a potentiometer inside older audio gear. I do like the test with spraying several pots with different cleaners to see if it will eat away any carbon. Then, run a resistance test to see how they respond. The best practices, I believe, is to take the potentiometers apart and thoroughly clean and lube them. I'm no expert by any means. Your page has great content, and I'm here for it! 🙏
Thanks Johnson, Yes I'll release that video soon of the multi test. Unfortunately the typical repair bill for a guitar amplifier is about £30-£50 so taking even one apart would be completely out of the question. It's not needed anyway (in guitar amps) as a quick spray of cleaner works wonders! Very vaouable and super antique gear then yes, if you have tht time, you could take the pots apart. All the best
The fact that his test sheet had no starting point resistance readings kind of indicates that experimental train has already left the station. (No surprise. This guy is an idiot.)
I avoid using ANY organic solvents on potentiometers. (Still thanks for your tests.) The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away. While I have successfully cleaned some pots with Isopropanol (e.g. a Casio MT-70 which is delicate to dismantle for access), e.g. slide pots in 1980th Bontempi keyboards react extremely sensitive on such chemicals. Thus I recommend to clean only with distilled water and a cotton swab (and dry it well) if you can desolder and open it (many slide pot tracks can be accessed without). Already the DeOxit statement "Mineral oil will not damage metals, plastics and carbon" is debunked, because mineral oil (e.g. household "machine oil") does make Bakelite (which by definition is a "plastic") brittle and crumble apart like charcoal, which is e.g. an infamous problem with spilled machine oil on Hammond organ parts. And the statement "If they use one of our sprays with a solvent, if the carbon has been scratched or damaged, the solvent will flush it off the surface." means that it does remove unbonded carbon particles (like a pencil streak), but poorly made old pot tracks are more like a pencil streak than a solid coal block. Therefore there is also the warning not to clean potentiometers in ultrasonic cleaners. Modern pots may be chemically and mechanically robust (like carbon brushes for strong motors) and even certified with a guarantee to survive PCB cleaning solvents used in factories. But ancient potentiometers are a different cup of pee. If the track is of nitro or spirit laquer, then Rest In Pieces. By the way, I have successfully repaired broken carbon tracks with conductive carbon paint based on such lacquers, those of course are not resistant to solvents either. Also a soft pencil can be used to patch a damaged carbon track, which isn't particularly stable either. And the reason that in the test with DeOxit the knob rotates much easier is because the shaft bearing/sleeve intentionally contains a viscous grease (may be to stop dust and make it feel more solid) that likely got washed away. That grease tends to solidify/form resin over time which makes the knob hard to turn.
I just posted a comment wondering about the use of various chemicals like isopropyl alcohol or CRC QD Electronic Cleaner or DeOxit for cleaning up old ham radios. You seem to have an excellent background in the chemistry of such things so your opinion would mean a lot if you would like to respond.
@@STBRetired1 It is just personal experience. I collect music keyboards and soundtoys, and saw much plastic and rubber parts ruined by previous owners or wrong construction (e.g. mains cable plasticizer turning Antonelli keyboard cases locally into black tar). Oil makes for 4 to 6 years things better and then only worse. Some parts (VCR tape drives etc.) need oil, but you need to know which type (silicone is an educated best guess) to prevent it from decomposing. Some professionals repairmen may consider potentiometers disposable parts those are to be replaced with a new one anyway if substances do long term damage. But e.g. in tube radios potentiometers were the ASIC of 1950/60th - often containing several concentric carbon tracks with 4 intermediate taps for loudness filters, rotary end switch or push/pull switch combination and 2 or 3 concentric knobs. Such parts are impossible to buy anywhere and even a nightmare to repair because everything is riveted together, contains brittle bakelite (that crumbles apart by oil!) or is decomposing by moisture induced zinc plague. So stay away with anything oily or unknown solvents when you don't exactly know what you are doing.
Wow. What a breath of fresh air. I've been an Electrical Engineer for over 45 years, and I've actively avoided online tech-related content (even since the old BBS days) specifically for the reasons you alluded to. It's mostly populated by anonymous, clueless hobbyists with fragile egos who feel no responsibility to provide fact-based information. Feelings and baseless opinions are fine. However, in the engineering world, Step 1 with any product you're considering using is to contact the manufacturer to make sure it meets your specifications. And when you mentioned that you'd actually contacted the manufacturer my jaw dropped. Wonderful. And the long document in the video notes detailing the manufacturer's response was perfect. And to actually perform your own tests is often Step 2 in the real world, but most online experts can't even comprehend doing something so logical. Sadly, technology is becoming nothing more than "I saw a video (or asked AI), and now I'm an expert".
Thanks very much. Yes a modern day skill we're all trying to learn is to navigate the internet looking for the solid onfo we need, and weed out the acres of garbage! It's actually REALLY difficult!
Exactly the experience described in the letter: I used DeOxit D5 on a pot that was in truly bad shape, and the cleaning experience 'made it still worse'. The DeOxit fluid simply washed out the remnants of the already flaked-out track. Plain water or even forced air would have done exactly the same thing. Ironically, if I'd used D5 on that pot years ago, the lubrication *would have prevented the wiper from scraping up a dried-out track*. I can see that an inexperienced tech would blame the final, complete failure, on the application of DeOxit, but this is simply shooting the messenger. It washed out the remaining, floating particles of carbon. TLDR: use DeOxit before the track has dried out and starts to flake.
I'm not a chemist, I'm a mechanic. We have found that odorless mineral spirits cleans most everything very well, with no damage to hands, or the things you are cleaning, unlike other cleaners. That being said, I've always been told that cleaning with Deoxit you need to be careful not to use too much or it will penetrate the material that holds the contacts. That would be of course, on band switches and that sort of thing. In fact I didn't know that it came in a spray, always bought a little bottle and used long Q-tips that I buy to clean guns with. So I was wondering when someone said they cleaned the pots with Deoxit how they did that. I was thinking the part of the pot that holds the coil is the same phenolic material as on a band switch? Very interested in your demonstration. Thank you.
Hi Donovan I'm talking about pots only here, nothing else. So, with pots you just spray it in through the hole where the contacts emerge, job done. I firmly believe it is an urban myth that DeOxit causes any damage. Millions upon million of applications and virtually zero problems. I've never seen a shred of actual evidence for pot damage. Until I see some evidence I do not believe an issue exists. All the best
Well done! For anyone that doesn't know, Caig actually linked to this video on their D-series page, and there's also thank you note to Stuart. That's how I got here. I'm pretty sure that most potentiometers use carbon in the form of graphite, which is only soluble in molten nickel (2651 °F), chlorosulfonic acid and chromic acid. Carbon has many allotropes and graphite is the most stable form. Pro tip: Don't clean pots with molten nickel.
The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (if ancient, in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away.
Thank you. Ive seen numerous videos about how D5 destroys pots and couldn't believe it either. I know a few electronics techs that have used it forever and recommend it above all else so i bought a bottle of the d100 with the needle tip. The one thing that is common in all the videos of the anti d series deoxit vids is that no one has done any experiment even remotely like yours. The proof to me is right there. Thanks for an informative video!
Thanks for your thorough explanation of Deoxit D5 negatively effecting guitar potentiometers. You were clear and honest. Dan from U.S.A./ lifetime guitarist. 👍
I haven’t heard deoxit “dissolve” carbon but I have heard not to use it on tube/valve pin sockets because it can gum them up but use IPA on those instead. My source is Lyle Caldwell from Psionic Audio. I’ve used it on pots w/o a problem.❤
Ah ok thanks. I do use DeOxit on the valve bases because it's the only one which has this deoxidisastion chemical and they do tend to get oxidised. Hopefully I'm not causing an issue!
I've been using D5 on pots for years and never had one fail from a chemically ruined carbon trace. I have however watched a couple of videos from users claiming the opposite. I have a Peavey back stage amp on the bench with a couple of noisy pots and am about to use D5. I'll let you know if I ruin the pot. I would have done an ohmeter test on that pot before taking it apart but that's just me.
The question may be whether there's any signficant difference and benefit in the residual lubrication / protection from F5 rather than whether there's damage from initial cleaning. For example, would a pot/fader wear out sooner MECHANICALLY if it were left with just D5's lubrication versus F5. (BTW: I think your shirts may be a demonstration of the residual lubrication). Also, if we assume that dirt likes to mix with lubricants - more lubricant may not be better in the long run if it's a dirty environment. Apparently, the premise is that D5 cleans alot and lubes a little while F5 cleans a little and lubes alot. Which I think is why I've seen quite a few folks doing their initial cleaning with D5 and following up with just a little squirt of F5 as a chaser. This is similar to the approach I've seen of using CRC QD contact cleaner for the dirty work and following it up with a squirt of CRC 2-26 multi-purpose lubricant. According to CAIG - D5 and F5 both contain 75% odorless mineral spirits and 20% propellant. Any difference is in the unspecified content of the remaing 5% "active ingredient". From the CAIG website D-series products "Removes oxidation & corrosion", "Lubricates & seals connections", and have "20% deoxidizing action". Whereas F5, they state "For reference, DeoxIT® Fader F-Series has approximately 1% cleaning action." and is advertised as something that "replenishes lubrication lost on surfaces that have been cleaned with solvents or other cleaning solutions." I think an interesting pseudo-scientific test would be to apply equal amounts of D5 and F5 to test surfaces, letting them evaporate, and seeing how much residue is left behind.
When I became a certified electronic technician in 1990, my best friend worked for Caig Laboratories and he gave me a kit of Cramolin cleaner and lube. It worked great. When they developed DeOxit I started using that on my pots and contacts and never had one problem with it. I guess I am crazy ape bonkers for taking that risk.😂🤣😂🤣
This reminds me of something I have experienced myself. I used to clean computer parts, circuit boards etc. with water and dishsoap, people would say I'm an idiot for doing so as the water would surely destroy the electronics.. This is not at all true of course, I have actually revived a graphics card this way which is still working perfectly to this day, this was maybe 2 years ago. As long as there is no power provided to the board and the caps are depleted, the water won't damage anything. Just make sure to rinse all the soap off and blow it dry with an air compressor or something like that and it will be just fine.
Hi Charles, yes thats a very good analogy! I have also dunked badly contaminated circuit board in a hot bath of soapy water and got in there with the nail brush! No problems whatsoever!
I have as well; *but soapy water isn't oil*, and your technique doesn't leave any residue behind. Deoxit does leave a residue, a greasy residue, which in some cases is highly inappropriate.
I 'm waiting to get some DeOxit D5, and soon I will be cleaning my Pots on my 30 year Fender Amp. I was hesitant to give it a try for fear of damaging my baby. Thank you for your informational video about potentiometers and DeOxit.
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 It worked great! It solved all my issues including: volume, scratchy pots, no reverb, and no treble adjustment. It seems I have a brand new amp again! Thank you so much again!
@@saint_redbull I'm the person stuart is talking about in this video. Why does the company make TWO different products where one states specifically that it is to be used for pots and faders (F5) vs the other one that doesn't state that it is to be used for pots and faders? Stuart completely misrepresented what I states. It's unfortunate that he's so persistent in his mindset. He can't expand or learn being that way. DeoxIT-D5 cost more, contains mineral spirits (which over time will erode the physical integrity of the carbon tract), and doesn't EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why. DeoxIT-F5 cost less, contains NO mineral Spirits, and DOES EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why. If those two products were the same, then why would the company make one where it says something very different from the other? They're formulated differently. Why would they be formulated differently?
@@johnsuggs7828 It is a good question as to why they make TWO different products. I don't know. I was skeptical myself, and I tried to do some research myself which led me here. I just want something that works. It might be a matter of preference, and I'm sure it is up for debate, like what kind of lubricant should you use on your garage door: silicone or white lithium(side note: don't forget to grease your spring).
@@saint_redbull the F5 is what you're supposed to use on faders and pots. I have both. The F5 states it rught under the name. People like Stuart use it because they see everyone else using it. The company made them different with different formulations for a reason
I used the d/5 red can on my volume pot an my audio source pots an they seem to work amazing on my old vintage Kenwood KR-4600 stereo amplifier/receiver making static disappear an source switch control better contact ,I used electronic spray cleaner with short lived results. Thank you for this video!!!!
At least we can put that one rest!! Phew!!! Thank you Stuart for your in depth experimenting! You have gone to great lengths to support your facts and debunk this myth!!!
I've found some other videos about experience with D5 gumming up or damaging pots and they may have some good points. I'm going to stick with F5 and use the D5 for metal contacts, and in the case of tube sockets, CLEAN it off afterwards because it leaves the lubricant behind that we don't want around high voltage. I don't think your experiments are totally conclusive. Soaking for 24 hours is not the same as long-term exposure, and also, maybe it doesn't eat pure carbon, but the carbon is fixed to the substrate somehow, maybe that aspect could be damaged? Maybe on some pots and not others? Also, when it comes to corrosion and possibly other reactions, having voltage applied changes the deal significantly, so the pot experiment has value, but isn't one-to-one with the application. That said, I do enjoy your videos immensely and have learned a great deal from you, thanks! EDIT: I found the discussion on the "embalmed pot" video and I had to go to the shop and look. BOTH my cans of D5, one bought in 1992, and the other within the last year, say to use on potentiometers.
One thing it DOES tend to do is dissolve the grease on the shaft of potentiometers. And this can cause the pot to feel less smooth and “damped”. So I suggest putting only a VERY small amount on the wiper. He even mentioned this at 14:50. The nice smooth feel you get from the original grease on the shaft is now gone. The shaft can even develop a “grinding” type feel from the loss of grease. So, that’s not good at all. Use the stuff in moderation. Drip a very small bit in the pot on the wiper, but don’t soak or saturate the pot.
If you turn the pot all the way to the end, you can usually drop a small amount right onto the sliding contact. So for pots, I prefer putting the Deoxit into a dropper.
I was (I’m) on the cleaner rabbit hole since I only have vintage audio equipment. But internet experts, are very vocal the ones in forums are much worse. I did the water and electronics, that drove them nuts. To make sure they went nuts I added a sonic cleaner. I tested full boards left them on the cleaner forever then tested each component no change what so ever. Anyway great channel. The dunning - Kruger effect is so prevalent nowadays, that is not worth the fight. Again great video and sub. 🎉
Yes the DK effect is very real (I've probably been guilty myself in my younger days!). YEs on water! I once accidentaly dropped a full can of coke into an amp chassis (don't ask!). I immediately filled my bath with warm water, dunked it in, swished it around. Left to dry for 24 hours. Perfect.
Thanks for your myth busting efforts. The pots on my vintage Pioneer SX-770 receiver (1971) and other electronics devices I own are popping and scratching, so I am looking to buy some Deoxit D5 to clean them. Then I remembered some tech on UA-cam making the same claim about D5 as your commenter did. So I am looking around for some definitive answers. You thoroughly and unequivocally busted that myth. I'm looking forward to seeing the results of your pot cleaning experiment. Thanks again Stuart. Now I can go ahead and buy the stuff. Thanks for your honesty. Btw, I subbed and liked.
Bad capacitors that leak even just a few millivolts of DC onto the volume and tone controls is a very common problem on old Pioneer recievers (I've worked on a hundred+ of these over the years). Spraying the pots may seem to cure the problem for a few months or a year but the noise comes back eventually as the potentiometer starts to oxidize a little bit internally again (the oxides that form on the metal parts act like semiconductor diodes, adding distortion to AC audio signals). You should measure for DC voltage with a sensitive digital multimeter at all the terminals of the tone and volume control pots. If there's any DC on them, change out the small value caps on the tone control board, typically between 1 and 10 mocrofarad (especially any orange caps and any bead-like tantalum caps). Modern electrolytic caps from well known makers such as Panasonic usually have such ridiculously low eternal leakag that they can be used anywhere on the tone control board, including as replacements for tantalum caps,, but if I'm replacing caps of 1 microfarad or less I will use film caps Instead of electrolytics. Unfortunately, occasionally one also encounters old transistors with black oxidized leads that can cause sputtering noises and static....a burst of freeze spray will often help identify those.
Brilliant, thanks for your effort. Be careful with just pure alcohol on pots as it has zero lubricants which "could" lead to more wear between the wiper and the carbon track. (Maybe another video for you, 😁). As you noticed when DeOxit dries it does leave a little film of lubricant behind. Of course their Fader product includes a higher percentage of lubricant for high use faders.
Any sort of cleaning product is going to remove a bit of material..... it's like when you polish your car's paint. My assumption is that the VERY noisy pot already has cracked/damaged tracks. I've had noisy pots that the cleaner of choice WILL WORK......and some it won't.
Hi. Interesting on your pot experience. I find that (e.g. DeOxit) sorts it 99% of the time. But yes after many years of use the track can become too worn to save and a new pot is needed.
Nice work. I'll admit I've been sceptical of contact cleaner after watching some other UA-cam techs... the faulty assumption or logical misstep I can now clearly see is that if your carbon tracks are already cracking/delaminating then off course a high velocity solvent spray can carry them off, making the pot seem "more broken" 🤦
The statement "If they use one of our sprays with a solvent, if the carbon has been scratched or damaged, the solvent will flush it off the surface." means that it does remove unbonded carbon particles (like a pencil streak), but poorly made old pot tracks are more like a pencil streak than a solid coal block. Therefore there is also the warning not to clean potentiometers in ultrasonic cleaners.
Thanks for the video, I've heard this rumor also. I tried this measuring the pots resistance, before, after and over time. The only thing that seemed to happen is the pot got cleaned up, the overall resistance stayed the same. There's a video from Caig showing cleaning pots with D5, I think it's nonsense.
I was reading up on this online as my guitar amp has some crackly pots I need to sort out (so now UA-cam is bunging me videos about it). I read a post on a forum which said what it will do, beside cleaning the pot up, is strip out the lubricant inside it so the contact will in time wear the carbon track out. That does make sense to me, and might be a worry on a guitar, where I use the volume and tone controls a lot, but I don't think it would do much to my amp as I've found the tone I like and - with the exception of the 'drive' pot - I leave 'em where they are!
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 Well, I did use good old Servisol on my guitar pots for years, with no ill effects I've been aware of! I guess I'm just getting more cautious with old age approaching. 😄
Hi ..a very interesting video,thank you...Befor the deoxit came along l always for years used Superservisol 10...its not as popular these days but has been great..it is of course a proper pot cleaner.cheers
Thanks Peter. My view is that pretty much any solvent 'switch cleaner' or even alcohol will clean 95% of pots because all it's doing is flsuhing away gunk. However, I kept finding the odd pot which simply would not respond. I've since discovered that it's because the metal wiper is oxidised. No amount of cleaner will fix this. This is where D5 scores because it will deoxidise the wiper.
I've always used Servisol cleaner on pots and never had a problem. I didn't know that DeOxit was available here. i do know that there appears to be techs in the US won't use it based on what you say, including some with UA-cam channels and swear by pure alcohol. Thanks for posting this.
I’ve never had issues with D5. I stopped using it because of the fold out straw. I use a much cheaper generic type. It smells the same as D5. I do keep a a small can of the fader lube and I use it after cleaning. It has the regular straw.
Hi David You have to be a bit cautious with the term 'mineral spirit' as it's a huge catch-all term. DeOxit uses a very mild formulation of m.s. and I haven't heard of any problems with plastics. I guess if you have something REALLY old and REALLY valuable the precautionary principle woould apply and you should use plain alcohol.
Great video Stuart, I love the methodical approach to debunking the myth. One thing though, It absolutely grinds my gears when I see someone tighten nuts with an adjustable spanner, a cheap socket set is far kinder and secure to jack and pot nuts then an adjustable. Just saying! Keep up the good work, I've learned loads of this channel.
Yep I've had that before. However I'm pretty good with it And know what I'm doing. It works for 99% of the time without issue and saves me hunting for the correct spanner. I agree about adjustables for TIGHT bolts which require force. Most of the time I use this it's not far from finger tight. Roght, I'm just off the scratch my nails down a blackboard to annoy you even further! :)
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 Perfect. There's nothing worse then someone tightening up screws and nuts to within an inch of thier lives. Another pet hate of mine 😀
My pyramid 52kx power supply was under 5 ft of water for 12 hours during a flood. Power washed. Sprayed with contact cleaner and dried with forced air. No issues since 2016...
Thanks Stuart. Good information. Its a tricky subject as I've watched xraytony's video on deoxit d5 who does have different experiences. Your potentiometer experiment will be enlightening, and will shed some light on the long term effects. Thanks for the content! Look forward to some more repair videos very soon. Do you repair pedals too? Would be good to see some videos on that. Ryan
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 *Although your focus is carbon deposited on substrate pots, if you wouldn't mind, please address correct lubrication of '60s-70s era, 1" WW pots. Thank you and Cheers!*
Hi. I have virtually zero experience of those I'm afraid. 99%+ of everything I do is carbon track. DeOxit do a good product called F5 which has some lubricant in it. That might do the trick. All the best.
You are talking sense. They are far too many so called experts on the web to day with no experience or knowledge giving advice that could prove be dangerous and cause serious harm. I do enjoy your chanell. I do have a Ham Radio licence for over 19:10 forty years and I have being building RF amplifiers and guitar amplifier, both value and solid state. With the valles a couple of 4CX255B and a HT line of a couple of KV mistake can be beyond interested. A little knowledge can be dangerous. Far too many experts around to day on the net.
Thanks for taking on this subject, which seems like something that may never go away, as people often have emotional attachments to their inaccurate ideas. If you have the time, it might be helpful to contact potentiometer manufacturers like CRL, Alps, Bournes, etc. and get their recommendations for cleaning their products. I assume they have people who look into these things.
DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots. DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason. DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here. Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders? Where is the logic in that?
STUART, I have heard that DeOxit does damage pots, switches, etc because it has a coating and will cause intermittent failures over time because of the coating. I remember at one of my jobs this repair tech used the DeOxit GOLD conditioner and over time it ruined all the relay contact switches, selector switches and pots. So I think it leaves a coating and its best to just soak them in 98% alcohol is what I have been told. What are your thoughts? and what type of coating does more cleaners leaving on the pots resistive track and switch contacts that this coating ruins switches and pot resistive tracks?
Hi Wayne . I think we have to be careful about which product we are talking about. On D5, I do not believe it leaves a coating and my investigations to date support this, but I'm still willing to be proven wrong. I think most contact cleaners are ok on pots and don't leave a coating. All the best.
Caig Labs first product, back in the 1980's, was a two part system called Cramolin, a cleaner and a contact enhancer. The audio repair company I work for tried using it on audio output relays and discovered that eventually the relay contacts would corrode. It may be a problem exacerbated by the small amount of DC offset typically found at the output of audio amplifiers.
Jim Williams (the mixer guru) also claims that the residue left by Caig deoxit products will attract dirt, and if used, you should flush it away after 24 ours. I don't remember if he mentions d5 specifically, but if you're sure it does'nt leave any residue it's all good then.
Just watched another video and the guy was saying the Deoxit red destroys the carbon in the pots? so I'm thinking we are talking about two different types of pots? One with a wire wound resistor with a wiper, and one that is made of carbon?
Hi, no they are all mostly carbon tracks and a metal wiper. I've seen that video and in my view he is wrong. Millions upon millions of users of DeOxit and there are close to zero complaints. If it 'ate' carbon it would be all over the net. It doesn;t!
Great video, engaging really well with the critical viewer's proposals in an informative and scientific manner that was great to watch! I think I am not the only viewer here that wanted to know how you were doing your cling film before you showed us the WrapMaster1000, I actually thought it was a plug, the introduction was seamless and you should get some royalties! Maybe a sideline to consider doing in your videos. Anyway, I came here to learn about cleaning pots and things, and am now subcribed because I like how you present. Looking forward to more. Thank you
I can't say I 100% agree with all the methods of your testing, and analysis, and the broadest application of the conclusions you have reached in this regard. (Specifically concerning carbon contacts and how that can be impacted by various products.) However, I really appreciate your willingness to consider the possibility you could have been wrong and your efforts to engage on the subject with a clear head and little bias. Sadly, an attitude of infallibility is far more common. Concerning your test and methods, as other comments have pointed out, the more realistic concern here is not hat the carbon can be dissolved by a product as that the carbon necessary electrical circuit that is conducted through the carbon could be effected. Such as a product desolving aspects of the paint-like layer sometimes used to keep the carbon in place . More specifically I'm not thinking of potentiometers, where the carbon track must be laid very securely as it will encounter nearly constant friction when being turned. Where this could be more relevant are where carbon is used as a contract to complete a basic on/off switch, such as that used by most computer keyboards and electronic musical keyboards. I'm a former computer accessories repair tech, and it was pretty common to believe that if too much isopropyl alcohol was used to clean a spill on a computer keyboard you might create conductive issues with the thin carbon traces these rely on. I never thought it was dissolving the carbon, but rather loosening the bond that had been used to create the carbon trace so that enough carbon was displaced or washed away that the low level electrical signal coriander get through. Anecdotally, I've tried to repair many broken computer keyboards after a spill caused a key to stop responding. I've never been successful if the spilled fluid had already damaged a trace, but many times after trying to use alcohol to clean these contacts I've created a larger problem, where more keys have failed. I have to assume that either I damaged the carbon traces with the IPA, or that I damaged them while clumsily trying to deal with these extremely thin traces an plastic film layers. A musical keyboard recently started having some intermittent keys and velocity issues. These generally work very similarly to a computer keyboard where the piano key presses down a rubberized car on contact onto an open carbon trace on a circuit board to complete the circuit. Velocity sensitive keyboards have 2 of these mechanisms under each key at different heights. The difference is measured to determine how load to play thr triggered sound. There are tons of references all over not to use cleaning agents like IPA on these carbon contacts with many reports of these traces being damaged further when attempting to be cleaned. This application has very little friction, so quite different than a pot. Vintage keyboard Repair forums frequently say not to use Deoxit D5 in applications like this. But now, having seen what you found about the ingredients of deoxit D5 makes me wish i had tried deoxit first for this piano key carbon contact issue. Most directions say to only use water, or even to just use a pencil eraser to clean the conductive surface of these contact traces. I tried water and it didn't resolve all issues, although it seemed to improve things. After researching this I decided to use the eraser method, that I assume removes oxidization. I started gently scrubbing these carbon contact points on the keyboard and quickly realizes (but too late) that the carbon was coming off as I could see grey streaks on the PCB and on the eraser. I quickly stopped but it was too late. I was able to restore some functionality by using a soft pencil to rub some conductive graphite on the contacts(to restore conductivity). It helped a lot but isn't improved enough, so I've made an order for some conductive carbon paint I can use to [hopefully] resolve these issues. Had I seen your video before using the eraser I would have tried first using some Deoxit D5, (since that is what I have). If the conductive paint works fully then perhaps I'll try some D5 on another key to see how it does and whether it improves things, leaves it the same, or reduces conductivity further. If so I'll try to report back. This may be a case where there is some truth to the contrary, but not applicable to POTS specifically.
Very interesting thanks for sharing. 100% of my experience and focus is on standard rotary carbon track pots. My hypothesis was concerned whether or not DeOxit affected those (only.) My conclusion is that DeOxit is fine for those and 'case closed'. From reading what you have said I'm getting the impression that ANY solvent spray or even alcohol could damage some of these fine switches/traces in keyboards etc.
So, it says lubrication is important (of course, we wouldn't want the carbon to wear through entirely!) and you noticed the deoxit pot was very loose (I think the factory lube gives it that nice, not loose but smooth feeling, and I suspect the D5 might be flushing away the lube). For pots, do you think a good tactic might be to first try F5, but if that doesn't work then try D5 to fix the pot, then F5 to finish for it's lubrication?
Hi Yes the D5 would tend to flush away any lubricant but in my experience most pots (e.g. in guitar amps) are not lubricated. If you feel you do want lubrication then yes go for the F5. Thanks.
Hi John. Alas another myth! I've had a carbon track soaking in DeOxit for the last 14 months. Nada! The proof of all this is in the almost total lack of user negative reports. If DeOxit caused any of these problems it would be all over the net! "Just RUINED a perfectly good amplifier with DeOxit! All the carbon pots are £$%*ed!" "Me to!!! Can''t believe they allow this stuff to be sold!!" Etc etc. Instead, after literally tens of millions of applications there is almost zero real world, real people complaints.
It is well known that anything which 'is well known' has just been made up on the spot. Great video with great information. btw... providing accurate information to someone who has drawn mistaken conclusions from incomplete information due to a lack of research... isn't 'myth busting' or 'debunking'. It's just correcting someone's mistake. That was probably innocently made, like most of the mistakes most of us make everyday.
Thank you so much for making this clear. I have seen videos basically saying the same thing, so thanks for busting it. As a beginner I was really getting worried about cleaning my pots. Subscribed, again thank you will be ordering some dioxit for my vintage radio I have just received.
Stuart, the video I watched just before this, explained that the D5 flushes away the Fader Grease from the Pot, and this will use long term issues, like makes the pot too loose. The grease is a type of seal , so when it gets washed away you lose that protection. He also thought it left behind a residue, but I wonder if it is breaking down the Fader Grease is it really the washed away grease that is leaving a residue? Does any of that make sense to you ?
Hi yes that all makes sense. I probably wouldn;t use D5 oin a 'greased fader' if you know what I mean, but 99.9% of the pots I use this on have never sena trace of grease in their miserable lives!
I'm the person Stuart is talking about in this video. DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots. DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason. DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here. Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders? Where is the logic in that?
I' am a retired tech and still do repairs, I have used DeOxit D5 for years without a single problem. I find myself perplexed with a number of video's claiming D5 leaves a residue making meter readings erratic. My take is, if another solvent were used and D5 applied later, then yes! maybe there could be argument made, mixing different solvents from other manufactures is asking for trouble. When I discovered DeOxit D5, it out performed any other contact cleaners by a mile, in fact my cleaners would cause volume slider controls to bind or stick due to the chemicals they used. Stuart! you are the only one that bothered to do a though investigation that involved contacting Caig to put this matter to rest, (well done).
¨A Little Knowledge Is Dangerous!! or to quote Bill Murray: ¨It is difficult to win an argument with a clever person - but it is near impossible to win an argument with an IDIOT!!¨ 😁
I stopped using it, white vinegar removes oxidation add two teaspoons in using a syringe with denatured alcohol (you can use mineral spirits but I believe the alcohol is better) into a 16oz refillable pressurized can, I also use the pressured can to do board cleaning also, this cost 1/10 of the price. I paid 30 bucks for the reusable aluminum pressurized can, white vinegar is $3.00 a gallon and the denatured alcohol is $20 a gallon I empty the pressurized can after every use for safety and make sure I use it outside of my shop. I do not have to be cheap with it and does a great job of cleaning everything. and FYI you can get deoxit in the tube and add it instead of the Vinegar. I flush everything with Air and allow it to dry overnight. Credit to my wife she was using the same thing (she found to recipe on line) to clean mineral buildup on plumbing fixtures but added a tablespoon of dawn soap so I started to research it
Using even a diluted vinegar solution inside potentiometers strikes me as just short of insane. Vinegar is excellent for cleaning certain things, and I do use it for removing battery corrosion from the battery department of remote controls, followed by a careful rinse with distilled water and alcohol, being extremely careful not to get any liquid inside the remote control circuitry. Vinegar is highly corrosive to copper, which is used for the moving metal commutators and wipers inside potentiimeters; also, the phenolic wafers typically found inside potentiometers, and some printed circuit boards as well, are made of cellulose (ground up wood pulp) bound together with petroleum resins, and are therefore hygroscopic, able to absorb water (even from the air) and some oils. Even the slightest trace of vinegar left behind is likely to cause corrosion of the metals in a potentiometer or the foils on a circuit board. Cleaning corrosion from metal shower fixtures and cleaning electrical or electronic contacts are two completely different things.
I wonder if the carbon track is held together with some kind of supporting substrate. If so could the solvent dissolve this substrate leading to deterioration of the track, even if the carbon is not affected. Perhaps pot manufacturers do not use the same substrate therefore explaining why some pots are damaged and others not.
Hi Stephen. Yes it's POSSIBLE, but it seems this is a solution looking for a problem. If D5 was constantly ruining pots and we were hunting for a mechanism, then your suggestion would be excellent. But D5 does not ruin pots, so why are you suggesting this mechanism?
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 because I am trying to understand why some people are reporting problems. Perhaps the pots they are working with are the cheap oriental pots I use which give me endless problems even when new.
@@stephenbarlin2314 Hi Stephen. Hmm, I wonder what pots they are having trouble with. I do 100% guitar amp work and they almost all use Alpha pots (fairly cheap) which don't have grease in them as far as I know. I wonder if certain high-end Hi-Fi pots are the issue? The number of problems reported is really down in the noise so I'm not convinced it's an issue. If it is (with High End pots) then almost any flushing solvent spray would give the same issue, not just D5. I've seen Hi Fi officianados dasassembling pots and carefully wiping with Q-tip soaked in alcohol etc. This is completely impractical for most amplifiers (a new pot is about $1.50!).
i use Deoxit on all my electrical contacts, i even used it on the brass workings on an antique clock and still happily ticking away after 2 years (-: will bear iqn mind the pot risk outlined here though.
Stuart, I’m very pleased that you took this one on. Well done! Yes, I remember this person,s posting about Deoxit D5 and F5 and was a little concerned after spending £43 for the 2 products. I started my contact cleaning journey many years ago and still have my Archer electronic cleaner with and without lubricant. Used these many times with no problems and later no problems with Servisol Super10. My experience with any potentiometer cleaner is it will cure problems for considerable time between application but not permanently due to dust buildup. I have a Gibson guitar that was made in 1980 which has the pots completely covered with an outer can arrangement and there is no crackle what so ever after playing this instrument for 40+ years.
I highly doubt that DeOxit is damaging the carbon tracks itself but both sides of this argument seem to be missing something... ANY solvent sprayed into a pot can break down or thin the friction grease in the pot. The grease can then run onto the carbon track, which may then cause continuity issues until properly cleaned off again. I believe this is what happens when a cleaned pot is working great for some time and then becomes noisy again after a short while.
Yes you make a good point. Having been close to this for a while now, another major division seems to be in the TYPE of pot people are cleaning. I'm 100% cleaning guitar amp pots and have done tens of thousands without issue. I don't even think they have grease in them! So I get people who restore valuable vintage audio HiFi amps telling me to 'carefully remove each pot, disassemble it, clean with a cotton tip soaked in alcohol, regrease, reassemble, and... job done!!" Um, yeah, sure... Completely unfeasable in guitar amps. A new pot is about $1 and it's super rare for me to need to actually change one out. No way would I ever be following the routine just mentioned! But if you have a $5,000 HiFi amp with top of the range pots costing $50 each, then sure, go for it!
Elemental carbon can not be dissolved by solvents. You can however remove carbon coke and soot deposits with a solvent. With that said, the carbon resistors in potentiometers are made from finely powdered elemental carbon mixed homogeneously with a ceramic binder and then kiln baked or chemically cured. The result is extremely resistant to solvents... It is unlikely in my opinion that a brief solvent exposure would cause any detriment to carbon resistors...
Stuart I was shocked too and it sounds like that rumours BS, but the other thing the rumours are saying is it can wash out the grease that’s in the potentiometer. Is that true, or BS as well?
I'm the person stuart is talking about in this video. Why does the company make TWO different products where one states specifically that it is to be used for pots and faders (F5) vs the other one that doesn't state that it is to be used for pots and faders? Stuart completely misrepresented what I states. It's unfortunate that he's so persistent in his mindset. He can't expand or learn being that way. DeoxIT-D5 cost more, contains mineral spirits (which over time will erode the physical integrity of the carbon tract), and doesn't EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why. DeoxIT-F5 cost less, contains NO mineral Spirits, and DOES EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why. If those two products were the same, then why would the company make one where it says something very different from the other? They're formulated differently. Why would they be formulated differently?
I sought out this video because today I used D5 on three pots on a guitar pedal and one scratchy pot on an amp. It completely dissolved the grease in all 4 pots, and now they all feel loose and terrible when I turn them. Not only have they lost any smooth feeling, but they’ve also lost whatever protection the grease was providing. After doing some research, I’ve found out that I either need to get them serviced, or try to apply new grease myself, which would mean completely dismantling the pots and putting them back together. So while perhaps D5 won’t damage the carbon, I have first hand experience that it will remove the grease from your pots, so be careful.
Hi A couple of things. First hardly any amp pots have grease in them. And... any cleaning spray, solvent, will remove grease of course, not just DeOxit. All the best
i learned that on my own on my synths, is just super aggressive on pots, much more than other solvents. For the future, get deoxit F5, that's the one for faders and pots. Same results, grease intact
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 The amp is a miniature amp head, and now the one knob that I sprayed with D5 has lost all of the smoothness and resistance that the other knobs still maintain. So whether or not you think the pots have grease in them doesn’t really matter because I actually own it and can feel the difference. My point is that while D5 may be perfectly safe for cleaning pots, there should maybe be a disclaimer somewhere stating that if you like the feel of pots that have damping grease in them, which gives them a little bit of resistance and smoothness to them, you should probably use a different product as D5 (and other solvents as you stated) will dissolve the grease which will make your knobs feel completely different. So maybe instead of being condescending and telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about, you could try to be helpful and say something like “Hey, good point, solvents can remove damping grease from potentiometers so be aware if you don’t want the grease to be dissolved”. The fella below gave a recommendation that I should try using F5 instead as it is safe for faders and pots that are greased. That is a much more helpful response than yours. I get it, it’s UA-cam and you probably get attacked constantly in the comment section, but that’s not what I’m doing. I’m simply stating that D5 can have adverse effects on certain potentiometers, namely the ones that have damping grease. It seems like you understand that this is true, so why not just say that? It really doesn’t need to be argumentative. But hey, you do you buddy. Take care, and thanks for the response.
@@shmoelyshpread44 Hi. Sorry you seemed to get annoyed with my reply. I'm not trying to say you are 'wrong'. All I can share is my experience. I've cleaned about 10,000 pots using D5 and never had an issue like the one you are saying. BUT... all of those pots were just standard guitar amp pots and they don;t have any grease or anything. I also have had many times a pot with a lot of 'feel' but on cleaning it becomes quite loose. This is not grease, but a buildup of dirt and crap. Once removed, the pot goes back to its proper 'looser' feel. Not saying this is what happened on yours though. I also know that all solvents will remove any/everything which is in the pot. Dirt, grease, whatever. So it's not unique to D5. If your pot is scratchy there;s not a lot you can do really apart from spray it. I disagree with the other reader who says something like 'D5 is super aggressive' - actually they use one of the milder formulations of mineral spirits. Finally, although I don;t use it myself, F5 (designed for faders really) has a bit of lubricant in it. You could actually try this on your pot to see if that helps. All the best.
You English are so polite. Even when arguing with a thick brain. A question for you, Can you use mass oxygen sensor cleaner for cleaning scratchy pots?
How come we're always the baddies in American movies then? Was watching 'Rebel Moon' last night and the baddies are full-on Nazis - but with cut glass English accents! Weird!!
Hi Dennis All other cleaners, apart from DeOxit, work the same way. Basically some sort of solvent which flushes away contaminants. Great. In my experience pretty much anything will do that. No brand is better than another. BUT... with about 1 in 10 pots, the noise doesn't go away. This is because the small metal wiper of the pot is oxidised. Obviously a cleaning spray will have no effect in those cases. DeOxit contains a deoxidation chemical which deals with this corsosion. It also has a flushing action as well of course. So I always use DeOxit even if 9/10 something cheaper (e.g. alcohol) might do the trick..
I just watched this video and loved it. Did you ever do a video on your pot experiment? I looked at your video list on your channel and did not see it.
I remember reading that conversation. He seemed very determined and it made me think too. But like most, I've been using Deoxit as long as I can remember. Unless the part itself was physically damaged in the first place, I've never had a failure by using Deoxit. And some of the places I have worked (not guitar related), we went through so much of that on the weekly, you'd think that we were painting with it. But in the fairness of completeness, I would welcome the person making these claims to retort with video evidence of his own that it does cause damage. I would certainly be interested myself. I do also use Servisol occasionally. Usually if it's a guitar potentiometer, I'll use Servisol given it's a bit cheaper and does the job. There's no reason for that at all other than it's just what I've always done.
I have seen cases where D5 causes a potentiometer to seize or to become sticky, or sometimes too loose (flushes the lubricant out). In all fairness, these are cases where experience has taught me ---- the hard way ---- that those particular pots cannot be safely sprayed with any known electronics control cleaner and must be disassembled for cleaning and lubing.
The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (if ancient stuff like tube radios, in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away. Modern potentiometers may be safe because they were certified to survive PCB cleaning solvents used by factories.
I'm the person Stuart is talking about in this video. DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots. DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason. DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here. Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders? Where is the logic in that?
@@johnsuggs7828 I certainly see your point. It's all fair enough. All I can say, I have never had a negative effect using D5 at all whether it's a pot or a fader. I do have D5 and F5 here and may take cause to prefer F5 for pots and faders in future. Just to date, I haven't had anything die as a result of using D5. The oldest candidate will be one of my TSL100s which has had I would guess 2-3 treatments of D5 over ten years or so which still all work fine. Maybe a point can be made as somebody else said on vintage amplifiers? The only times I have replaced potentiometers is when cleaning just didn't work at all to remove scratchiness or voids in the travel.
This video fell right into my lap =) I just purchased the F5 a couple of minutes ago right before clicking on your channel, how bizarre. 👍 Mahalo from Commie Fornia TBD3.0 (Toothless Bull Dog 3.0)
Interesting video, but why not use Servisol Super 10 which is less than half the price? Is Deoxit better in some way? If so, how? Servisol Super 10 also comes with the old style push button and straw (like old WD40) which you can bend and spray at the same time
Hi. There are LOTS of cleaners out there and it's just too big a job to assess them all, not that I am qualified to do so in any case. So I just stick with one I know to be good. Servisol may be as good or even superior. All the best
hi stuart i hope ypu well .. i wuld like to ask you samthing.. where can i find th potentiometers for a Marshall valvestate avr 150hx ? the pronlem is that i live in Venezuela and culdnt find them here in my country .. so do you know where can i find them ?
I am grateful to viewer ‘John S’ who has raised questions about which product to use on potentiometers - DeOxit D-Series (e.g. D5) or DeOxit F-series (e.g. F5). He also raised issues about the safety of these products (i.e. whether or not they damaged pots).
I have now had extensive further discussions with the manufacturers and contained in this article are, I hope, the answers to these questions.
Hopefully this one can now be ‘put to bed’.
Here is a summary of the questions and concerns:
1. D5 lists many uses on the side of the can but it does not list ‘potentiometers’. The implication is that this product should not be used on potentiometers.
2. F5 specifically mentions potentiometers on the can. The implication is that only this (DeOxit) product should be used on potentiometers.
3. D5 contains mineral spirits. These are harmful to carbon tracks. F5 does not contain mineral spirits. The implication is that here is more proof that this is the one to use for potentiometers.
All three of these implications are false.
Summary TL/DR
• Neither D5 or F5 are harmful to carbon track potentiometers.
• Both D5 and F5 use mineral spirits as a flushing agent, in exactly the same proportions, i.e. 75%
• D5 will work on all carbon track potentiometers regardless of if the problem is surface contamination or oxidisation of the metal wiper.
• F5 was formulated for conductive plastic faders/pots. The lubrication is important in these components. F5 will not help with oxidized metal parts as it contains no deoxidization chemical.
• In the latest packaging, DeOxit D5 has ‘potentiometers’ on the list of uses on the side of the can.
Here is the full explanation.
Since the earliest days of electronics the search has been on for a solvent which would clean switch contacts, potentiometers and suchlike. For decades the ‘go to’ solution was Freon. It flushed away contaminants and evaporated rapidly. However, as we now know Freon is very environmentally damaging and is banned in most countries.
The search was then on to find an alternative. For some time MEK (Methyl Ethyl Ketone) was used as an organic solvent but this is still fairly damaging and attacks many plastics.
Mineral spirits were then used as the ‘least worst’ option (environmentally). There are many different formulations and strength of ‘mineral spirits’ - it is a catch-all term.
DeOxit D5 uses mineral spirits as the flushing agent. A ‘flushing agent’ is the chemical which washes away surface contaminants mostly via mechanical action. DeOxit D5 uses one of the milder formulations and strengths of OMS (Odourless Mineral Spirits). The sole purpose of the mineral spirits in D-Series products is to flush (wash) away surface contaminants. Despite ongoing myths to the contrary, mineral spirits do not attack or ‘eat’ carbon.
In addition to the mineral spirit flushing agent, D-Series products also contains an anti-oxidisation formulation, the effect of which will now be explained.
A potentiometer consists of two surfaces in contact with each other. Commonly this is a metal ‘wiper’ and a carbon track. The mineral spirits in D-Series will wash away surface contaminants (dust, grease, dirt etc.). Many other solvent sprays will do the same of course, even alcohol will do this. but sometimes the metal wiper contact is oxidised. In this case no amount of solvent spray will improve the potentiometer. The deoxidisation chemicals in all D-Series sprays will remove the oxidation from the metal surfaces. It is this dual action which makes it so effective on potentiometers.
Aside: I have many times tried isopropyl alcohol and other solvent sprays on pots. It seems to work about 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time it does not work. If I then use D5 on the same pot, it is completely fixed. In these instances, I believe the metal contact was oxidised and required the deoxidisation chemicals in D5 to cure it - alcohol and many other sprays have no effect on oxidisation.
There are 3 products in the D-Series. Here is what each one does.
1. DeOxit D5 - as described above. A mineral spirits ‘flush’ to remove contaminants. Then a powerful deoxidiser to remove oxidation from the metal wiper. Downside - you can overspray and as it doesn’t evaporate it needs mopping up.
2. DeOxit DN5 - if you don’t need a flushing action this product delivers the deoxidiser via a fast evaporation solvent. Good for more precise delivery of the deoxidation element and no residual liquid.
3. DeOxit D100S This is 100% deoxidation product with no solvent delivery chemical.
FADER F5 Product
This product was specially formulated for linear conductive plastic film slider potentiometers. E.g. Faders on mixing desks. It contains the same percentage mineral spirits (75%) as D5. It also has a lubricant to aid fader travel. This product can also be used on potentiometers. However, if the potentiometer is faulty due to metal oxidisation on the wiper, then a better product would be the D-series (e.g. D5).
Very Old/Valuable Potentiometers.
With very old and worn potentiometers it might not be advisable to use any spray with a flushing action as the mechanical action of this may under rare circumstances further loosen any material, Instead use DN5 for accurate delivery.
Summary TL/DR
• Neither D5 or F5 are harmful to carbon track potentiometers.
• Both D5 and F5 use mineral spirits as a flushing agent, in exactly the same proportions, i.e. 75%
• D5 will work on all carbon track potentiometers regardless of if the problem is surface contamination or oxidisation of the metal wiper.
• F5 was formulated for conductive plastic faders/pots. The lubrication is important in these components. F5 will not help with oxidized metal parts as it contains no deoxidization chemical.
• In the latest packaging, DeOxit D5 has ‘potentiometers’ on the list of uses.
I hope this provides a full explanation and draws a line under this topic.
Based on Deoxit response, they sound very unprofessional, and they sound like a garage shop. I myself will stop using them!
I just ordered a can of Dioxit for a rebuild that I have in progress. My amp tech also recommended it, but it's kind of speedy, so I ended up buying a can of WD40 contact cleaner. Since then, I've heard a few people explain that the product differentiator is the deoxidation agents in D5... Obviously, I want to keep my OEM pots on my audio equipment, and vintage amps. To be honest, I was searching for clarity on this exact topic. Thank you for digging into this. Cheers
@@JeremiahLGreat I'm glad you enjoyed it. To be fair its only about 1 in 10 pots which have an oxidisation problem. That's why the usual electrical contact cleaner solvent works 90% of the time.
Hello Stuart. Fist off it is a true pleasurer to see a gentle perform a non-bias analytical analysis. That is how we learn. Some do and some don't. I have been using and recommending Caig products for 50+ years. No comparison to other products. I did have an issue in the 90's. I am a retired Fender Amp Engineer/Tech and when Fender switched to plastic wiper hubs in the 90's it was a service nightmare ONE time for me. I had a warrantee claim on a 32 channel mixer. Well it had the sticky spilled drink issue so it set out to pull the PC mounted pot boards to start the cleaning process. Each PC board contains 8 channels. All the knobs, nuts and washers off to gain access for service. Painful at best. All cleaned with the staple at the time DN5. After completion the mixer worked great. I let it sit over night to "dry out" for final testing. Well the next day I went back and several of the pot knobs were laying over to the side. They had all become disconnected. At disassembly inspection all the plastic wiper hubs had softened to different degrees!!! A very bad feeling. I disassembled one and called Caig. As plastic use was just new they asked me the composition of the material.
No knowing I call in to my Fender designers. Panic set in when I told the Caig informed me that DN5 attacks acrylics or styrene, because it contained Genetron 141B as a solvent. Resolution: D5S. You will see on the can. Safe for plastics. DN5 now has a warning. As for Fender, they honor all claims and paid parts and labor. Warnings were issued to all service centers. Two reputable companies!
AND YES Deoxit does NOT dissolve carbon. It washes away loose carbon molecules and other "Crude" causing scratchy pots. I put it on all new build also for prevention to provide long term service free use. Now concentrated nitric acid can oxidize and dissolve elemental carbon at high temperatures over an extended exposure timeframe. It is used to make explosives and it "eats" skin also. Thanks again, Stuart it was a pleasurer! Ric
Great story thanks so much for sharing it. I don't take on mixers because it's a nightmare having to take off 140 or more pot nuts etc! Did you ever work on the Bluesbreaker 15? See my video on that!
Most excellent. Some of the most frustrating questions to find an answer to are ones about Deoxit D5. Everyone is an certified expert based on doing no research whatsoever. I appreciate your experiments, as I have heard these claims, and have used D5 for 30+ years on potentiometers with never an issue. New subscriber and looking forward to learning more. Well done! 👍
Thanks Oliver.
Excellent!! Intelligent, articulate, interested and wrapped up well in humility and common sense. A sense that seems to be not so common. You sir are what we need more of in this world!
Thank you for your kind words.
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 Oh, you 're welcome. Thanks you for taking the time to make the video!
most excellent video! This should be the gold standard for how to handle such theories and hear-say.
Many thanks!
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” I usually just shake my head and walk away. Thank you for your patience and dedicated research. Have an awesome day 🙂
Yes the error I made was to believe he was genuinely interested in the facts!
I absolutely love how you handled this! Great job sir! I’ve used Deoxit for years as a tech and I’ve never had it damage components….
Great to hear Quincy and that aligns with my own experience and other techs.
Amateur Amp tech, auto mechanic. I have been using Deoxit for years,never an issue. I have also used mineral spirits to clean car parts , it cleans and loosens carbon put it doesn’t dissolve carbon. That’s just my experience over the last 40 years.
Thanks for this video. I had also heard these rumours and are pleased to see them dispelled as I am a D5 fan.
We have some problematic input A/B switches on a mixer and while eventually the problem returns, it takes over a year instead of a month or two with another well-known switch cleaner.
I also used D5 on the Input pots of two tape machines that were about 38 and 48 years old, the latter being an Akai 4000DS that I had as a teenager in 75. Both machines’ line input pots were almost laughably noisy but seemed to be as good as new after spraying with Deoxit D5. I spray, then waggle the pot a fair bit, then spray again to wash any debris away and this seems to work well.
Thanks Rob, nice one. I well remeber those Akai machines!
I've used D5 for many, many years, on potentiometers, with no issues.
I have, however, started using F5, just because it's formulated for them.
Great video!
Great thanks for the feedback.
Just seen this video. Interesting points made by many. I don't normally comment, but couldn't resist, so apologies for the length of this. I am 72 and have been an electronics technician and repairer, mainly of audio equipment, since I was 13. During this time I have used lots of cleaners. Servisol used to be everyone's go-to product, and generally did a good job. However, I once had a good quality 12 channel mixer in for repair. It had several noisy pots. I can't remember the make of the mixer or the pot manufacturer, but foolishly as well as spraying the noisy pots with Servisol, I gave all the pots a spray for good measure. The mixer worked a treat and I sent it out into the world. About a week later, it came back full of faults, way more than it had originally. To my horror, I discovered that the metal wipers in the pots were held in place by tiny plastic pips, and the Servisol had destroyed all of them! I had to replace all the pots at my cost. After that I stopped using Servisol and went on to use a Phillips switch cleaner which was fantastic in every way. The Philips became unavailable, and I went over to Ambersil, which seemed OK. In my experience, most fader and rotary pot noise originates from oxidation of the metals, not the carbon tracks, particularly the deposited wiper track in faders such as ALPS etc., so I expect that the DeOxit will be very effective. So the moral is, shit can happen when squirting chemicals into things, so if it is something rare and valuable, strip the control down if possible.
Aaagh! What a horror story! Thanks for the info Bob.
Very well done man, thank you much for your efforts for the community.
Thanks! Back to sharpenin' yer pitchfork...
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 hahahaha yes sir!
Thank you so much for making this video. I fell for this myth and was only using the deoxit fader spray for pots and the d5 for contacts. I restored a old scope last week and it was a pain to keep switching the cans. At one point I forgot to switch back and sprayed a pot with D5 and immediately panicked. True statement. Lol. Thanks again!!
LOL. Well atleast you can go back to using it now!
I'm the person he's referring to in the video.
Answer me this then.
DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots.
DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason.
DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here.
Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders?
Where is the logic in that?
I just watched a video on another tech channel about how Deoxit D5 damages pots. He never actually showed the damage on a pot that he was servicing. He completely disassembled the pot, but failed to demonstrate any damage. He said the pot was gunked up or something. Caig is correct and so are you Stuart. I need to see actual proven evidence of damage to electronic controls caused by Deoxit D5 cleaner before I will believe it. So, as I stated in my earlier comment, I'm gonna buy me some Deoxit D5 and safely clean my pots! Thanks again Stuart. Cheers.
Thanks Bob. Yes you'll be totally fine with DeOxit so don't worry!
Stuart, when I was only a kid, my dear old Dad gave me one of the best pieces of advice that I have ever received in my life, when he said, “Son, never ever, argue with ..a MUG”..!
And could I humbly suggest that you, should do yourself a big favour, from this moment forward, and also, always from now on, remember that same, great ‘Fatherly’ piece of advice, because life is too short, to waste even a moment of it, arguing, with ..idiots. 😉👍
Your dad was/is a wise man! One problem with all social media inc UA-cam is that people can pretty much write what they want and press SEND with no consequences. Imagine if I was saying anything remotely contentious, e.g. a political view etc.! I heard of one guy who had to close down a popular KNITTING forum because it became a sewer of hatred eventually resulting in death threats to him and his family. That's knitting ffs!! (For your interest, it kicked off because some woke idiot accused him of 'cultural appropriation' over some knitting design or other. The carzy fool actually tried to defend himself....
Stuart, I have a can of CAIG DeoxIT D5 part no. D5S-6 with the L-M-H adjustable spray from the late 1990's and plain as day it says it CAN be used for potentiometers. I reached out to CAIG and they swear the current formulation works "identically" to the can I have - the only changes made is a reduction in the red dye used and a lower VOC propellent.
Yes I believe the new cans also say potentiometers.
I like this video... I think soaking those thick pieces of carbon is definitely not the same as what you would see in a potentiometer inside older audio gear.
I do like the test with spraying several pots with different cleaners to see if it will eat away any carbon. Then, run a resistance test to see how they respond.
The best practices, I believe, is to take the potentiometers apart and thoroughly clean and lube them.
I'm no expert by any means.
Your page has great content, and I'm here for it! 🙏
Thanks Johnson, Yes I'll release that video soon of the multi test. Unfortunately the typical repair bill for a guitar amplifier is about £30-£50 so taking even one apart would be completely out of the question. It's not needed anyway (in guitar amps) as a quick spray of cleaner works wonders! Very vaouable and super antique gear then yes, if you have tht time, you could take the pots apart. All the best
The fact that his test sheet had no starting point resistance readings kind of indicates that experimental train has already left the station. (No surprise. This guy is an idiot.)
@@Davedarave6661 I've never tried that and doubt it would work. Time for a new pot!
I avoid using ANY organic solvents on potentiometers. (Still thanks for your tests.)
The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away. While I have successfully cleaned some pots with Isopropanol (e.g. a Casio MT-70 which is delicate to dismantle for access), e.g. slide pots in 1980th Bontempi keyboards react extremely sensitive on such chemicals. Thus I recommend to clean only with distilled water and a cotton swab (and dry it well) if you can desolder and open it (many slide pot tracks can be accessed without).
Already the DeOxit statement "Mineral oil will not damage metals, plastics and carbon" is debunked, because mineral oil (e.g. household "machine oil") does make Bakelite (which by definition is a "plastic") brittle and crumble apart like charcoal, which is e.g. an infamous problem with spilled machine oil on Hammond organ parts. And the statement "If they use one of our sprays with a solvent, if the carbon has been scratched or damaged, the solvent will flush it off the surface." means that it does remove unbonded carbon particles (like a pencil streak), but poorly made old pot tracks are more like a pencil streak than a solid coal block. Therefore there is also the warning not to clean potentiometers in ultrasonic cleaners. Modern pots may be chemically and mechanically robust (like carbon brushes for strong motors) and even certified with a guarantee to survive PCB cleaning solvents used in factories. But ancient potentiometers are a different cup of pee. If the track is of nitro or spirit laquer, then Rest In Pieces.
By the way, I have successfully repaired broken carbon tracks with conductive carbon paint based on such lacquers, those of course are not resistant to solvents either. Also a soft pencil can be used to patch a damaged carbon track, which isn't particularly stable either.
And the reason that in the test with DeOxit the knob rotates much easier is because the shaft bearing/sleeve intentionally contains a viscous grease (may be to stop dust and make it feel more solid) that likely got washed away. That grease tends to solidify/form resin over time which makes the knob hard to turn.
I just posted a comment wondering about the use of various chemicals like isopropyl alcohol or CRC QD Electronic Cleaner or DeOxit for cleaning up old ham radios. You seem to have an excellent background in the chemistry of such things so your opinion would mean a lot if you would like to respond.
@@STBRetired1 It is just personal experience. I collect music keyboards and soundtoys, and saw much plastic and rubber parts ruined by previous owners or wrong construction (e.g. mains cable plasticizer turning Antonelli keyboard cases locally into black tar). Oil makes for 4 to 6 years things better and then only worse. Some parts (VCR tape drives etc.) need oil, but you need to know which type (silicone is an educated best guess) to prevent it from decomposing.
Some professionals repairmen may consider potentiometers disposable parts those are to be replaced with a new one anyway if substances do long term damage. But e.g. in tube radios potentiometers were the ASIC of 1950/60th - often containing several concentric carbon tracks with 4 intermediate taps for loudness filters, rotary end switch or push/pull switch combination and 2 or 3 concentric knobs. Such parts are impossible to buy anywhere and even a nightmare to repair because everything is riveted together, contains brittle bakelite (that crumbles apart by oil!) or is decomposing by moisture induced zinc plague. So stay away with anything oily or unknown solvents when you don't exactly know what you are doing.
@@cyberyogicowindler2448 Thanks for the information. Much appreciated.
@@STBRetired1 I'd be interested too...
Wow. What a breath of fresh air. I've been an Electrical Engineer for over 45 years, and I've actively avoided online tech-related content (even since the old BBS days) specifically for the reasons you alluded to. It's mostly populated by anonymous, clueless hobbyists with fragile egos who feel no responsibility to provide fact-based information. Feelings and baseless opinions are fine. However, in the engineering world, Step 1 with any product you're considering using is to contact the manufacturer to make sure it meets your specifications. And when you mentioned that you'd actually contacted the manufacturer my jaw dropped. Wonderful. And the long document in the video notes detailing the manufacturer's response was perfect. And to actually perform your own tests is often Step 2 in the real world, but most online experts can't even comprehend doing something so logical. Sadly, technology is becoming nothing more than "I saw a video (or asked AI), and now I'm an expert".
Thanks very much. Yes a modern day skill we're all trying to learn is to navigate the internet looking for the solid onfo we need, and weed out the acres of garbage!
It's actually REALLY difficult!
The video is 7 months old. Any update on your interesting experiment? It would be good to see what you can share with us. Excellent channel 👍
Hi Yes I'm really trying to find time to do that vis! Thanks for the prompt.
Exactly the experience described in the letter: I used DeOxit D5 on a pot that was in truly bad shape, and the cleaning experience 'made it still worse'. The DeOxit fluid simply washed out the remnants of the already flaked-out track. Plain water or even forced air would have done exactly the same thing.
Ironically, if I'd used D5 on that pot years ago, the lubrication *would have prevented the wiper from scraping up a dried-out track*.
I can see that an inexperienced tech would blame the final, complete failure, on the application of DeOxit, but this is simply shooting the messenger. It washed out the remaining, floating particles of carbon.
TLDR: use DeOxit before the track has dried out and starts to flake.
Interesting info, thanks.
I'm not a chemist, I'm a mechanic. We have found that odorless mineral spirits cleans most everything very well, with no damage to hands, or the things you are cleaning, unlike other cleaners. That being said, I've always been told that cleaning with Deoxit you need to be careful not to use too much or it will penetrate the material that holds the contacts. That would be of course, on band switches and that sort of thing. In fact I didn't know that it came in a spray, always bought a little bottle and used long Q-tips that I buy to clean guns with. So I was wondering when someone said they cleaned the pots with Deoxit how they did that. I was thinking the part of the pot that holds the coil is the same phenolic material as on a band switch? Very interested in your demonstration. Thank you.
Hi Donovan I'm talking about pots only here, nothing else. So, with pots you just spray it in through the hole where the contacts emerge, job done. I firmly believe it is an urban myth that DeOxit causes any damage. Millions upon million of applications and virtually zero problems. I've never seen a shred of actual evidence for pot damage. Until I see some evidence I do not believe an issue exists. All the best
I have also used D5 for some time now, I have now bought a can of F5 to try as well. Great video!
Thanks!
Great work Stuart! Love the pot experiment you came up with! Might try that myself!
I Really must get on and finish that video!
Well done! For anyone that doesn't know, Caig actually linked to this video on their D-series page, and there's also thank you note to Stuart. That's how I got here.
I'm pretty sure that most potentiometers use carbon in the form of graphite, which is only soluble in molten nickel (2651 °F), chlorosulfonic acid and chromic acid. Carbon has many allotropes and graphite is the most stable form.
Pro tip: Don't clean pots with molten nickel.
Damn... what am I going to do with this job lot of molten nickel? I feel I've been scammed...
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 😂
@@KingNast I spray fing78464h every thing with it even the old lady
The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (if ancient, in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away.
@@cyberyogicowindler2448 True, that's a good point
Thank you. Ive seen numerous videos about how D5 destroys pots and couldn't believe it either. I know a few electronics techs that have used it forever and recommend it above all else so i bought a bottle of the d100 with the needle tip. The one thing that is common in all the videos of the anti d series deoxit vids is that no one has done any experiment even remotely like yours. The proof to me is right there. Thanks for an informative video!
Thanks Kevin
Thank you l had this question in mind ,well done 👍
Thanks for your thorough explanation of Deoxit D5 negatively effecting guitar potentiometers. You were clear and honest. Dan from U.S.A./ lifetime guitarist. 👍
Thanks Dan
came for electronics-----subscribed for the stories......I really like this channel!
I haven’t heard deoxit “dissolve” carbon but I have heard not to use it on tube/valve pin sockets because it can gum them up but use IPA on those instead. My source is Lyle Caldwell from Psionic Audio. I’ve used it on pots w/o a problem.❤
Ah ok thanks. I do use DeOxit on the valve bases because it's the only one which has this deoxidisastion chemical and they do tend to get oxidised.
Hopefully I'm not causing an issue!
I've been using D5 on pots for years and never had one fail from a chemically ruined carbon trace. I have however watched a couple of videos from users claiming the opposite. I have a Peavey back stage amp on the bench with a couple of noisy pots and am about to use D5. I'll let you know if I ruin the pot. I would have done an ohmeter test on that pot before taking it apart but that's just me.
Ha ha, don;t worry you'll be perfectky fine!
"Hang on!..its fizzing!.." lmao well done my friend.
Glad you enjoyed it!
The question may be whether there's any signficant difference and benefit in the residual lubrication / protection from F5 rather than whether there's damage from initial cleaning. For example, would a pot/fader wear out sooner MECHANICALLY if it were left with just D5's lubrication versus F5. (BTW: I think your shirts may be a demonstration of the residual lubrication). Also, if we assume that dirt likes to mix with lubricants - more lubricant may not be better in the long run if it's a dirty environment.
Apparently, the premise is that D5 cleans alot and lubes a little while F5 cleans a little and lubes alot. Which I think is why I've seen quite a few folks doing their initial cleaning with D5 and following up with just a little squirt of F5 as a chaser. This is similar to the approach I've seen of using CRC QD contact cleaner for the dirty work and following it up with a squirt of CRC 2-26 multi-purpose lubricant.
According to CAIG - D5 and F5 both contain 75% odorless mineral spirits and 20% propellant. Any difference is in the unspecified content of the remaing 5% "active ingredient". From the CAIG website D-series products "Removes oxidation & corrosion", "Lubricates & seals connections", and have "20% deoxidizing action". Whereas F5, they state "For reference, DeoxIT® Fader F-Series has approximately 1% cleaning action." and is advertised as something that "replenishes lubrication lost on surfaces that have been cleaned with solvents or other cleaning solutions."
I think an interesting pseudo-scientific test would be to apply equal amounts of D5 and F5 to test surfaces, letting them evaporate, and seeing how much residue is left behind.
Thanks Tom a useful post and addition to the debate!
When I became a certified electronic technician in 1990, my best friend worked for Caig Laboratories and he gave me a kit of Cramolin cleaner and lube. It worked great. When they developed DeOxit I started using that on my pots and contacts and never had one problem with it.
I guess I am crazy ape bonkers for taking that risk.😂🤣😂🤣
What you don;'t realise is that 10 years, 1 month, 2 weeks and 11 days after you use it, all the pots melt into a mess of goo and become unuseable.
I'd used for 40 years in all kinds of radios, audio, video equipment never had any issues.
This reminds me of something I have experienced myself. I used to clean computer parts, circuit boards etc. with water and dishsoap, people would say I'm an idiot for doing so as the water would surely destroy the electronics.. This is not at all true of course, I have actually revived a graphics card this way which is still working perfectly to this day, this was maybe 2 years ago. As long as there is no power provided to the board and the caps are depleted, the water won't damage anything. Just make sure to rinse all the soap off and blow it dry with an air compressor or something like that and it will be just fine.
Hi Charles, yes thats a very good analogy! I have also dunked badly contaminated circuit board in a hot bath of soapy water and got in there with the nail brush! No problems whatsoever!
I have as well; *but soapy water isn't oil*, and your technique doesn't leave any residue behind. Deoxit does leave a residue, a greasy residue, which in some cases is highly inappropriate.
I 'm waiting to get some DeOxit D5, and soon I will be cleaning my Pots on my 30 year Fender Amp. I was hesitant to give it a try for fear of damaging my baby. Thank you for your informational video about potentiometers and DeOxit.
Great I hope it sorts it for you Frank.
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 It worked great! It solved all my issues including: volume, scratchy pots, no reverb, and no treble adjustment. It seems I have a brand new amp again! Thank you so much again!
@@saint_redbull I'm the person stuart is talking about in this video.
Why does the company make TWO different products where one states specifically that it is to be used for pots and faders (F5) vs the other one that doesn't state that it is to be used for pots and faders?
Stuart completely misrepresented what I states. It's unfortunate that he's so persistent in his mindset. He can't expand or learn being that way.
DeoxIT-D5 cost more, contains mineral spirits (which over time will erode the physical integrity of the carbon tract), and doesn't EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why.
DeoxIT-F5 cost less, contains NO mineral Spirits, and DOES EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why.
If those two products were the same, then why would the company make one where it says something very different from the other? They're formulated differently. Why would they be formulated differently?
@@johnsuggs7828 It is a good question as to why they make TWO different products. I don't know. I was skeptical myself, and I tried to do some research myself which led me here. I just want something that works. It might be a matter of preference, and I'm sure it is up for debate, like what kind of lubricant should you use on your garage door: silicone or white lithium(side note: don't forget to grease your spring).
@@saint_redbull the F5 is what you're supposed to use on faders and pots. I have both. The F5 states it rught under the name. People like Stuart use it because they see everyone else using it. The company made them different with different formulations for a reason
I used the d/5 red can on my volume pot an my audio source pots an they seem to work amazing on my old vintage Kenwood KR-4600 stereo amplifier/receiver making static disappear an source switch control better contact ,I used electronic spray cleaner with short lived results. Thank you for this video!!!!
Thanks John.
At least we can put that one rest!! Phew!!! Thank you Stuart for your in depth experimenting! You have gone to great lengths to support your facts and debunk this myth!!!
It was a marathon! Still some people are not convinced though!
I've found some other videos about experience with D5 gumming up or damaging pots and they may have some good points. I'm going to stick with F5 and use the D5 for metal contacts, and in the case of tube sockets, CLEAN it off afterwards because it leaves the lubricant behind that we don't want around high voltage.
I don't think your experiments are totally conclusive. Soaking for 24 hours is not the same as long-term exposure, and also, maybe it doesn't eat pure carbon, but the carbon is fixed to the substrate somehow, maybe that aspect could be damaged? Maybe on some pots and not others?
Also, when it comes to corrosion and possibly other reactions, having voltage applied changes the deal significantly, so the pot experiment has value, but isn't one-to-one with the application.
That said, I do enjoy your videos immensely and have learned a great deal from you, thanks!
EDIT: I found the discussion on the "embalmed pot" video and I had to go to the shop and look. BOTH my cans of D5, one bought in 1992, and the other within the last year, say to use on potentiometers.
Ok Rob, thanks.
Very well done! Thank you. I am convinced,
Thanks Patrick
Excellent work! Thank you so much!
Cheers Christopher.
Just subscribed to your channel, due to your vast knowledge, class and you have a damn good channel!
Once again a great show of your knowledge. Thanks for the information.
Thanks Michael
One thing it DOES tend to do is dissolve the grease on the shaft of potentiometers. And this can cause the pot to feel less smooth and “damped”. So I suggest putting only a VERY small amount on the wiper. He even mentioned this at 14:50. The nice smooth feel you get from the original grease on the shaft is now gone. The shaft can even develop a “grinding” type feel from the loss of grease. So, that’s not good at all. Use the stuff in moderation. Drip a very small bit in the pot on the wiper, but don’t soak or saturate the pot.
If you turn the pot all the way to the end, you can usually drop a small amount right onto the sliding contact. So for pots, I prefer putting the Deoxit into a dropper.
I was (I’m) on the cleaner rabbit hole since I only have vintage audio equipment. But internet experts, are very vocal the ones in forums are much worse. I did the water and electronics, that drove them nuts. To make sure they went nuts I added a sonic cleaner. I tested full boards left them on the cleaner forever then tested each component no change what so ever. Anyway great channel. The dunning - Kruger effect is so prevalent nowadays, that is not worth the fight. Again great video and sub. 🎉
Yes the DK effect is very real (I've probably been guilty myself in my younger days!). YEs on water! I once accidentaly dropped a full can of coke into an amp chassis (don't ask!). I immediately filled my bath with warm water, dunked it in, swished it around. Left to dry for 24 hours. Perfect.
Hi Stuart, great comprehensive video! I was wondering is there any update on the contact cleaner test on the pots you were doing over 1 year?
I MUST get around to finishing that video!
Great video! I saw another UA-cam video saying that what you debunked. Thanks again!
Thanks Alan
Wow! If that workbench top could talk! 🙂. Thank you for this Stuart.
It's brand new. I had the stains and chips applied by a specialist artist to make it look authentic....
Thanks for your myth busting efforts. The pots on my vintage Pioneer SX-770 receiver (1971) and other electronics devices I own are popping and scratching, so I am looking to buy some Deoxit D5 to clean them. Then I remembered some tech on UA-cam making the same claim about D5 as your commenter did. So I am looking around for some definitive answers. You thoroughly and unequivocally busted that myth. I'm looking forward to seeing the results of your pot cleaning experiment. Thanks again Stuart. Now I can go ahead and buy the stuff. Thanks for your honesty. Btw, I subbed and liked.
Thanks Bob!
Bad capacitors that leak even just a few millivolts of DC onto the volume and tone controls is a very common problem on old Pioneer recievers (I've worked on a hundred+ of these over the years). Spraying the pots may seem to cure the problem for a few months or a year but the noise comes back eventually as the potentiometer starts to oxidize a little bit internally again (the oxides that form on the metal parts act like semiconductor diodes, adding distortion to AC audio signals). You should measure for DC voltage with a sensitive digital multimeter at all the terminals of the tone and volume control pots. If there's any DC on them, change out the small value caps on the tone control board, typically between 1 and 10 mocrofarad (especially any orange caps and any bead-like tantalum caps). Modern electrolytic caps from well known makers such as Panasonic usually have such ridiculously low eternal leakag that they can be used anywhere on the tone control board, including as replacements for tantalum caps,, but if I'm replacing caps of 1 microfarad or less I will use film caps Instead of electrolytics.
Unfortunately, occasionally one also encounters old transistors with black oxidized leads that can cause sputtering noises and static....a burst of freeze spray will often help identify those.
Brilliant, thanks for your effort. Be careful with just pure alcohol on pots as it has zero lubricants which "could" lead to more wear between the wiper and the carbon track. (Maybe another video for you, 😁). As you noticed when DeOxit dries it does leave a little film of lubricant behind. Of course their Fader product includes a higher percentage of lubricant for high use faders.
Thanks. Yes I no longer use alcohol.
Any sort of cleaning product is going to remove a bit of material..... it's like when you polish your car's paint. My assumption is that the VERY noisy pot already has cracked/damaged tracks. I've had noisy pots that the cleaner of choice WILL WORK......and some it won't.
Hi. Interesting on your pot experience. I find that (e.g. DeOxit) sorts it 99% of the time. But yes after many years of use the track can become too worn to save and a new pot is needed.
Nice work. I'll admit I've been sceptical of contact cleaner after watching some other UA-cam techs... the faulty assumption or logical misstep I can now clearly see is that if your carbon tracks are already cracking/delaminating then off course a high velocity solvent spray can carry them off, making the pot seem "more broken" 🤦
The statement "If they use one of our sprays with a solvent, if the carbon has been scratched or damaged, the solvent will flush it off the surface." means that it does remove unbonded carbon particles (like a pencil streak), but poorly made old pot tracks are more like a pencil streak than a solid coal block. Therefore there is also the warning not to clean potentiometers in ultrasonic cleaners.
Thanks for the video, I've heard this rumor also. I tried this measuring the pots resistance, before, after and over time. The only thing that seemed to happen is the pot got cleaned up, the overall resistance stayed the same.
There's a video from Caig showing cleaning pots with D5, I think it's nonsense.
Glad you enjoyed it. Yes it's surprising how strongly people cling to this myth though!
I was reading up on this online as my guitar amp has some crackly pots I need to sort out (so now UA-cam is bunging me videos about it). I read a post on a forum which said what it will do, beside cleaning the pot up, is strip out the lubricant inside it so the contact will in time wear the carbon track out.
That does make sense to me, and might be a worry on a guitar, where I use the volume and tone controls a lot, but I don't think it would do much to my amp as I've found the tone I like and - with the exception of the 'drive' pot - I leave 'em where they are!
You're fine to use it on your guitar pots.
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 Well, I did use good old Servisol on my guitar pots for years, with no ill effects I've been aware of! I guess I'm just getting more cautious with old age approaching. 😄
Hi ..a very interesting video,thank you...Befor the deoxit came along l always for years used Superservisol 10...its not as popular these days but has been great..it is of course a proper pot cleaner.cheers
Thanks Peter. My view is that pretty much any solvent 'switch cleaner' or even alcohol will clean 95% of pots because all it's doing is flsuhing away gunk. However, I kept finding the odd pot which simply would not respond. I've since discovered that it's because the metal wiper is oxidised. No amount of cleaner will fix this. This is where D5 scores because it will deoxidise the wiper.
I've always used Servisol cleaner on pots and never had a problem. I didn't know that DeOxit was available here. i do know that there appears to be techs in the US won't use it based on what you say, including some with UA-cam channels and swear by pure alcohol. Thanks for posting this.
looking forward to the results of the experiment
Stuart - can you elaborate or provide a link to the head worn magnifying glass (old school jeweller's headset?). Trying to find something decent
I bought it years ago I think on eBay. Just type in something like 'head worn magnifying glass' and you'll get a selection. I use mine all the time.
I’ve never had issues with D5. I stopped using it because of the fold out straw. I use a much cheaper generic type. It smells the same as D5. I do keep a a small can of the fader lube and I use it after cleaning. It has the regular straw.
Hi Jonathan. They've now reverted to the old, thin straw thank goodness!
I wouldn't get to hung up with the carbon track but does mineral spirit effect the plastic ? Especially old plastic ?
Hi David You have to be a bit cautious with the term 'mineral spirit' as it's a huge catch-all term. DeOxit uses a very mild formulation of m.s. and I haven't heard of any problems with plastics. I guess if you have something REALLY old and REALLY valuable the precautionary principle woould apply and you should use plain alcohol.
Great video Stuart, I love the methodical approach to debunking the myth.
One thing though, It absolutely grinds my gears when I see someone tighten nuts with an adjustable spanner, a cheap socket set is far kinder and secure to jack and pot nuts then an adjustable. Just saying!
Keep up the good work, I've learned loads of this channel.
Yep I've had that before. However I'm pretty good with it And know what I'm doing. It works for 99% of the time without issue and saves me hunting for the correct spanner. I agree about adjustables for TIGHT bolts which require force. Most of the time I use this it's not far from finger tight. Roght, I'm just off the scratch my nails down a blackboard to annoy you even further! :)
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 Perfect. There's nothing worse then someone tightening up screws and nuts to within an inch of thier lives. Another pet hate of mine 😀
My pyramid 52kx power supply was under 5 ft of water for 12 hours during a flood.
Power washed. Sprayed with contact cleaner and dried with forced air. No issues since 2016...
Nice one!
Thanks Stuart. Good information.
Its a tricky subject as I've watched xraytony's video on deoxit d5 who does have different experiences.
Your potentiometer experiment will be enlightening, and will shed some light on the long term effects.
Thanks for the content! Look forward to some more repair videos very soon.
Do you repair pedals too? Would be good to see some videos on that.
Ryan
Hi Ryan Yes I do some pedals from time to time, maybe I'll do a vid. Just had a super rare 1960s Selmer in so I'm defo going to video that!
I think X-ray started all of this
@@dirtydon8661 I think you might be right!
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 that's where i first heard about it as well
What is the end result of the potentiometer test using different cleaners/lubricants?
Hi Bo I simply MUST get around to doing that video!!
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 *Although your focus is carbon deposited on substrate pots, if you wouldn't mind, please address correct lubrication of '60s-70s era, 1" WW pots. Thank you and Cheers!*
Hi. I have virtually zero experience of those I'm afraid. 99%+ of everything I do is carbon track. DeOxit do a good product called F5 which has some lubricant in it. That might do the trick. All the best.
You are talking sense. They are far too many so called experts on the web to day with no experience or knowledge giving advice that could prove be dangerous and cause serious harm. I do enjoy your chanell. I do have a Ham Radio licence for over 19:10 forty years and I have being building RF amplifiers and guitar amplifier, both value and solid state. With the valles a couple of 4CX255B and a HT line of a couple of KV mistake can be beyond interested. A little knowledge can be dangerous. Far too many experts around to day on the net.
Thanks Dermot. My father was a very famous radio ham G3HSR also VK9NS on Norfolk Island!
Actually high rank people of one of the best audio recording company told me Deoxit D5 is great to clean pots and contacts
Nice to have that added confirmation, thanks.
Thanks for taking on this subject, which seems like something that may never go away, as people often have emotional attachments to their inaccurate ideas. If you have the time, it might be helpful to contact potentiometer manufacturers like CRL, Alps, Bournes, etc. and get their recommendations for cleaning their products. I assume they have people who look into these things.
Hi Don That's a good idea thanks.
DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots.
DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason.
DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here.
Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders?
Where is the logic in that?
STUART, I have heard that DeOxit does damage pots, switches, etc because it has a coating and will cause intermittent failures over time because of the coating. I remember at one of my jobs this repair tech used the DeOxit GOLD conditioner and over time it ruined all the relay contact switches, selector switches and pots. So I think it leaves a coating and its best to just soak them in 98% alcohol is what I have been told. What are your thoughts? and what type of coating does more cleaners leaving on the pots resistive track and switch contacts that this coating ruins switches and pot resistive tracks?
Hi Wayne . I think we have to be careful about which product we are talking about. On D5, I do not believe it leaves a coating and my investigations to date support this, but I'm still willing to be proven wrong. I think most contact cleaners are ok on pots and don't leave a coating. All the best.
Caig Labs first product, back in the 1980's, was a two part system called Cramolin, a cleaner and a contact enhancer. The audio repair company I work for tried using it on audio output relays and discovered that eventually the relay contacts would corrode. It may be a problem exacerbated by the small amount of DC offset typically found at the output of audio amplifiers.
Jim Williams (the mixer guru) also claims that the residue left by Caig deoxit products will attract dirt, and if used, you should flush it away after 24 ours. I don't remember if he mentions d5 specifically, but if you're sure it does'nt leave any residue it's all good then.
@@isakstruck73 Flush it with what?
@@waynegram8907 contact cleaner wich leave no residue plus compressed air, i guess.
Just watched another video and the guy was saying the Deoxit red destroys the carbon in the pots? so I'm thinking we are talking about two different types of pots? One with a wire wound resistor with a wiper, and one that is made of carbon?
Hi, no they are all mostly carbon tracks and a metal wiper. I've seen that video and in my view he is wrong. Millions upon millions of users of DeOxit and there are close to zero complaints. If it 'ate' carbon it would be all over the net. It doesn;t!
Great video, engaging really well with the critical viewer's proposals in an informative and scientific manner that was great to watch!
I think I am not the only viewer here that wanted to know how you were doing your cling film before you showed us the WrapMaster1000, I actually thought it was a plug, the introduction was seamless and you should get some royalties! Maybe a sideline to consider doing in your videos. Anyway, I came here to learn about cleaning pots and things, and am now subcribed because I like how you present. Looking forward to more. Thank you
Excellent thanks John. I love my Wrapmaster!!
I can't say I 100% agree with all the methods of your testing, and analysis, and the broadest application of the conclusions you have reached in this regard. (Specifically concerning carbon contacts and how that can be impacted by various products.) However, I really appreciate your willingness to consider the possibility you could have been wrong and your efforts to engage on the subject with a clear head and little bias. Sadly, an attitude of infallibility is far more common.
Concerning your test and methods, as other comments have pointed out, the more realistic concern here is not hat the carbon can be dissolved by a product as that the carbon necessary electrical circuit that is conducted through the carbon could be effected. Such as a product desolving aspects of the paint-like layer sometimes used to keep the carbon in place .
More specifically I'm not thinking of potentiometers, where the carbon track must be laid very securely as it will encounter nearly constant friction when being turned. Where this could be more relevant are where carbon is used as a contract to complete a basic on/off switch, such as that used by most computer keyboards and electronic musical keyboards.
I'm a former computer accessories repair tech, and it was pretty common to believe that if too much isopropyl alcohol was used to clean a spill on a computer keyboard you might create conductive issues with the thin carbon traces these rely on. I never thought it was dissolving the carbon, but rather loosening the bond that had been used to create the carbon trace so that enough carbon was displaced or washed away that the low level electrical signal coriander get through. Anecdotally, I've tried to repair many broken computer keyboards after a spill caused a key to stop responding. I've never been successful if the spilled fluid had already damaged a trace, but many times after trying to use alcohol to clean these contacts I've created a larger problem, where more keys have failed. I have to assume that either I damaged the carbon traces with the IPA, or that I damaged them while clumsily trying to deal with these extremely thin traces an plastic film layers.
A musical keyboard recently started having some intermittent keys and velocity issues. These generally work very similarly to a computer keyboard where the piano key presses down a rubberized car on contact onto an open carbon trace on a circuit board to complete the circuit. Velocity sensitive keyboards have 2 of these mechanisms under each key at different heights. The difference is measured to determine how load to play thr triggered sound. There are tons of references all over not to use cleaning agents like IPA on these carbon contacts with many reports of these traces being damaged further when attempting to be cleaned. This application has very little friction, so quite different than a pot. Vintage keyboard Repair forums frequently say not to use Deoxit D5 in applications like this.
But now, having seen what you found about the ingredients of deoxit D5 makes me wish i had tried deoxit first for this piano key carbon contact issue. Most directions say to only use water, or even to just use a pencil eraser to clean the conductive surface of these contact traces.
I tried water and it didn't resolve all issues, although it seemed to improve things. After researching this I decided to use the eraser method, that I assume removes oxidization. I started gently scrubbing these carbon contact points on the keyboard and quickly realizes (but too late) that the carbon was coming off as I could see grey streaks on the PCB and on the eraser. I quickly stopped but it was too late. I was able to restore some functionality by using a soft pencil to rub some conductive graphite on the contacts(to restore conductivity). It helped a lot but isn't improved enough, so I've made an order for some conductive carbon paint I can use to [hopefully] resolve these issues.
Had I seen your video before using the eraser I would have tried first using some Deoxit D5, (since that is what I have).
If the conductive paint works fully then perhaps I'll try some D5 on another key to see how it does and whether it improves things, leaves it the same, or reduces conductivity further.
If so I'll try to report back. This may be a case where there is some truth to the contrary, but not applicable to POTS specifically.
Very interesting thanks for sharing. 100% of my experience and focus is on standard rotary carbon track pots. My hypothesis was concerned whether or not DeOxit affected those (only.) My conclusion is that DeOxit is fine for those and 'case closed'. From reading what you have said I'm getting the impression that ANY solvent spray or even alcohol could damage some of these fine switches/traces in keyboards etc.
So, it says lubrication is important (of course, we wouldn't want the carbon to wear through entirely!) and you noticed the deoxit pot was very loose (I think the factory lube gives it that nice, not loose but smooth feeling, and I suspect the D5 might be flushing away the lube). For pots, do you think a good tactic might be to first try F5, but if that doesn't work then try D5 to fix the pot, then F5 to finish for it's lubrication?
Hi Yes the D5 would tend to flush away any lubricant but in my experience most pots (e.g. in guitar amps) are not lubricated. If you feel you do want lubrication then yes go for the F5. Thanks.
I think I heard it doesn't attack the carbon track but the material the carbon track is placed on, It swells up once deoxit is sprayed on it.
Hi John. Alas another myth! I've had a carbon track soaking in DeOxit for the last 14 months. Nada! The proof of all this is in the almost total lack of user negative reports. If DeOxit caused any of these problems it would be all over the net! "Just RUINED a perfectly good amplifier with DeOxit! All the carbon pots are £$%*ed!" "Me to!!! Can''t believe they allow this stuff to be sold!!" Etc etc. Instead, after literally tens of millions of applications there is almost zero real world, real people complaints.
It is well known that anything which 'is well known' has just been made up on the spot.
Great video with great information.
btw... providing accurate information to someone who has drawn mistaken conclusions from incomplete information due to a lack of research... isn't 'myth busting' or 'debunking'.
It's just correcting someone's mistake. That was probably innocently made, like most of the mistakes most of us make everyday.
Hi Robin True if it's just one person, but if a lot of people believe the same error, I think it's fair to call it 'myth busting'! All the best
Thank you so much for making this clear. I have seen videos basically saying the same thing, so thanks for busting it. As a beginner I was really getting worried about cleaning my pots. Subscribed, again thank you will be ordering some dioxit for my vintage radio I have just received.
Thanks Tony!
Stuart, the video I watched just before this, explained that the D5 flushes away the Fader Grease from the Pot, and this will use long term issues, like makes the pot too loose.
The grease is a type of seal , so when it gets washed away you lose that protection. He also thought it left behind a residue, but I wonder if it is breaking down the Fader Grease is it really the washed away grease that is leaving a residue? Does any of that make sense to you ?
Hi yes that all makes sense. I probably wouldn;t use D5 oin a 'greased fader' if you know what I mean, but 99.9% of the pots I use this on have never sena trace of grease in their miserable lives!
I'm the person Stuart is talking about in this video.
DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots.
DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason.
DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here.
Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders?
Where is the logic in that?
I' am a retired tech and still do repairs, I have used DeOxit D5 for years without a single problem. I find myself perplexed with a number of video's claiming D5 leaves a residue making meter readings erratic. My take is, if another solvent were used and D5 applied later, then yes! maybe there could be argument made, mixing different solvents from other manufactures is asking for trouble. When I discovered DeOxit D5, it out performed any other contact cleaners by a mile, in fact my cleaners would cause volume slider controls to bind or stick due to the chemicals they used. Stuart! you are the only one that bothered to do a though investigation that involved contacting Caig to put this matter to rest, (well done).
Thanks John!
¨A Little Knowledge Is Dangerous!! or to quote Bill Murray: ¨It is difficult to win an argument with a clever person - but it is near impossible to win an argument with an IDIOT!!¨ 😁
Did you ever post the follow up video on the multiple pots test?
Its high up on my priority list
Something preventing putting the ANSWER in the title?
Come on! Where have you been? That's not how UA-cam videos work!!
I stopped using it, white vinegar removes oxidation add two teaspoons in using a syringe with denatured alcohol (you can use mineral spirits but I believe the alcohol is better) into a 16oz refillable pressurized can, I also use the pressured can to do board cleaning also, this cost 1/10 of the price. I paid 30 bucks for the reusable aluminum pressurized can, white vinegar is $3.00 a gallon and the denatured alcohol is $20 a gallon I empty the pressurized can after every use for safety and make sure I use it outside of my shop. I do not have to be cheap with it and does a great job of cleaning everything.
and FYI you can get deoxit in the tube and add it instead of the Vinegar.
I flush everything with Air and allow it to dry overnight.
Credit to my wife she was using the same thing (she found to recipe on line) to clean mineral buildup on plumbing fixtures but added a tablespoon of dawn soap so I started to research it
Using even a diluted vinegar solution inside potentiometers strikes me as just short of insane. Vinegar is excellent for cleaning certain things, and I do use it for removing battery corrosion from the battery department of remote controls, followed by a careful rinse with distilled water and alcohol, being extremely careful not to get any liquid inside the remote control circuitry. Vinegar is highly corrosive to copper, which is used for the moving metal commutators and wipers inside potentiimeters; also, the phenolic wafers typically found inside potentiometers, and some printed circuit boards as well, are made of cellulose (ground up wood pulp) bound together with petroleum resins, and are therefore hygroscopic, able to absorb water (even from the air) and some oils. Even the slightest trace of vinegar left behind is likely to cause corrosion of the metals in a potentiometer or the foils on a circuit board. Cleaning corrosion from metal shower fixtures and cleaning electrical or electronic contacts are two completely different things.
I wonder if the carbon track is held together with some kind of supporting substrate. If so could the solvent dissolve this substrate leading to deterioration of the track, even if the carbon is not affected. Perhaps pot manufacturers do not use the same substrate therefore explaining why some pots are damaged and others not.
Hi Stephen. Yes it's POSSIBLE, but it seems this is a solution looking for a problem. If D5 was constantly ruining pots and we were hunting for a mechanism, then your suggestion would be excellent. But D5 does not ruin pots, so why are you suggesting this mechanism?
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 because I am trying to understand why some people are reporting problems. Perhaps the pots they are working with are the cheap oriental pots I use which give me endless problems even when new.
@@stephenbarlin2314 Hi Stephen. Hmm, I wonder what pots they are having trouble with. I do 100% guitar amp work and they almost all use Alpha pots (fairly cheap) which don't have grease in them as far as I know. I wonder if certain high-end Hi-Fi pots are the issue? The number of problems reported is really down in the noise so I'm not convinced it's an issue. If it is (with High End pots) then almost any flushing solvent spray would give the same issue, not just D5. I've seen Hi Fi officianados dasassembling pots and carefully wiping with Q-tip soaked in alcohol etc. This is completely impractical for most amplifiers (a new pot is about $1.50!).
I've used DeOxit on pots for years and never had any type of issue on either modern or antique pots.
Thanks for the feedback Paul. My experience is the same.
i use Deoxit on all my electrical contacts, i even used it on the brass workings on an antique clock and still happily ticking away after 2 years (-: will bear iqn mind the pot risk outlined here though.
Stuart, thanks for debunking the myth. Well ✔ 👍
I meant to say, well done 👏
Thanks Ken!
Stuart, I’m very pleased that you took this one on. Well done! Yes, I remember this person,s posting about Deoxit D5 and F5 and was a little concerned after spending £43 for the 2 products. I started my contact cleaning journey many years ago and still have my Archer electronic cleaner with and without lubricant. Used these many times with no problems and later no problems with Servisol Super10. My experience with any potentiometer cleaner is it will cure problems for considerable time between application but not permanently due to dust buildup. I have a Gibson guitar that was made in 1980 which has the pots completely covered with an outer can arrangement and there is no crackle what so ever after playing this instrument for 40+ years.
Hi Terry YEs I'm pretty much with you on that. Almost any contact cleaner spray will do a decent job.
I highly doubt that DeOxit is damaging the carbon tracks itself but both sides of this argument seem to be missing something...
ANY solvent sprayed into a pot can break down or thin the friction grease in the pot. The grease can then run onto the carbon track, which may then cause continuity issues until properly cleaned off again. I believe this is what happens when a cleaned pot is working great for some time and then becomes noisy again after a short while.
Yes you make a good point. Having been close to this for a while now, another major division seems to be in the TYPE of pot people are cleaning.
I'm 100% cleaning guitar amp pots and have done tens of thousands without issue. I don't even think they have grease in them! So I get people who restore valuable vintage audio HiFi amps telling me to 'carefully remove each pot, disassemble it, clean with a cotton tip soaked in alcohol, regrease, reassemble, and... job done!!"
Um, yeah, sure... Completely unfeasable in guitar amps. A new pot is about $1 and it's super rare for me to need to actually change one out. No way would I ever be following the routine just mentioned! But if you have a $5,000 HiFi amp with top of the range pots costing $50 each, then sure, go for it!
is the residue left by deoxidiser sprays NOT conductive ?
Correct. The PURE residue from DeOxit is not conductive. Of course, if it's mixed up with all sorts of other crap, it might possibly be.
Elemental carbon can not be dissolved by solvents. You can however remove carbon coke and soot deposits with a solvent. With that said, the carbon resistors in potentiometers are made from finely powdered elemental carbon mixed homogeneously with a ceramic binder and then kiln baked or chemically cured. The result is extremely resistant to solvents... It is unlikely in my opinion that a brief solvent exposure would cause any detriment to carbon resistors...
True. I am at the end of an experiment where I soaked a pot in D5 for a year. Nada!
In truly unpressed with your patience and dedication to relying on data to determine consensus,,, cheers!@@stuartukguitarampguy5830
Good work Stuart !
On to to Grassy Knoll
Well done
T
Thanks Trev.
Stuart I was shocked too and it sounds like that rumours BS, but the other thing the rumours are saying is it can wash out the grease that’s in the potentiometer. Is that true, or BS as well?
99% of all pots don't have 'grease' in them!
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 👍👍👍
I'm the person stuart is talking about in this video.
Why does the company make TWO different products where one states specifically that it is to be used for pots and faders (F5) vs the other one that doesn't state that it is to be used for pots and faders?
Stuart completely misrepresented what I states. It's unfortunate that he's so persistent in his mindset. He can't expand or learn being that way.
DeoxIT-D5 cost more, contains mineral spirits (which over time will erode the physical integrity of the carbon tract), and doesn't EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why.
DeoxIT-F5 cost less, contains NO mineral Spirits, and DOES EXPLICITLY state that it is to be used for pots and faders. There's a reason why.
If those two products were the same, then why would the company make one where it says something very different from the other? They're formulated differently. Why would they be formulated differently?
I sought out this video because today I used D5 on three pots on a guitar pedal and one scratchy pot on an amp. It completely dissolved the grease in all 4 pots, and now they all feel loose and terrible when I turn them. Not only have they lost any smooth feeling, but they’ve also lost whatever protection the grease was providing. After doing some research, I’ve found out that I either need to get them serviced, or try to apply new grease myself, which would mean completely dismantling the pots and putting them back together.
So while perhaps D5 won’t damage the carbon, I have first hand experience that it will remove the grease from your pots, so be careful.
Hi A couple of things. First hardly any amp pots have grease in them. And... any cleaning spray, solvent, will remove grease of course, not just DeOxit. All the best
i learned that on my own on my synths, is just super aggressive on pots, much more than other solvents. For the future, get deoxit F5, that's the one for faders and pots. Same results, grease intact
@@stuartukguitarampguy5830 The amp is a miniature amp head, and now the one knob that I sprayed with D5 has lost all of the smoothness and resistance that the other knobs still maintain. So whether or not you think the pots have grease in them doesn’t really matter because I actually own it and can feel the difference.
My point is that while D5 may be perfectly safe for cleaning pots, there should maybe be a disclaimer somewhere stating that if you like the feel of pots that have damping grease in them, which gives them a little bit of resistance and smoothness to them, you should probably use a different product as D5 (and other solvents as you stated) will dissolve the grease which will make your knobs feel completely different.
So maybe instead of being condescending and telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about, you could try to be helpful and say something like “Hey, good point, solvents can remove damping grease from potentiometers so be aware if you don’t want the grease to be dissolved”.
The fella below gave a recommendation that I should try using F5 instead as it is safe for faders and pots that are greased. That is a much more helpful response than yours.
I get it, it’s UA-cam and you probably get attacked constantly in the comment section, but that’s not what I’m doing. I’m simply stating that D5 can have adverse effects on certain potentiometers, namely the ones that have damping grease. It seems like you understand that this is true, so why not just say that? It really doesn’t need to be argumentative. But hey, you do you buddy.
Take care, and thanks for the response.
@@Emilio-HLZ Thanks so much, I appreciate the suggestion. I’ll make sure to use that on my pedal knobs from now on. Take it easy!
@@shmoelyshpread44 Hi. Sorry you seemed to get annoyed with my reply. I'm not trying to say you are 'wrong'. All I can share is my experience. I've cleaned about 10,000 pots using D5 and never had an issue like the one you are saying. BUT... all of those pots were just standard guitar amp pots and they don;t have any grease or anything. I also have had many times a pot with a lot of 'feel' but on cleaning it becomes quite loose. This is not grease, but a buildup of dirt and crap. Once removed, the pot goes back to its proper 'looser' feel. Not saying this is what happened on yours though.
I also know that all solvents will remove any/everything which is in the pot. Dirt, grease, whatever. So it's not unique to D5. If your pot is scratchy there;s not a lot you can do really apart from spray it. I disagree with the other reader who says something like 'D5 is super aggressive' - actually they use one of the milder formulations of mineral spirits. Finally, although I don;t use it myself, F5 (designed for faders really) has a bit of lubricant in it. You could actually try this on your pot to see if that helps. All the best.
You English are so polite. Even when arguing with a thick brain. A question for you, Can you use mass oxygen sensor cleaner for cleaning scratchy pots?
How come we're always the baddies in American movies then? Was watching 'Rebel Moon' last night and the baddies are full-on Nazis - but with cut glass English accents! Weird!!
Used Servisol at work. Probably very similar. Good detective work, Stuart.
Hi Dennis All other cleaners, apart from DeOxit, work the same way. Basically some sort of solvent which flushes away contaminants. Great. In my experience pretty much anything will do that. No brand is better than another. BUT... with about 1 in 10 pots, the noise doesn't go away. This is because the small metal wiper of the pot is oxidised. Obviously a cleaning spray will have no effect in those cases. DeOxit contains a deoxidation chemical which deals with this corsosion. It also has a flushing action as well of course. So I always use DeOxit even if 9/10 something cheaper (e.g. alcohol) might do the trick..
I just watched this video and loved it. Did you ever do a video on your pot experiment? I looked at your video list on your channel and did not see it.
Hi mark. I MUST finish that one!!!
I remember reading that conversation. He seemed very determined and it made me think too. But like most, I've been using Deoxit as long as I can remember. Unless the part itself was physically damaged in the first place, I've never had a failure by using Deoxit. And some of the places I have worked (not guitar related), we went through so much of that on the weekly, you'd think that we were painting with it. But in the fairness of completeness, I would welcome the person making these claims to retort with video evidence of his own that it does cause damage. I would certainly be interested myself. I do also use Servisol occasionally. Usually if it's a guitar potentiometer, I'll use Servisol given it's a bit cheaper and does the job. There's no reason for that at all other than it's just what I've always done.
Hi Jon I very much doubt he had any evidence at all!
I have seen cases where D5 causes a potentiometer to seize or to become sticky, or sometimes too loose (flushes the lubricant out). In all fairness, these are cases where experience has taught me ---- the hard way ---- that those particular pots cannot be safely sprayed with any known electronics control cleaner and must be disassembled for cleaning and lubing.
The problem is that a potentiometer track is not a solid block of *pure* carbon. It is a paint containing carbon particles in a binder, which depending on its composition (if ancient stuff like tube radios, in worst case something like nitro lacquer or spirit lacquer) may dissolve by organic solvents and so flush the carbon powder away. Modern potentiometers may be safe because they were certified to survive PCB cleaning solvents used by factories.
I'm the person Stuart is talking about in this video.
DeoxIT-F5 states specifically on the label that it cleans and lubricates faders and pots.
DeoxIT-F5 DOES NOT contain mineral spirits. It doesn't for a reason.
DeoxIT-D5 DOES NOT specifically say that it is to be used on pots and faders. Why would the leave it out if it was supposed to be used for it. There's over a couple dozen things it states, but it leaves out pots and faders? Give me a break here.
Why would you continue to use a product that doesn't state to use for pots and faders when the same company makes another product that is less expensive, doesn't contain mineral spirits and states specifically that it IS to be used on pots and faders?
Where is the logic in that?
@@johnsuggs7828 I certainly see your point. It's all fair enough. All I can say, I have never had a negative effect using D5 at all whether it's a pot or a fader. I do have D5 and F5 here and may take cause to prefer F5 for pots and faders in future. Just to date, I haven't had anything die as a result of using D5. The oldest candidate will be one of my TSL100s which has had I would guess 2-3 treatments of D5 over ten years or so which still all work fine. Maybe a point can be made as somebody else said on vintage amplifiers? The only times I have replaced potentiometers is when cleaning just didn't work at all to remove scratchiness or voids in the travel.
This video fell right into my lap =)
I just purchased the F5 a couple of minutes ago right before clicking on your channel, how bizarre.
👍
Mahalo from Commie Fornia
TBD3.0 (Toothless Bull Dog 3.0)
Amazing! I hope you enjoyed it.
i was wondering if i can make my own d5 with mixing mineral spirits with deoxit d100...
The thing is, 'mineral spirits' is a HUGE catch-all term.
Interesting video, but why not use Servisol Super 10 which is less than half the price? Is Deoxit better in some way? If so, how?
Servisol Super 10 also comes with the old style push button and straw (like old WD40) which you can bend and spray at the same time
Hi. There are LOTS of cleaners out there and it's just too big a job to assess them all, not that I am qualified to do so in any case. So I just stick with one I know to be good. Servisol may be as good or even superior.
All the best
hi stuart i hope ypu well .. i wuld like to ask you samthing.. where can i find th potentiometers for a Marshall valvestate avr 150hx ? the pronlem is that i live in Venezuela and culdnt find them here in my country .. so do you know where can i find them ?
Are you able to get a picture of the pot?