@oldaudiophile,
have I learned anything?
Oh yes, you have learned quite a bit. WRT to the Elmasonic P60H PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf, it’s a very versatile dual frequency 37/80-kHz unit with variable power and various operating modes. As the book says, a common UT cleaning process with Elmasonic P-series is 10-min auto-cycling between 37-kHz and 80-kHz; then 10-min at 80-kHz. But it’s a very powerful unit. It will heat the tank water pretty quickly.
UT tank power ratings especially for the lower cost Chinese units can be shall we say optimistic. It’s easy to check by how quickly the tank heats up (ultrasonics only) or plug into a simple power monitor such as Upgraded Watt Meter Power Meter Plug Home Energy Monitor Electricity Usage Monitor, Electrical Usage Monitor, Energy Voltage Amps Meter Tester with Backlight, Overload Protection, 8 Display Modes - Amazon.com.
If you plan on serially cleaning a large batch of records, one batch after another, for the Elmasonic P-series you have to manage the tank temperature, i.e. cool it off. You can try what Kirmuss does for his UT tank at shows which is to drain the tank into a container to allow it cool, and refill with cooler fluid, or you can add a pump, filter and radiator. I have successfully set up a few people with a pump, filter and radiator for Elmasonic P-series tanks (Chapter XIV has the radiator details).
Take care and best wishes for the Holidays and New Year,
Neil
PS/For those reading who cringe at the details being addressed for full wet cleaning, for new records (and even good condition used records), many people are satisfied with just the Audio Technica AT-6012 brush - Amazon.com: Audio-Technica AT6012 Record Care Kit with Record Care Solution, Brush Pad, Storage Base, and Adhesive Tape : AUDIO-TECHNICA: Electronics used as follows:
- Do not use the fluid provided, it’s now nothing more than water+detergent and it will leave residue. It used to be distilled water and isopropyl alcohol but worldwide shipping regulations have clamped down on shipping flammable fluids.
- Instead, drain out the detergent and 1st flush the bottle with tap-water until no foam, then rinse with distilled water (DIW) and refill with 50:50 distilled water (DIW) and 70% or 91% isopropyl alcohol (IPA). Do not use rubbing alcohol it has other ingredients that will leave residue.
- Wet the leading edge of the brush (the brush is directional) with the 50:50 DIW/IPA solution, then wipe the record (while spinning) with the wetted edge, and then roll the brush to dry, as shown in this video - https://youtu.be/eQIFbCc015s beginning at time 3:05. If you watch the whole video dismiss applying the 5-drops to the top of the pad.
- Note that over time, the pad will get dirty, and it will give back more than it removes. Just flush the pad with DIW (spray bottle works) and then finish with wetting the entire pad with the DIW/IPA solution to speed up drying the pad.
|
FWIW the basic rules for UT are as follows:
- The power to produce cavitation is proportional to the kHz, so a 120kHz UT needs more power than a 40kHz.
- For ultrasonic tanks, the bubble diameter is inversely proportional to the kHz, so a 40 kHz UT produces a large bubble than a 120kHz UT.
- The cavitation intensity is proportional to the bubble diameter and the tank power (watts/L) but there is a maximum power above which no addition cavitation intensity is obtained.
- The number of cavitation bubbles produced is proportional to kHz, so a 120kHz produces more bubbles than a 40kHz, but smaller bubbles.
- The smaller the tank volume, the more power that is required. It has to do with the ratio of the tank volume to its interior surface area.
- For lower kHz units (<60kHz), if the tank bath flow rate (from filtering or spinning) >50% of the tank volume per minute, cavitation intensity decreases.
The Humminguru is 40-kHz and the tank is only 400-ml, so even with only 60W it is a proper ultrasonic unit and produces fully developed cavitation. The Degritter is 120kHz and 1.4L, so it needs much more power, but at ~300W it's a powerful machine. But the KLAudio is the king of the hill, it's a beast - 40kHz, 0.78-L and 200W. The KLAudio is the most powerful recording cleaning UT sold. While the HG and DG can often benefit from a touch of surfactant for cleaning efficiency, the KLAudio is just brute power (and its water level sensors prevent the use of surfactant).
|
If Neil were to buy a Vacuum RCM and a US RCM and used his magic to invent a technique for them I am all ears. I would be very interested in that, but trying based on his description, with no practical experience, I hesitate to go down that rabbit hole.
All the procedures that are in the book Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press which include vacuum-RCM, UCM and combinations thereof have been validated with users across the globe.
As far as 200-proof ethanol this is what the book says: Pure Ethanol is drinking alcohol and aside from the inebriating effects is very safe. But most Ethanol purchased is denatured (made undrinkable) with methanol, and methanol and IPA can be very toxic. I make no statement that 200-proof cannot be purchased.
As far as Triton X100, this is what the book says: However, Dow™ Triton™ X-100 is categorized as a nonylphenol ethoxylate (NPE) and NPE chemical compounds have aquatic toxicity and are being phased-out (ref: EPA, Nonylphenol (NP) and Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs), 8/18/2010, Action Plan, RIN 2070-ZA09 (21)). Dow™ Triton™ X-100 was banned for commercial use/sale in the EU/UK on 4 January 2021 unless an exemption has been authorized. Medical use is authorized through 22 December 2023.
Otherwise, I developed and patented cleaners and precision cleaning processes for the Navy for about 20-years and assisted setting up those procedures across the globe with our allies. Those processes included ultrasonics anything from simple bench top to massive systems with 400-gallon tanks.
You can believe it or not, but I have lots of on-hands practical experience, and I have no need for the Edisonian technique of trial and error. If you understand the science, the mechanics and the chemistry, all you are doing at the end is tweaking the chemistry and process to match the user and equipment. Cleaning a record is not rocket science, but if it matters I do know how to clean rockets - I developed a spray cleaning procedure to clean a large aerospace contractor’s 30,000-gal liquid oxygen tank. But for those wed to trial and error, it’s a valid approach, just not very efficient.
The book discusses the “Rushton Paul” DIY ultrasonic cleaning formula Ultrasonic Cleaning, addressing each of the ingredients and what they mean. If you understood the chemistry (which the book addresses) of surfactants then you would understand why I recommend Tergitol 15-S-9; it’s essentially 4X more efficient which allows using less making rinsing easier.
As far as the manual process, I am open with stating that if you are cleaning more than about 6-records at a time, it’s not practical.
Otherwise, as the book states: All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. In the final analysis, the best cleaning process is the one that is best for you.
Take care,
Neil Antin
|
@tomic601,
Probably a friction stir welded tank my team built….ha. One million linear inches of weld without a defect… definitely NOT trial and error…
That's impressive. The tank was an open honeycomb design. When they explained what they wanted to clean, I definitely took a deep breath. But we able to clean the tank using only about 100-gallons of cleaner. We used a high pressure multi-axis spray nozzle using Teflon diaphragm pumps to keep the fluid clean and as the fluid drained from the tank, a bank of 0.1-micron absolute filters kept the cleaning agent (that I had a Patent for) clean for continuous use with sampling of effluent to determine the process efficiency. However, the irony is the company w/o my knowledge and w/o including me, filed for and got a patent for the cleaning process; but they never made any money on it. I uncovered the Patent while researching something else. Oh well, so much for ethical behavior.
Take care and best wishes for the holidays,
Neil
|
@tuberculin,
Make no mistake, you did not offend me. You criticized the work that I have done, and I have the right of response. Period.
I have expended as much as 4-6 hours working with someone when they are attempting to use the chemistry and process that are documented in the book and run into problems. For the record, I have never worked with you. There are little details that can make a large difference such as concentration and application, even the brush and the technique using the brush (for vacuum RCM). That is why I always say the devil is in the details.
I would like to know the source of your statement:
I tried your Tergitol, it didn't work as well. That's why they added the second Tergitol, to make it the same as Triton X.
The origins of Tegikleen which is a blend of insoluble Tergitol 15-S-3 and soluble Tergitol 15-S-9 go back to 1996 when Triton X100 would have been readily available world-wide: The Care and Handling of Recorded Sound Materials, By Gilles St-Laurent Music Division National Library of Canada January 1996 “The Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) recommends the use of nonionic, ethelyne oxide condensates surfactants to clean sound recordings. The CCI does not foresee long-term problems associated with the use of nonionic surfactants such as Tergitol. Tergitol 15-S-3 is an oil soluble surfactant and 15-S-9 is a water-soluble surfactant. Combined they remove a wide range of dirt and greases and can safely be used on sound recordings. Use 0.25 part of Tergitol 15-S-3 and 0.25 parts of Tergitol 15-S-9 per 100 parts of distilled water. The recording must then be rinsed thoroughly with distilled water to eliminate any trace of detergent residue.”.
Otherwise, you are entitled to your opinion, and as the old saying goes, you can make some of the people happy some of the times, but you will never make all the people happy all the time.
Peace
|
@lewm,
The quote I somewhat butchered was: You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time" and web 'appears' to attribute it to John Lydgate of Bury (c. 1370 – c. 1451) who was a monk and poet.
I will not hold it against you for using Triton X100 LOL. Many people I have worked with had Triton X100 and while adopting some of what I recommended choose to stay with Triton X100. It really only becomes to an issue when people want a no-rinse solution for UT, in which case you want just enough nonionic surfactant for wetting and keeping the cleaner concentration 50-ppm or less works well and this is where Tergitol 15-S-9 is a major benefit.
Otherwise, thank you for the kind words and best wishes to you and yours for the Holidays and the New Year,
Neil
|
|
@tuberculin,
I am not criticizing your system. It simply does not work for me. Don’t be so sensitive, show some humility and accept that this boy ain’t gonna buy it.
Your prior statement is obviously very critical of items that I may have never said in the past. Unfortunately, the VPI Forum is long gone and all we have left is the published book.
So far Triton-X100, which Neil said was being taken off the market years ago, is still available and all of the other ingredients are easily obtainable, even the 200 proof ethyl alcohol, which Neil said is not available. That has fueled my skepticism.
As far as my chemicals did not work - the list of chemicals that are now in the book are quite extensive:
- Alconox Liquinox - general detergent for precleaning.
- Alconox Citranox - weak acid for precleaning
- Distilled White Vinegar with Nonionic Surfactant as a lower cost alternative to Citranox.
- Enzymes are discussed in Chapter 8
- Isopropyl alcohol (IPA) is discussed at length in Chapter 8 along with blending with the final cleaner nonionic surfactant
- Quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) such as HEPASTAT-256 and BAK50 (available EU) that some people use for anti-static coatings is addressed in Chapter 8.
- Rush Paul cleaning solution is addressed in Chapter 8.
- Nonionic Surfactants include Tergitol 15-S-9, Polysorbate-20, Triton X100, Surfonic™ JL-80X, DEHYPON LS 54 (available UK), ILFORD Ilfotol, and Tergikleen.
There are a host of chemicals that I address and many different processes. Ultrasonic cleaning is addressed ad-nauseum in Chapter XIV detailing the effects of kHz, power, how many records at a time, spinner speed, etc,. But depending on where you live, what equipment you have, and your own goals, the book is a handbook that can guide in any direction you want to go.
Essentially, I have no fixed system. My first recommendation is the basic standard chemicals Liquinox, Citranox and Tergitol 15-S-9. If they work great, if not, and if I work with you, the hours I addressed above are my time - not yours, and I will adjust as necessary to hopefully match a chemistry and process that works for you.
And as the book says in the Forward, All methods/procedures specified here present opportunity for experimenting with different cleaning agents, different cleaning brushes, different drying cloths, and different cleaning equipment....If you proceed down the path of experimentation, the information provided by this book can guide you to informed decisions...
Otherwise, like your selection of cartridge, I have four Soundsmith cartridges that I rotate among a two-arm table, Sussurro Gold Limited Edition, Paua, Boheme, and Carmen. Always have one back at Soundsmith for rebuild.
Take care,
|
@dogberry,
Have you moved on from the Sussurro Gold?
No.
VPI did a comparison some year back at CAF with two exact same tables (HW-40); played back through some big Wilsons; one with the Lyra-Etna, the other with the Soundsmith Hyperion (the low output version of the Helios). They were playing a Louis Armstrong record. The differences in the cartridges were to me very apparent. The Etna made Louis sound like he was singing in Aspen, CO (clear & bright - call it a bit yang), while the Hyperion made Louis sound like he was playing in New Orleans (hot and humid - call it a bit yin); but neither missed any details. Personal taste would dictate which one you would like. To me, the Sussurro Gold is in-between, and much more to my liking (and my equipment).
|
Hi Bill,
Thanks for the kind words, and yes, it's been a bit of journey since the VPI Forum days. I very grateful to @whart for jumping in as Editor and Publisher of the book and making it available for free. Although there are days when I ask myself why did I do this, LOL. I went back to work a few years ago, so it's not like I do not have enough to do. But is always good trying to help people.
Take care and best wishes for the Holiday and New Year,
Neil
|
