A cleaning solution that is alcohol free, for those who prefer, is Torumat TM-8. Sheila Berdan and Joe Knight at Brooks Berdan, Ltd. in Monrovia California have started Groovy Hi-Fi Solutions to make and market it.
Degritter brand ultrasonic record cleaner
I received notification yesterday that the Degritter ultrasonic record cleaner is finally making it into production. I have been watching the company for about a year, as the cleaner has moved from prototype to beta testing , and now to a limited production of the finalized (we’ll see ;-) version. The design is excellent, eliminating my reservations about the high-priced (around $4,000) ultrasonic cleaners, at a little over half their price (just over $2,000, last I read). The Degritter uses 120kHz as it’s ultrasonic frequency, and features water filtering and disc drying. It also looks cool, like a 1950’s toaster! Details available on the companys website.
116 responses Add your response
On 07-14-2019, Prof said: “Downsides? Sometimes I'm not sure I prefer the sound of the washed record to the unwashed record. It can sometimes make a record sound in a way a bit more CD-like than vinyl. Can sometimes seem to lose a little bit of life/air/leading edge after a wash.” Hello Prof, and everyone, I do not have a Degritter, so I hope I’m not too off-topic here, but I do have lots of DIY ultrasonic record cleaning experience, and my theory and experience with this is that a totally clean record can sound like what you are describing, especially if the lubricating surface of the vinyl becomes more “dry” such as it does with many cleaning fluids and methods. I use a post-wash and vacuum removal with a VERY diluted solution of L’Art du Son cleaning fluid. For me, this eliminates the problem you are describing. If you are interested, you can read more about it in my posts (redcars) here: https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/timas-diy-rcm.26013/page-3#post-581681 There are posts both before and after this post if you want to dig into this further. The principle that I am recommending is not dependent on the method or products used in ultrasonic cleaning. Best, Don |
I have to sell a couple of my vintage drumsets before I can buy a Degritter. Audiogon member Simon (folkfreak) invited me over to his place in NE Portland to hear his system (and quite a system it is!), and while I was there he cleaned an LP I brought with me on his KL Audio machine. After hearing some of my records through his Magico loudspeakers (which have an elevated high end in comparison with those I’m accustomed to), I learned I HAVE to get an URC of my own! |
Interesting. The US site says out of stock. https://us.degritter.com/product/degritter-rcm/ |
Says here it is in stock: https://degritter.com/product/degritter-rcm/ I just picked one up. They had a few blemished units offered at a discount on the site so I grabbed one of those. I have been using it for a couple weeks. It works quite well in my opinion. I just bought the adapters for 7" and 10" records too as I have a fairly decent number of those records. I don’t do a second rinse though. The cleaner has an antistatic property to it and I find that this has definitely helped in my situation. |
Yes the Degritter is very flexible and user programmable. I got two water tanks for my Degritter for when I want to do as you’ve mentioned - a second wash to remove any left over surfactant. Though the usual presets combine wash and dry, you can select to only wash the record - 3 presents from light/med/heavy wash times. Or only dry. So I do a heavy wash with the surfactant tank, with no dry time selected. When it’s finished I switch in the water-only tank and select a quick wash/dry cycle. |
The Degritter machine met my expectations. Nice looking, very easy to use, great user interface, excellent flexibility in how you want to wash the records. Being able to drop a record in, push a button and walk away was what I wanted. There was one software glitch (machine didn't automatically turn off after 15 minutes as it is supposed to) but that was purportedly fixed with updated software that I have yet to download and install. But nothing that has impeded the use of the machine. It's nice that the Degritter can be updated by the user as new software is released - they can tweak how the machine works based on user feedback and their own research. Just to try, I did get a second tank. So if I want I can do a wash with surfactant, then insert the second tank to wash off the surfactant. Not sure this has made any difference. It's tough to know because I only ever have one copy of a record to wash, they are all going to be in different shape sonically, so it's hard to compare multiple cleaning methods. As for sonic results, like any record cleaner it depends on the shape of the record and the nature of it's noise. Obviously this machine won't get rid of pops and ticks caused by actual damage to the record, only if it's caused by debris that can be scoured out. Overall I'd say I hear an appreciable difference with every record after cleaning - smoother, less hash, somewhat less pops and ticks. There have been the occasional jaw-dropping difference. One record went from sounding like it had been taken directly from a trash compactor - hard to even hear the music through the noise - to sounding almost brand new after a wash in the Degritter. I hadn't thought such a thing possible until I heard it. Downsides? Sometimes I'm not sure I prefer the sound of the washed record to the unwashed record. It can sometimes make a record sound in a way a bit more CD-like than vinyl. Can sometimes seem to lose a little bit of life/air/leading edge after a wash. |
I got mine a couple days ago. There have been some issues but I think (hope) we’re past that now. The company has been very responsive and helpful. Coming from a KL machine there are so many things better about the Degritter. I had one new album that was very noisy since I bought it. Probably should have thrown it out after cleaning it with the KL 10 times and no improvement. I cleaned it once on the Degritter and it’s 95% quiet now! I’m putting every record through a heavy wash and I swear even records with no issues sound noticeably better afterwards. |
I have been in contact with the folks who created The Degritter and have found them to answer all my questions quickly and with a level of detail that inspires confidence. Having just recently gotten back in the the vinyl game, I find it would be helpful to have a product that is easy to use and gets the job done without all the fuss. The Degritter seems to check all the boxes and seems like a real engineered product. Most everything else seems just shy of DIY. @prof Having had the unit a while can you provide an update? Does the unit meet your expectations and would you purchase again? Any pitfalls? You mentioned a 2nd tank as for a clean wash if one adds their cleaner to the distilled water. I had the same idea. Also, your list of reasons of getting it are exactly like mine. If I could clean up both new and old vinyl and get rid of most of the pops and ticks that would be great. So far surface noise has not been terrible just pesky ticks and the occasional pop. As good as vinyl has been overall I think digital sources like SACD, CD, or something else for some genes or content may win out for playback - especially of the source material is very quiet. For example, the new Brian Eno half-speed masters may be a bit too noisy on vinyl for me. But the vice of most of my albums have been great. So I would like to clean them up as much as possible without having to make a sacrifice at the alter of the vinyl Gods. Thanks for the feedback. |
Will give more detail later, but so far I'm awfully glad I went this route vs something like a VPI, Okki Nokki or other machines. This machine really suites my needs. Drop record in, press button and walk away, return to US cleaned and dried record! The extra cost for such convenience to me is well worth it, against the time/labor/noise etc involved in other methods. |
Thank whart. Yes I bought a whole batch of the Ultimate Audiophile Inner Sleeves from sleevecity. By far the best inner sleeves I've ever found. All waiting to be used. I admit I find it almost a bit galling to consider that something other than an US cleaning might be necessary, given the way US purportedly works it's hard to imagine what could do better at getting in to those record grooves. I buy a lot of used records from discogs. But I'd have to say significant surface noise has been fairly rare, even when the record looks dirtier than it sounds. So I think I'll get along ok with just the US. I don't want to add more work, which for me would defeat the purpose of buying this press-a-button-and-walk-away cleaning machine. |
It should work. I've had several machines and the only shortcoming I've found is that some records need more work- for those you could do a manual pre-clean with a fluid like AIVS #15, rinse it, then stick it into the US. I do find that US adds something to otherwise high grade record cleaning using something on the order of the Monks, which I like very much. I find the combined methods synergistic, but for new records or pristine audiophile owned copies, the US should be fine. You may also be able to experiment with how much of the manufacturer's fluid you want to use- that was an early adopter trick with the Audio Desk as well. Let us know how you fare- i suspect you'll be pleased. I assume you bought yourself some fresh aftermarket inner sleeves? |
whart, Yes. And my first attempt to clean any of my records (aside from a record brush). I’ve been building my vinyl collection this year at a furious pace, and need to clean many of them, but I’m way too lazy for any other cleaning regimen. If this machine doesn’t work out for me I doubt I’ll bother cleaning my records. But, fingers crossed.... |
There's a lot of chatter on forums about using cleaners/surfactants with US cleaners - what type, or whether to even use them at all. It seems generally acknowledged that surfactants work well in aiding the US cleaning process, but some are uncomfortable leaving any residue on the vinyl. The Degritter cleaner apparently leaves a fine "anti-static" coating that they claim does not affect playback at all. Some beta testers seem to agree as they use the surfactant. But for those uncomfortable leaving it on, an idea is to do a double wash - first with surfactant, second to wash the surfactant off (Degritter says you can wash off the surfactant). I inquired a while ago about the possibility of acquiring an additional water tank to make a double wash easy - just have the tank with fresh water, sans surfactant, on hand to switch in after the first wash. They said they'd be making the water tanks available on their own. Nice to see they will be available! (Though I'm looking to simplify the record cleaning process as much as possible, which is why I went with a Degritter in the first place. So if I like what I hear using the surfactant I'll likely stick with that). |
I received this email today from Degritter: "New web store stock on March 25As you may have noticed, our webshop is up and running. You may also have noticed that the number of machines in stock was rather low and that they’ve all been already bought. "Bear with us, though. There will be five more machines available in our shop on March 25. Indeed, we are keeping the quantities low in March, but this is to ensure that the stock that is currently available is available to buy throughout the whole month. "Degritter accessories will also become available on March 25. This includes 7” and 10” adapters, replacement water tanks and filters as well as cleaning fluids. "There is still some more good news. We expect the availability of stock to stabilize by April. This means that considerably larger quantities of Degritter machines will become available in our webshop. "We appreciate your patience and aim to deliver the best ultrasonic record cleaner in return. "All the Best, Team Degritter" |
bdp24, Yeah the price hike does push it upward to a smaller audience. I got in when I could buy it at just over $2,300 so I'm happy enough about that. Still, the price demanded for the KLAudio and Audio Desk does put the Degritter in better perspective, and it looks to me like the better machine in many ways. I've started to really anticipate the Degritter because, as I wrote, I've built up a big collection of LPs, especially tons of older "library music" LPs from the 70's to early 80's. I have bought brand new premium inner sleeves to use once my records are washed. So...I'm all ready to go, just twiddling my thumbs waiting. |
Agree 100% @prof. I registered on the Degritter website, and have received regular email updates on the status of the cleaner ever since. Many of them included the announcement of a slight increase in price, but nothing like the latest! At around $2,000 US I didn’t consider it overpriced (as I do the $4,000 usc machines), but $3,000 is pushing it. Still, as it appears it may actually be a better machine than the KLAudio and Audio Desk, that price IS defendable. For anyone not wanting to have to assemble a DIY usc, and with the required disposable income (or savings, for you retired gents), the Degritter is mighty attractive and tempting. As you said prof, to see it is to want it! I’m not crazy about the idea of forced-air drying of LP’s, but anyone with a VPI, Nitty Gritty, Pro-Ject, Okki Nokki, or even Keith Monks vacuum machine can use it to dry the LP after a cleaning in any usc. I also like having a VPI if for no other reason than that it provides a platter upon which a used, dirty LP can be scrubbed by hand. One advantage of the Vinyl Stack spinner is the ability to clean up to five LP’s simultaneously. The only automatic usc that does more than one at a time is the Kirmuss (and then only two), with which I have serious reservations (for one thing, 35kHz is imo unacceptable. For another, their pitchmans claims for the Kirmuss cleaning solution strike me as bs. Plus, drying an LP with a cloth?!). |
I got in on the Degritter and ordered one back in the summer. Given the start-up and crowd-fund nature of the company I expected delays and of course there have been a number of them. All well explained by the company though. I should be getting mine hopefully within the next couple of weeks. It will be my first record cleaning machine! And I have so much vinyl I’ve bought since I ordered it, piling up, waiting to be cleaned. For me this machine based on it’s goals, design and the feedback of beta testers, is precisely what I was looking for. I buy plenty of old and new records and wanted a record cleaner. But frankly every single version of record cleaning I’ve ever seen has turned me off. It just looks like adding a chore to the experience of listening to records. I have taken albums over to my friend’s place and watched him use his VPI cleaner and it was just, as I said, too chore-like. And as I have sensitive ears I HATE the loud fans on so many record cleaners. The automated US machines from AudioDesk etc seemed to do what I’d like, but were expensive and, IMO, damned ugly. As soon as I saw the Degritter I wanted it. Love the chic industrial design. Looks like a finished product I would actually place in plain view, rather than the kludged together in someone’s basement look of other record cleaners. Loved the intuitive looking controls, the fact you just pop a record in and hit a button, then you can walk away do other things and come back to a dry record ready to play. And they seem to have thought through so many little user-friendly design aspects, especially flexibility in the drying process. There are now something like 22 finely graded settings for the fan dryer noise, so you can dial it to really quiet (longer dry) or louder (shorter dry). I took the chance in paying 1/2 up front, 1/2 upon delivery. The feedback from beta testers was all highly positive both for the machine and for the Degritter team being conscientious and responsive. Since paying up I’ve found that to be very true. All inquiries have been responded to within 24 hours, often sooner, with confidence-inspiring detail. As to the price, I can certainly understand why someone would blanche at paying thousands of dollars for a record cleaner. But this is really about personality and budget. As I said, I look to records to relax, not add chores to my life. To some they may like to clean records so it’s no big loss to go a cheaper route, or a manual route to cleaning. Which is great! But that’s not me. I rationalize the money in that I have spent similar sums and more for various equipment over the years - speakers, amps, pre-amps, turntable, etc. Given I'm listening mostly to vinyl these days and cleaning a record will upgrade the sound to some degree (variable, I know, I’m not expecting miracles) I look at it as an upgrade similar to if I were buying some other component that would improve the sound of my system. So that’s my story with the Degritter, thus far. I’ll report back when I get it in action. |
A .5 micron filter would be nice, but the large 1 micron filter canisters available on Amazon do a great job of clearing the bath of all visible debris-- which accumulates quickly over the course of several cleaning cycles. Circulation through the soft plastic tubing to/from the external pump and filter also returns a hot bath to safe temperatures. |
Thanks @terry9 , There was a lot of info on the "Thumbs up for ultrasonic cleaning" thread that most here contributed to. I've found to be true the same as you and @dgarretson have said regarding overstating possible negative effects of heat up to 45c and higher frequencies than 40khz by others/other manufacturers. I do want to get a .5 micron pre-filter to go in front of my 1 micron filter next. |
The thing about higher frequency is that the wave length is shorter. A 40KHz wave is about 1.5" long, a 120KHz wave is 0.5" long. The significance of this is the space necessary for the US wave to develop. If the space (record to tank wall) is less that the wave length, then cleaning is compromised. And don’t forget to factor in a margin for warped records, so those numbers are an underestimate. Bottom line is a 120KHz machine can have a smaller tank. If it meets spec, and truly generates 120KHz. Which is why it’s a good idea to buy lab grade equipment like the PH60 - you know what you are buying, and you can trust it to meet spec, this year and next. The first thing I did when I bought the PH60 was to test for damage. It doesn’t, unless you overheat (50C) the chemistry - then records warp, but the grooves remain undamaged. At least, not with my equipment, which includes an air bearing turntable and a Koetsu. I have cleaned some 3000 records, most of them twice, some many times. No detectable damage from US. YMMV, but I doubt it. |
I’m using an Elma and Vinyl Spin, with an external DIY 1um pump filter circuit and the finishing touch of a VPI 16.5 to extract residue loosened but still in the grooves after ultrasonic cleaning. I’m suspicious that the high-priced integrated units are conceived mostly for ease of use, and that their automated brushes and inboard filtering circuits may be less effective than manual techniques. They are certainly added points of failure owing to complex mechanisms. The Elma offers both 40 and 80K frequencies. I can’t hear any improvement at 80K. At 80K there is much less ultrasonic energy communicated to the LP, as measured by the increasing heat of bath temperature during the cleaning cycle. This could be a good or bad thing w/r to safety and cleaning results. But there is no damage to the LP provided that the Vinyl Spin keeps spinning. I have melted LPs on the few occasions that I forgot to engage the spinner. One or two lessons like that and you won’t forget to turn it on. |
let’s hope the unknown as yet undiscovered far exceeds the known....otherwise it is going to be a pretty boring next thousand years... yep thirty five years ago..nobody understood how a 225# 12 varsity letter 21 year old athlete could get Juvenile diabetes....well, we know now.... peace to all those who carry a burden, visible or otherwise.... |
@teo_audio: I learned a little about medical science and holistic medicine from a veterinarian in Vista, New York who showed us ancient medical texts that explained the symptoms of our cat’s disease, since overwritten by more modern science, and then proceeded to treat the animal sympathetically with non-invasive treatments and prolonged the animal’s life for 3 years when other conventional vets suggested brain surgery or euthanasia. So, I’m well equipped to learn, even if my scientific skills are somewhat lacking. I also learned something about conventional science and reality in the Lyme disease arena, where established science is only now coming to grips with that misery. I shall soldier on.... |
@wakethetown- the Elma P60H is the one that is more reasonable in price, but will require some attention to fill level and record placement due to its smaller size. Offhand, I know from their posts here that @dgarretson and @terry9 are users of this unit. They can chime in on using this unit. The larger, more expensive P120H will accommodate more records, larger capacity tank at a greater price. Here’s the piece Tima wrote when his cheapie US tank crapped out and he stepped up to the Elma, with some good observations on water recycling: https://thevinylpress.com/timas-diy-rcm-follow-up-2-compelling-changes-improved-results/ (note those are Tim’s words, not mine). I’m still using my KL so I haven’t crossed the DIY Rubicon yet. PS: there's a relationship between tank size and the number of records you can effectively clean, something that has been discussed on other threads and can be revisited here. |
@whart .. so you came across Jerry Decker’s keeleynet. Which he’s abandoned, probably due to his health. Jerry’s been at it since before the net existed. One of the original scientific oddity data websites and collections, it is. It is slowly fading and the loss of his collection is a great loss to the searchers on the edge of the herd. Those that are by definition the edge of change itself. Reading such oddity websites is what takes a person to being, via finding those chestnuts of data within..can put one 10-20-50 years ahead of anyone else, in some aspects of scientific knowledge. Critical when it comes to putting things together into a framework that works in the now. In there, when you get past the strange and obsessive ’guardians of the scientific laws’ (don’t look! they scream, with all that agitated hand waving) when you get past the illiterate clams that all they don’t know is foo... then you can get into all the interesting edge phenomena that are indicating where to go and look in emergent science. Eg, what you just found from nearly 100 years ago, as some sort of grandiose crazy story would be normally delegated by the spitty foo claimers as being a charlatan’s tale ----is actually something that became connected to a real thing, but nearly 100 years later. This happens a thousand times over. Check the record, to note it when you come across it. And it will happen again --a thousand times more. Thus, logic says, look to the edge and into the darkness, as the middle of the herd..has nothing. Nothing at all. So ignore all the naysayers and forge ahead. And when they confront you in their self appointed fiefdom of comfort, safety, dogma, and so on, those ’halls of laws and negativity in science’ (Eg engineering..which is given as dogma, for specific reasons), gently push them by the head into a wall so you can say ’excuse me’ and step past their weird negative space ranting. They are psychologically knotted up, and it’s not going to go away. Part of the condition of being in a herd and not knowing the self.... The thing is.. they will all gang up and beat one to death in the public interweb streets for looking at and playing with data they don't understand..but not a single one will appear and show some humanity and chagrin, when they are shown to be wrong. Such is my repeated experience for decades. And move on to real science (which is by design all theory), which comes from the new and the strange, the oddities and the observations. Always has, always will. Textbooks are for telling you where the norm of the now is, in the historical sense. Read them and relate and note, but then it’s all on you to throw the textbook over your shoulder..and step out to find the new. The map is not the territory. |
@tomic601 - no problem. If you do go ultrasonic, don’t get rid of your vacuum machine. I find that ultrasonic is not a complete answer with older records that have been exposed to who knows what. @teo_audio- your comments about the resonant frequency of water fascinated me, so I did some quick and entirely inconclusive reading. There was a fellow named Keely who did some experiments back in the late 19th century experimenting with "etheric forces" and water. There was a mention of a sympathetic frequency a little above 40kHz where water shot through a tube and blew a hole through the roof of his lab! I think a lot of the information we have about ultrasonic cleaning of records is anecdotal and extrapolated from other fields. I don’t know that anyone has funded any independent research on the subject that has resulted in published papers. I gather that some of the work done by the fellow that developed the AD is considered proprietary. One person who visited here briefly to discuss ultrasonic cleaning said he measured the frequency of the KL at around 35 kHz, rather than the 40kHz claimed. One constant seems to be the question of damage- which I have found no evidence of in my use of several different machines. The theory is that the higher frequencies generate smaller, less powerful bubbles which are less likely to cause any pitting. Part of the reason for the spinning of the record is to avoid this sort of damage, though I have not tried to damage a record deliberately using ultrasonic machines. I think the days of major companies funding research in these areas is long gone-- there is little economic incentive to do so and most of the companies in the market in the record cleaning space are small operations, or are using US baths that are designed for industrial use, not necessarily for cleaning records, e.g. Elma, who make equipment for labs, dental and medical, industrial applications, etc. |
