@whart Thanks so much for referring the Elma.... I need more German stuff in my life :-) I can heartily recommend Brinkmann anything... ha
my manual but hyper trusty Nitty Gritty is fading....
my manual but hyper trusty Nitty Gritty is fading....
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
One of the reasons for 40 khz is that the resonance of water is right at that frequency. 41.2khz, approx. IIRC..... So a 40khz ultrasonic resonator is designed for that frequency and then to wander in that range (+/- 250hz, approx) until it finds the lowest reflections of energy in the resonator and the highest rate of transfer. So not the water resonance really, but the best condition of energy transfer through the medium of water. This comes out of the ultrasonic sealing industry, the place the ultrasonic resonators at’ 40khz’...come from. Most times they work with water-based products like toothpaste, creames, hair shampoo, etc. In that, I’m not sure what is accomplished with 120khz. Other than cavitation and heating at the surface of the resonator. Maybe the odd photon. I’m ready to be wrong about all that, in the face of other arguments. We shall see, kinda thing. Not negative, just neutral. A bigger number is not automatically better, is the deal, ....but...there may be good reasons to go to 120kz, and such hardware would likely take some tuning, tied to correct analysis...in order to get it to the right spot. |
Kirmuss uses a pretty ubiquitous ultrasonic bath* with the addition of a proprietary spinner that uses multiple slots rather than a rotisserie like the Vinyl Stack. He also uses a fluid that he claims removes all sorts of nasties left over from prior bad cleanings. I haven’t used it- there’s a fair amount of anecdotal information on the Hoffman forum about having to repeatedly clean to remove a paste-like residue that Kirmuss claims is the result of built-up contamination. Judging from those comments, which you can read yourself, it’s a pretty time intensive process. I don’t have an issue with his introducing a low cost entry into the ultrasonic sweepstakes, but some of his claims are, well, a bit extravagant. If you can ante up for an Elma, another fine piece of German engineering (sorry about your MB, @tomic601 - my favorite was a ’69 300 6.3- sort of a short wheelbase 600 with oodles of power), you’ll spend more but get a better quality US bath. Add a water recirculation filtering system for less than 100 dollars and the Vinyl Stack and you are in business for more than the Kirmuss but still far less than the AD or KL. *One claim he does make that I agree with is the position of the transducers on the bottom of the tank, rather than at the sides; given how wave propagation occurs, the LPs act as baffles if the transducers are at the sides of the machine. |
The 17F VPI is a fine machine, probably the best one VPI built. Here's pic from the Library of Congress showing a big VPI and a Monks from my visit to the Packard Campus back in December, 2014: https://thevinylpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/DSCF0273-1024x682.jpg |
Slaw Forgive me if I’m wrong but judging by your post above, you don’t have personal experience with US cleaning, and you’re ready to recommend the Walker fluid without personal experience. All the while, ready to question others’ experience?Went and read the post again, its pretty darn clear I have records that were cleaned that way. All my comments were directed at the results, none at the use. The sequence is transgression, apology, repentance, then forgiveness. Not my rules. Your turn. |
I lived two blocks from Tom Ports apartment in Sherman Oaks in the late-80’s/early-90’s, and bought some LP’s from him (the original German pressing of Magical Mystery Tour is a must!). I was pretty surprised by his hi-fi system, and not in a good way. A mass-market Japanese "automatic" record player, a receiver, and some box speakers. It was like being in a Best Buy! I don’t recall what record cleaner he was using at the time, but ya know he doesn’t have some secret information no one else does. A clean record is a clean record, however that is achieved. Brooks Berdan had a Keith Monks (original) in his shop in Monrovia, but preferred the VPI HW-17F. I love my 17F (with which I use fluids by VPI, Last, Nitty Gritty, and Torumat), but am still going to put together a DIY ultrasonic. There is one guy offering tanks with a choice of frequency---40k, 60k, 80k, 120k; I’m thinking 80k is a good compromise between power and gentleness. That and a VinylStack LP spinner plus water filter makes for a great, low cost usc. The Degritter looks great, but I’d rather put $3,000 into more LP’s. |
I use a Monks Omni and ultrasonic. The results are synergistic. I talked to the Degritter people when they first announced the machine a couple years ago, and suggested that coming in at a low price point might give them a real edge in the market. At the time, the person I spoke with was not optimistic about keeping the price down, but wanted to build a better machine. Perhaps they have done that. In the meantime, an awful lot of people have hopped onto the DIY bandwagon, and not just for lower cost. The feature set can be better, and if you add a circulation pump and filter, you can really optimize what you are doing. I know @slaw has gone this route, @Terry9 has done so, as have a few others. Rush Paul wrote that seminal article bringing together a lot of the learning on the DIY Audio thread (a vast undertaking to read). Tima has contributed several articles on the subject as well, including some thoughts on filtration and water purity. The high frequency used by the Degritter is, as far as I know, novel among the current crop of US machines used for record cleaning. The Walker fluids are fine. I get the same results from AIVS #15 and reagent grade 1 bought in bulk and it takes far less time than the 4 steps involved in the Walker Prelude kit. I hope these folks can bring it to market and succeed, in spite of the price. Too bad the Odyssey is no longer made. I would have bought one. The Monks is pretty well made, relies on a German dialysis pump and has a sort of classic British engineering vibe to it (no, it doesn’t leak oil and the lights don’t go out). There’s the Loricraft too, and I think Fremer wrote up at least one other point nozzle at a lower price point. In my estimation, you don’t need fancy equipment to get the job done. Most of it is about method/process and good practices. An all in one machine that works with the push of a button has yet to be made cheaply. |
FYI @millercarbon the cleaner in question is an Odyssey MKV, very well regarded and similar approach to the Monks and Loricraft machines although the Odyssey is built to Teutonic tolerances 😉. Personally I like the speed and simplicity of my US machine but I might like to have a Monks as well for those discs needing a real deep clean 😜 |
Damn @reubent, the price has gone up 50% from just six months ago! I posted this not to make the case for ultrasonic cleaning, but for those considering purchasing one of the $4,000 machines (Audio Desk, KLAudio, etc.). Here is a cheaper (even with the price increase) alternative that may actually be superior to the $4,000 models. A perfectly acceptable usc can be assembled DIY for far less, of course, and many of us still pretty happy with our VPI’s, Nitty Gritty’s, etc. I don't require Tom Port's advice on record cleaning---I've been doing it longer that he ;-) . My first cleaner was a Watts Preener in 1968. |
When it comes to cleaning records, or anything to do with getting the absolute best sound possible from them, I would defer to Better Records. They don't use ultra-sonic. They have by far the most pristine vinyl I've ever seen. They have by far the best sound I've ever heard. Pretty sure the machine they use is a lot more than $4k, but they also use Walker Enzyme Fluid for the bulk of the cleaning process. I would start with that. Yeah sure its easy to take the position something else like in this case Degritter is at least as good if not better. Its ultrasonic! Blah. Blah. Blah. I could not care less. Results are what counts in my book. Buy a couple Hot Stampers, hear how insanely good they are, realize they could not possibly be this good without an insanely good selection process- which includes cleaning with this- and then get back to me. https://www.better-records.com/product.aspx?pf_id=rcm&rurl= |
120khz now that is interesting. Nice looking unit and looks well thought out with filtering and drying. Was there ever a consensus on higher frequency 120khz vs lower frequency 40khz? I recall advocates on both sides of the argument. I am still cleaning my records the "old fashioned" way with the VPI RCM, but willing to dive in to US cleaning. |