Humminguru record cleaner

Provided your cave has an electrical supply and clean water is available in a nearby stream, yes.

So is the HG so easy a caveman could use it?

I’m going through my 2000 odd record collection that I had given up for dead and am rediscovering gems because I'm using the Humminguru. I never knew how good many of them really sounded. They’ve come to life.

@mapman agreed! It’s so easy to use that if one wanted to, you could clean every record before every play. It takes less than one side of a record to complete a cycle, so while you listen to a record, the other is cleaning and ready when the side is finished. I have my rack and cleaning equipment in a separate equipment closet and can’t hear the HG while music is playing. I recognize not everyone has this sort of setup, and the HG is still noisy enough that I wouldn’t want it in my listening room, but it’s still an option if you have a nearby room to run the HG.

I demoed a Kirmuss, was not that impressed with it. On a couple of occasions the record was off center in the slot and nearly did damage. Plus, the Kirmuss does not dry the record, a disadvantage, imo. I think the ‘Guru’ is a much better machine.

In addition to cleaning better than anything I’ve had prior, the HG is fast and easy to use which makes it an even better value. Have yet to have to run a record through more than once.

+1 @rvpiano 

I looked up the video instructions for the Kirmuss record restorer.  All I can say is, if you’ve got a lot of time on your hands this machine is for you. There are at least 10 steps in the process, every one of them time consuming.  Undoubtedly the results are better, but is the improvement so much better as to spend half a day cleaning a few records worth it?

I’ll stick with the Humminguru.

It looks like the Kirmuss 'In the Groove' Ultrasonic Record Restorer - Upscale Audio Anniversary Edition (going for ~$1200 now) might be the ticket to a "better" machine that provides the necessary higher power for cavitation bubbles without all the bells and whistles of the far more automatic (and significantly more expensive) Degritter.  I'll have to look into one of these. While I love vinyl, my collection is only a couple hundred albums, (sold or gave away most of my vinyl in the 1990s - ouch!) so I can't justify $3K for a cleaner.  I'd be better off putting that money towards a better streamer or DAC for my digital front end. 

 

Moonwatcher, to your post of 2/13, please re-read my post about “ultrasonic “ STYLUS cleaners. They are not ultrasonic. They operate at around 500 Hz. Of course, US cleaners for LPs are ultrasonic. That’s all I was saying.

@lewm Though just to be confusing, what you say is perfectly true for the Hudson, Flux and similar devices (all seem to be the same mechanism in various plastic shells), there is one actual U/S stylus cleaner on the market, and it is made by Humminguru! The S-Duo. I have one but hardly dare use it for fear of getting water inside a cartridge. One has to lower the tip of the cantilever into the shallow bath of D/W, so no good for my Deccas. I did try it out on a new Cadenza Bronze, and took photos of the stylus cleaned with a brush, and then with the S-Duo.

Plainly, it does work! I'd estimate the Hudson as running about 100Hz, and it does a mechanical clean, but not an ultrasonic one.

@aberyclark been a little while since I had it. I didn't have it very long. I liked what it did more than my VPI, so that's a high endorsement. Since I liked the result so much I went for a DG.

I just recall it seemed a bit more finicky. Record fits into the cleaning slot much nicer/tighter on DG, process is a lot smoother.

Again, HG is a fine machine at the price point. I recommend it. Not everybody wants to spend the $$$ on DG for similar results 

Have one. Very happy with it! I also used their support one time. Very responsive. 

@muzikat I thought the HG was pretty much a hit the button and go operation as well?

@vitussl101 Apparently it is you who does not know how a ’Guru’ works, or for that matter how the cleaning process works in general with US. With the ’Guru’, the issue is that ( and this is like most US machines, including the KL that I used to own, albeit less so here), the water does not get the record sufficiently wet unless a surfactant ( to break down the water/vinyl interface) is utilized. Without the surfactant, the cavitation aspect is far less effective. YMMV.

@tomic601 cover one side in painter’s tape, clean record in first machine. Hope tape stays on during cleaning cycle! Remove tape, tape up cleaned side, clean in other machine. Remove tape, play both sides of record. Not perfect by any means but not bad either.

How does one start w two identically dirty records to conduct a “ shoot-out “…. silly…

AND i should mention, i’m on Degritter #2 as is a fellow heavy user ( 500 + cycles )…. like anything built by man, i wouldn’t say it is invincible….

Would i buy another ? ….. in a heartbeat….

@rvpiano If you have not seen this video, it might be worth your time:

@daveyf  "The ’Guru’ is an excellent machine, However, it does benefit greatly from having a surfactant added to the water ( as do all US machines). Without a surfactant and DS, I found the machine to clean ok, but there was still a certain amount of hash, even on relatively clean LP’s."

Apparently, you’re not familiar with how an ultrasonic machine works. Explain how a surfactant improves ultrasonic machines. It’s imploding bubbles, small enough to get to the bottom of the grooves that do the cleaning. You can say water is a carrier for the bubbles. The detergent that comes with the Degritter breaks down oils and dirt in the water. But you don’t need to use the stuff. Even KLaudio don’t recommend adding anything to the water and will void the warranty if you do.

"@moonwatcher if you look at the price difference between the Guru and the Degritter, it is, at least imho, impossible to assign said difference to the build quality and the higher power of the DG. Instead, what is going on…is that the usual suspects are involved with the DG. As such, there is a lot more ‘upside’ built into the DG to support all of the ‘middle men’. Luckily, the Guru offers a great option to those folks, like myself, who are happy to see a machine brought to market with a great deal of value -and less impact from the ‘middle men’!."

Tell that to my neighbor Alex who purchased a Humminguru I think in September about the build quality of it. When I spoke to him on New Years it had stopped working. Looking at it, well I guess you get what you pay for. Look, I’ve cleaned records already cleaned on a Humminguru. You hear the difference. A local dealer who has a rather large record business has several customers who own a H-guru and the overall impression is it’s okay, fine for what it is. The Degritter used in the store has cleaned thousands of records with several days of heavy use without a hitch. Simple to maintain, basically clean the filter, change the water when it tells you, and good to go. Customers of the Degritter love them. In my case, I’m still on the first filter after a couple of years. It’s inexpensive to own. And their service is excellent. When I first saw the price of one I thought, who would buy this? After owning a VPI 16.5( noisy, ugly, and takes up much space) I tried one. Now I say who wouldn’t purchase one?

@muzikat thanks for the feedback. No doubt the Degritter is a very nicely designed machine.

Well of course I would have to give the nod to Degritter. I didn't have the Humminguru very long at all, hard to remember exactly. It was very close though.  If money is a concern then by all means go with Hummingguru

Moonwatcher, to your post of 2/13, please re-read my post about “ultrasonic “ STYLUS cleaners. They are not ultrasonic. They operate at around 500 Hz. Of course, US cleaners for LPs are ultrasonic. That’s all I was saying.

@muzikat ease of use aside, how well do each clean?

I had the Humminguru for awhile. I was impressed so much that I went for the Degritter. Both are good Degritter much easier to use, just put in a record hit the button and walk away. Six minutes later viola, clean record. Of course like everything in this hobby, there is the price consideration. 

@tablejockey Great! I hope you are as happy with the HG as I am.

"I have enough invested in my record collection to justify a Degritter but I have yet to find compelling evidence that it does the job that much better than the HG to justify the price. With the $3K I’ve saved I buy better copies of favorite records that I can’t get acceptably clean."

This speaks to me.

I'll be hitting the "buy now" button for my own HG.

I’ve cleaned 300 records since getting my HG a year ago. RO tap water and six drops of Ilfotol wetting agent. Problem-free and a joy to use. SO much better than my previous vacuum RCM setup. NO need for additional rinse. I have enough invested in my record collection to justify a Degritter but I have yet to find compelling evidence that it does the job that much better than the HG to justify the price. With the $3K I’ve saved I buy better copies of favorite records that I can’t get acceptably clean. 

I have a HG and a VPI 16.5.

The HG does a great job. My favorite part is that no pads or brushes come into contact with the record. 

How much power is actually required to generate the bubbles that do the trick? I’ve had medical equipment cleaned by CLIA compliant machinery that essentially used a wall wart. We are just cleaning records here, not fracking. I am willing to believe that a”cheap, plasticky” Ultrasonic Device does the job and given the maturity of the technology if it sells for $500 I suspect the manufacturer is doing just fine in the profit area. As to the machine not being a piece of audio candy, I’m alright with that. I don’t need the mop that cleans my expensive hardwood floors to be sitting in an expensive Greek pottery from Republican Athens.

@davey and @aberyclark that's what I'd like to see. A "mid-priced" model offering the higher power of the Degritter without as many bells and whistles.  I already have a decent homemade vacuum RCM so I can use it to rinse and dry the records after they are ultrasonically cleaned.  Hopefully Degritter or Guru would eventually address the market in the $1000 to $1500 range for those of us who love vinyl but only have a few hundred albums, and mainly now listen to streaming services.  I can't justify $3K on an ultrasonic machine.  I'm actually pretty happy with my vacuum RCM (total cost around $500), but figure adding a good ultrasonic machine to the cleaning routine would be a step in the right direction. 

I'm willing to bet HG will offer up another level up for more money eventually.

@moonwatcher if you look at the price difference between the Guru and the Degritter, it is, at least imho, impossible to assign said difference to the build quality and the higher power of the DG. Instead, what is going on…is that the usual suspects are involved with the DG. As such, there is a lot more ‘upside’ built into the DG to support all of the ‘middle men’. Luckily, the Guru offers a great option to those folks, like myself, who are happy to see a machine brought to market with a great deal of value -and less impact from the ‘middle men’!. Everyone I know that owns a Guru is very happy with it.

@lewm whoever told you that was incorrect. Ultrasonic machines are indeed "ultrasonic" unless you are a bat. The cheap ones operate at 40KHz, the more expensive ones at 120KHz. 

From YourSoundMatters dot com:

"The Degritter doesn’t come cheap at over $3000/£2000.

Naturally, this raises the question, what do I get when buying a Degritter over, say, the much more affordable HumminGuru at just $499.

This is a BIG question...

Aside from the general build quality (the HumminGuru is clearly built to a price and feels much more plasticity and flimsy compared with the Degritter), there is the glaring issue of power.

Ultrasonic record cleaning machines require a good amount of power to generate the cavitation bubbles for record cleaning; there is a big difference when it comes to each of these machines.

The Degritter uses 300W to generate its 120KHz frequency across four transducers.

The HumminGuru uses only 60W to produce a 40KHz frequency with just two transducers.

This glaring difference does raise some concerns as to whether or not the HumminGuru has enough “juice” to get the job done.

The low power by comparison goes a long way to explain why, in my experience, why the HumminGuru often benefits from multiple runs on the same record.

This comparison is a little unfair given the vast price difference, but it’s important to state.

Granted, $3000+ is a huge outlay. And my recommendations for the Pro-Ject VCMs and the HumminGuru still stand if you’re on a tighter budget. You can, and will, get great results with these machines, you’ll just have to work a little harder to achieve the same outcome.

If you’ve been sitting on the fence about the Degritter for some time, I can wholeheartedly say that it’s worth the investment if you buy a lot of used record or want to restore your old collection. "

All I'm saying is that there are reasons (much more power, higher frequencies used, the automatic "hands off" cycles, etc.) the Degritter is so much more expensive than the Humminguru, so just set your expectations accordingly. If the Humminguru works for you as an adjunct to a VCM then that is great. 

Yes!

@rvpiano 

loving the performance and convenience of my guru i bought from the first batch from the manufacturer!   multitasking while records are cleaning  is so nice. 

@tomic601 

your secret is safe with me 

@mahler123 you are admirable, hopefully my spouse NEVER reads your post….

Vinyl for me is a secondary medium.  I only have about 20 albums and don’t anticipate obtaining many more.  I pay a guy who has a ultrasonic machine who charges $5/lp and also provides a new MoFi sleeve.  These recordings shouldn’t require a second cleaning.  Once should remove the deepest crud and normal lp care afterwards should suffice.

  If I had several hundred albums I would investigate this product, but at present I don’t wish to accumulate another piece of machinery that will leave my heirs groaning with distress.

  Yes, the before and after is very impressive.  I would estimate a 75% noise reduction 

@czarivey 

" I use DeWalt drill to grab a spindle and spin those fast till dry."

I've got an older 18v Dewalt and have been looking for a good excuse to upgrade to the 20v.  

Thank you.

Steam distilled water is silly cheap at the grocery store. De ionized water should not be used for record cleaning, nor should tap water, minerals and salts will still be present. Always pre brush to keep your cleaning solution free of debris, a shaving brush from Amazon...clean micro fiber cloth. A surficant is good, but should be rinsed away with distilled water after cleaning. I use my old vacuum machine for pre-drying before rack air dry.  Clean archival liners. mo PVC!

I have two hobbies: I clean records and align turntables and tonearms and cartridges.

@rvpiano 

Who am I to argue.

@czarivey 

So, do you spin the LP clockwise, or anticlockwise?

@bondmanp 

i know of no downside to this cleaner.  I was very surprised to discover it actually improved the SQ of records.  Its frequency is evidently not too low to be effective. And it’s very easy to operate.

Great thread!  I currently use a cheap and cheerful KAB record cleaner with a canister vacuum attached.  I have been eyeing the Humminguru, as I like the principal of US cleaning, and the all-in-one automated aspect, especially the drying feature.  One question: Most Amazon reviews are positive, but a few negative reviews gave me pause.  Perhaps stealth marketing from competing machine manufacturers?  Some say the frequency is too low to be effective, and others say it just didn't clean their records. Any thoughts on these negative reviews?

No, it's not a problem.

@dogberry Great. Thanks..Do you ever find static electricity built up after the 1st cleaning?  

@vinylshadow The Loricraft usually gets things silent in terms of unwanted noise. The Degritter usually deals with the failures. If there is noise after both it is generally because there is a scratch. It takes about ten minutes to do both machines, and I do it once, mark the new inner sleeve to show it has been cleaned, and then play it until I think it needs cleaning again. That might be a dozen plays, so with a large collection there is repeat business only with favourite discs.

@lewm Wow. I never would have even thought that a possibility. 

Has there been any studies?

@mijostyn 

My records are not by any means “filthy” and, it’s not my imagination, the SQ is palpably better after cleaning with the Humminguru.

@dogberry Ahh. Thank you....So a final ultrasonic wash after your Loricraft. Interesting

Have you noticed noise after cleaning with the Loricraft? And that is eliminated after the Degritter? 

Cleaning 1 record must take about 20 minutes using both methods?

Still using VPI, if that’s important.  Until someone proves to my satisfaction that repeated ultrasonic cleaning does not damage the high frequencies encoded on an LP, I will stick with a conventional RCM, like the VPI.