Kirmuss 'In the Groove' Ultrasonic Record Restorer - Upscale Audio Edition

There is a bible on the subject published by The Vinyl Press. It tells you all you need to know about record cleaning in general, and US cleaning in particular.

I have invested thousands in US cleaning and it is one of the highest return elements of my system. Highly recommended.

@rsf507 I was not disputing your post. I know nothing about Kirmuss and so I make no comment on that product. But Antinn’s Bible gives all the technical information necessary to make an informed decision in any particular case.

Personally, I am keen on 80kHz cleaning, lab grade reagents, and heroic rinsing with pure water. YMMV.

PS On re-reading my post, I can see how it might be interpreted as a favourable review of Kirmuss. My post was intended to be a favourable review of US cleaning, not Kirmuss, because I know nothing about Kirmuss. Sorry for the confusion.

I second the ElmaSonic P60. I have a P60 rebranded by Fisher Scientific, and add-on rotisseries. I have cleaned more than 3000 records. My current regime is spin-clean with running pure water, 2 records on the spindle for 10 minutes of US cleaning, spin-rinse with running pure water, bath in distilled water, spritz with distilled water, air dry.

Excessive? After 1000 hours on my Koetsu the stylus showed virtually no wear (by photomicrograph). The re-tip which I didn’t need would have cost $7K. Excessive spend on US? I don’t think so.

How much power? How much power delivered to each record face? What frequency? How's the QC? Read the bible before you leap. IMO.

Just in case anyone reads jeffrey's post of  07:14, it's misleading. Suggest you read Neil's bible. Reference above.

@jeffreylee   "What did I say that's misleading?"

You said, "There’s no difference between the way US machines operate. Transducers create bubbles, the bubbles clean. That’s it."

That is so silly that you contradicted it in the next sentence. Then you ignore the fact that cleaning efficiency depends on both particle size and frequency. You also do not discuss the particle size usually encountered on records, and hence which frequency a record cleaner should use, and whether or not jewelry cleaners use this frequency.

You do not discuss power generated. Or power at the record face. Or distribution of power at the record face. Or QC. You do not discuss how closely the unit which has been delivered, adheres to spec.

You do not discuss the cleaning solution, type of surfactant required, rinsing, etc.

That do?

If I remember correctly, Neil suggested that I use a final rinse consisting of a distilled water spritz (my regime included a distilled water bath). Has he changed his mind? Or are my marbles disappearing?

For context, mine was a special case, in that I had access to running purified water for a first rinse, second rinse in a distilled water bath, third rinse spritz.

I don’t think that being accurate is "trying way too hard." But YMMV.

I guess things have changed a lot in 10 years - because 10 years ago it seems there were lots of misc US machines running at less than 40KHz. I’m not in a position to measure everything, so I need to take most specifications on trust. Guess I’m a little less trusting of everyone selling on EBay. Again, YMMV.