KLaudio or Degritter Mark II


Just curious to know if anyone out there has used both the KLaudio ultrasonic record cleaning machine and the Degritter Mark II (or the original Degritter) and which you thought achieved the best or better results.

I've got a lash-up ultrasonic cleaning system that I've put together which costs significantly less than the original Degritter. The end result I get with my lash-up system is, at least, as effective as the original Degritter but significantly more labor intensive. The Degritter is much more eloquent in this regard, which is its allure. I know the KLaudio is twice the price, but I'm much more interested in optimum results.

Thanks!

oldaudiophile

Showing 12 responses by oldaudiophile

@antinn Thanks ... I think ... for turning me on to that post by Wizzard.  I suffered through nearly all of it.  That man is in need of help!  The Arizona Mike tip, however, was considerably more helpful!  The video afforded a good real-life look and sense of the operational footprint the KLAudio requires, much more informative than photos of the machine on the web.

I tend to do record cleaning in spurts.  My modus operandi has involved setting up the Knosti on the kitchen counter and shuttling records to & from my US machine, set-up on a work bench in the basement.  After an afternoon's activity, generally 15 records worth, I break down, clean and put everything away until the next foray.  I don't save or re-use cleaning fluids or leave same in the respective vessels.

The KLAudio certainly seems like a fantastic bespoke US record cleaning machine.  However, given its size and operational footprint, seems like it's better suited to a more industrial approach (i.e.  more sustained, lengthier cleaning sessions).  It's easy to see how critical such a machine would be for an operation like Arizona Mike's record shop and record cleaning service.

I continue to struggle with more practical, cost-effective alternatives for my purposes and am considering the following, which would involve purchasing an Elma Sonic P60H, another Knosti, a vacuum machine or combination thereof.  As always, your comments & suggestions would be most welcome.

  1. Solution of distilled water + 0.01% or 0.015% Tergitol 15-S-9 + 1% Alconox Liquinox in the Knosti as a pre-cleaning step.
  2. Use of the Elma Sonic P60H with distilled water + 0.01% to 0.15% Tergitol 15-S-9.
  3. After degassing, run 2 or 3 records (2 would achieve a 1.25" separation; 3 would be 11/16") set to run between 31C and 35C but no warmer than 35C at ? RPM for ? minute cycles.  (Questions here are:  how many records would be best, 2 or 3, at what RPM and duration of cleaning cycles?  I've read that keeping the cleaning temperature between 31C and 35C for no more than 6- to 9-minute cleaning cycles is optimum in a machine like the P60H and anything longer could cause damage.)
  4. I'm not sure how to approach an immediate final rinse with distilled water.  I'm thinking of transferring the records immediately over to my present 40kHz US machine for this.  However, I'd have the same questions here regarding heat setting, spacing, RPM or, more importantly, the advisability of this at all.  If lengthier than 6-to-9-minute cleaning cycle in a P60H is not advisable, maybe exposing the records to additional US bombardment is not a good idea?  Maybe it would be best to purchase another Knosti for this?
  5. This leaves the drying dilemma.  Records would be sopping wet after a final rinse in a Knosti, making air drying in a rack and use of microfiber cloths less appealing.  A vacuum machine would help but this approach would involve purchasing another Knosti and a good reasonably priced vacuum machine.  This puts a dent in the cost-effectiveness quotient; not to mention making the whole cleaning process seem like an episode of the Keystone Cops!  Previously, my approach was to raise the records out of the US tank fluid and run them on the spit or skewer at 5 RPM for 15 minutes.  Not only did this allow the tank fluid to cool but the heat rising above the tank served to dry the records almost completely.  After this, I sandwiched the records between LP-sized microfiber cloths to remove whatever drops of residual moisture might be left and stave off dust motes, transferred them to the Knosti drying rack and covered them with microfiber cloths until they were completely dry.

 

@skywachr Thanks for posting in on this one!  I have read other encouraging accounts of the useful life or life expectancy of the Degritter.  It's good to know or hear that it is a robust or quality manufactured machine.  I've also read that Degritter offers re-build services for what seems like a reasonable price, although I'm not clear on what exactly that all entails (e.g.  shipping to & from Estonia; etc.).  I'm still keeping my eye out on that machine and hoping for a sale and/or a price drop.

@dogberry in the old days, when Christ was a Corporal, I incorporated Kodak Photo-Flo in my manual cleaning process of a bunch of my records. I don't think it did any harm. However, after reading Neil Antin's "Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records (all 3 editions), I switched to Tergitol.

Not easy reading, by any means. However, in my humble opinion, worth the time:

Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press

Yes, the Humminguru is a reasonably priced alternative.  However, based upon what I've read, it is a 40Hz machine whereas the Degritter is 120Hz and better designed and built.

@antinn You are indispensable!

My last foray of record cleaning involved the use of LAST POWER RECORD CLEANER (used as directed) as a pre-cleaning step.

Then, I used a Knosti Disco Anti-Stat filled with Mobile Fidelity Super Record Wash as another pre-cleaning step, rotating the records in the bath at least half a dozen times in both directions.

The next step involved use of an RoHS Model 30A 180W ultrasonic power 200W cleaning power 40Khz 6L digital ultrasonic cleaner filled with distilled water and 15ml of Tergitol.15-S-9, set to 72 degrees Fahrenheit for 15-minute cleaning cycles.  I ran the machine for 30 minutes at the same temperature, prior to cleaning records, thinking this would accomplish degassing.  Then, I cleaned 3 records at a time in the ultrasonic using CleanerVinyl's record rotating motor set for .5 RPM, their old-style screw-on spacers that separates records by approximately 11/16", their record lifting & lowering device and their 6l one micron filtration device.

The last step (excluding treating dry records with LAST RECORD PRESERVATIVE) involved another go-around in the same ultrasonic machine, filled with only distilled water (same degassing protocol) and set to the same temperature and cleaning/rinsing cycles.

The results I obtained were at least as effective as a previous time when I used Mobile Fidelity's Super Record Wash for the ultrasonic cleaning fluid, no heat, and the same 15-minute cleaning cycles at 5 RPM rotation.  In a direct comparison with the original Degitter, using only my ears for fidelity comparison, I found the Degritter did no better.

The allure of machines like the Degritter, KLAudio and some others, from my perspective, is and has always been ease of operation, smaller footprint and, basically, eloquence.  Be that as it may, I and many other audiophiles, I'm sure, continue to struggle with the thousands of dollars such eloquence affords.

I'm wondering if the Elma Ultrasonic P60H, with its sweep frequency and 37 to 80 Khz settings might be a cost-effective alternative to consider.

Thoughts, Sensei?

As always, I cannot thank you enough for whatever time and attention you bring to this!

@antinn First and foremost, thanks so much for your kind attention to my record cleaning madness!  Also, a correction of a typo I made:

Rotation speed for my final ultrasonic rinse cycle(s) is/was 0.5 RPM; not 5 RPM.

In answer to your questions/observations/constructive feedback:

(1)  I did, indeed, use 15ml of Tergitol.  Using 0.9ml to achieve a 0.015% concentration seemed like so vanishingly little.  I did not encounter any issues or problems with foaming.  Also, I continue to struggle with the idea of possibly using a little alcohol in the cleaning process, either in the US cleaning cycle or the Knosti pre-cleaning step, because the records I've been cleaning (i.e.  my core collection) are already very, very clean.

(2)  If I reduce my throughput, so to speak, to 2 records instead of 3, the records would be spaced by approximately 1.25".  Would that make a huge or significant difference?  Would 1 record at a time be better still?  Also, what impact would this have on rotational speed?

(3)  Thanks!

(4)  That looks like the US machine I have except mine is a 6-liter capacity; not 6.5 liters.  I set the heat to 26 Celsius.  Toward the end of a 15-minute cleaning cycle the tank fluid sometimes reaches 30 Celsius.  If it gets higher than that, I allow for extra cooling time.

(5)  Thanks!  It appears this filter pump is doing its job because I'm starting to notice some discoloration (dirt) captured by the filter.  I did not expect dramatic results in this regard because of how clean my core collection is.

(6)  Thanks!  According to LAST's marketing/advertising, this solution or treatment is supposed to meld or bond on a molecular level with PVC, last for at least 200 plays or more, etc., etc., etc.  As such, I assumed this would not amount to a film or residue, per se.  However, now that I think of this a bit more, if this treatment has a life span of 200 plays or more, then I suppose it's reasonable to assume it is gradually etched off or eroded by the stylus and ultimately becomes a residue.  This ushers in a whole new set of questions!  Since I haven't played any records on my relatively new TT that haven't been ultrasonically cleaned, first, and treated with LAST, I would wonder if LAST actually does contribute to significantly less surface noise and at what cost of fidelity.

@antinn First and foremost, thanks very much again for your continued guidance!

A few questions:

As I think I may have mentioned earlier, most of my core collection of LP records are already relatively clean.  Should I avoid using the Knosti & Liquinox pre-clean step for those, altogether, or does that matter at all?  I don't mind doing this pre-clean step at all, unless it might be detrimental or superfluous.  I do have some very old records I inherited from my folks when they passed (e.g.  33's and 78s of Sinatra, Como, Mario Lanza, etc.).  Maybe the Knosti pre-clean step should be relegated to those?    

By "and then secure the heaters", do you mean heat the tank water to 26C and then shut off the heat for US cleaning, as the US activity heats the tank water anyway?

Your feedback, as I understand it, seems to indicate that a 20-minute total US cleaning cycle in the Elma Sonic P60H would be safe.  Do I understand that correctly?  Should 20-minute cleaning cycles be reserved for very dirty records or does that matter?

Thanks so much!

@antinn:  All I can say is WOW!  And thank you, thank you, thank you, again and again!  You never cease to amaze, both with your technical expertise and graciousness with your time.  I wish there were something I could do to repay the kindness.

@antinn in a two-tank protocol employing my present 40kHz US machine and the Elma Sonic P60H, would using a 6L 180W, 132kHz cleaning power, 200W heating power, instead of the P60H achieve better results?

Thanks!

@antinn Can't argue with math!  Thanks, once more!  Now, time to take a good look at the P60H operation manual.

All the best!

@antinn I’ve read the Elma Sonic P60H operation manual. Judging from its published dimensions, the CleanerVinyl components that I use with my 40kHz UCM will fit onto the P60H with one exception (i.e. the pump/filter). The P60H carrying handles are mounted too high, near the top of the tank. However, CleanerVinyl has a relatively inexpensive bracket (i.e. $59) designed to fit the P60H.

My quandary, at the moment, has to do with the following:

"Note: with the dual frequency you should secure the pump/filter when operating at 37kHz (depending on # or records) but then operate the pump/filter at 80kHz.

  1. The general process for the Elamasonic P-series is the first phase is run at 80% power for 10 minutes under the auto frequency change mode where the tank runs at 37kHz for 30 seconds then it switches to 80kHz for 30 seconds, back and forth. The second phase runs for 10 minutes at 80kHz at 100% power or 100% in pulse power."

If I understand this correctly, using my CleanerVinyl pump/filter with the P60H would be virtually impossible, using this frequency change mode of operation. As such, I’m wondering if it might be more practical, from an operational standpoint, to avoid using this frequency change mode and stick to an initial fixed low frequency (i.e. 37kHz to 40kHz) 10-minute cleaning or pre-cleaning cycle at 0.5 RPM with (or without) the pump/filter in place and then switch to a fixed 80kHz final cleaning cycle at 0.5 RPM with the pump/filter in place, keeping tank fluid temp between ... say, 27C and 31C and certainly no higher than 37C. If so, by using a minimal amount of Tergitol 15-S-9 during the P60H US cleaning process (e.g. 0.004%) to eliminate the need for a rinse step and help with air drying the records, I don’t see a need to continue using the 40kHz UCM if I continue using my pre-cleaning step with the Knosti, distilled water and 0.5% Liquinox. I suppose I could use it for a final 5- or 6-minute rinse step at 0.5 RPM, using distilled water only with no heat setting. However, the argument against this would be the hassle involved in transferring the CleanerVinyl components (i.e. record lifter; motor; pump/filter) from one UCM to the other. Purchasing another set of CleanerVinyl components to accommodate two UCM makes no cost-effectiveness sense. I’d might as well just buy a Degritter, at this point, and use the 40kHz UCM as my final rinse step. As I’ve done previously, lifting the record(s) out of the UCM tank after a cleaning cycle and increasing the rotational speed to 5 RPM for 15 minutes or so, gets the records almost completely dry.

My alternative methodology, without the P60H, would be the following:

  1. Use the Knosti for a pre-clean step in a room temp solution of distilled water + 0.5% Liquinox.
  2. Use the 40kHz 6-liter UCM I have with a solution of distilled water + 0.004% Tergitol with the machine set to operate between 27C and 31C and certainly no higher than 37C for a 15 to 30 minute degas cycle.
  3. Clean 2 records in the machine (which would be spaced 1.25" apart) at 0.5 RPM at the same heat setting(s) for 15-to-20-minute cleaning cycles.
  4. Lift records out of the tank solution, increase motor rotation speed to 5 RPM and let them rotate just above the tank for 15 or 20 minutes or so until completely or almost completely dry. The heat rising from the US tank helps with the drying process.
  5. If records aren’t completely dry, set in stand near a HEPA air cleaner until completely dry.

As you indicated in a previous post, the extensional or maybe even existential question, of course, is which modus operandi would likely yield the best or better result. Incidentally, my "better" barometer here is audio fidelity, which is, admittedly, subjective. Generally speaking, I’m assuming the cleaner the record, the better the audio fidelity will or can be. I’m also assuming, given these two different record cleaning methodologies, it’s quite possible the comparative audio fidelity results might be very slight and maybe even imperceptible to most audiophiles.

Once again, thanks so much for your guidance!

@antinn thanks for your responses.

Reading the P60H operation manual was helpful.  However, not having actually operated it is quite another.  I learn much better by doing.

What I was responding to is that attempting to pause the machine every 30 seconds to switch the pump on & off during this initial auto frequency change mode would be futile and maybe even damaging to the machine.  The other issue that I was (and still am) not clear on is whether or not this 20-minute cycle (i.e.  10 minutes of auto frequency change mode followed by 10 minutes of 80kHz only) can be programmed into the machine to run as a single cycle.  Pausing the machine after this initial 10-minute auto frequency change mode in order to switch on the pump/filter for the 10-minute 80kHz cycle seems more feasible.  However, it seems, to me, that it would be more practical to run these two operational cycles separately, rather than pausing the machine and activating the pump/filter at the 10-minute mark.  This would obviate the need to standby and be alert to this while I'm doing other things (e.g.  pre-cleaning additional records; etc.).

Thanks for the tip on the iSonic pump/filter!  I wish I had known about that before purchasing the CleanerVinyl pump/filter.  That would have saved me a good bit of coin.

Thanks, also, for the tip(s) on the record spinners!  I've lately been taking a closer look at the Kuzma RD kit that Tima uses.  However, I've only found two places in the USA that sell this and the price seems rather steep, in my opinion.

Thanks again and all the Best!