Record Cleaning Machines


Has anyone out there done an A/B comparison of the cleaning results or efficacy using the Degritter ultra sonic record cleaning machine which operates at 120 kHz/300 watts and an ultrasonic cleaner that operates at 40 kHz/300 or 380 watts (e.g. Audio Desk; CleanerVinyl; the Kirmuss machine; etc.)?  I have a system I put together using CleanerVinyl equipment, a standard 40 kHz ultrasonic tank and a Knosti Disco-Antistat for final rinse.  I clean 3 records at a time and get great results.  Surface noise on well cared for records (only kind I have) is virtually totally eliminated, sound comes from a totally black background and audio performance is noticeably improved in every way.  Even though the Degritter only cleans 1 record at a time, it seems significantly easier to use, more compact and relatively quick, compared to the system I have now.  I'm wondering if the Degritter's 120 kHz is all that much more effective, if at all, in rendering better audio performance than the standard 40 kHz frequency.  I don't mind, at all, spending a little extra time cleaning my records if the audio results using the Degritter are not going to be any different.  I'm not inclined to spend three grand for a little more ease & convenience and to save a few minutes.  However, if I could be assured the Degritter would render better audio performance results, even relatively small improvements, that would be a whole other story.
oldaudiophile
@oldaudiophile,

1. If you read the book Chapter XIV.5.3, and you apply your tank volume of 6L with 3 records, the fastest you should spin is 1 rpm. If you clean just one record at a time, then 3 rpm is the fastest you should spin. The problem with spinning too fast is that it agitates the fluid and if the fluid is agitated at >50% of tank volume/min, for lower frequency UCM such as 40 kHz, the cavitation intensity decreases and 3 records at 3 rpm in a 6L tank, the cavitation intensity could be 50% less. Note that if the spinner motor is 12/24VDC, you can buy a variable speed power supply such as these which should get the speed down to 1 rpm Amazon.com: SHNITPWR 60W Universal Power Supply DC 3V 4V 4.5V 5V 6V 7V 7.5V 8V 9V 10V 11V 12V Adjustable Variable Power Adapter 100V-240V AC to DC Converter 1A 2A 2.5A 3A 4A 5A with 14 Tips & Polarity Converter : Electronics or Amazon.com: SHNITPWR 3V ~ 24V 3A 72W Power Supply Adjustable DC 3V 5V 6V 9V 12V 15V 16V 18V 19V 20V 24V Variable Universal AC/DC Adapter 100V-240V AC to DC Converter with 14 Tips 5.5x2.5mm 4.0x1.7mm 3.5x1.35mm : Electronics

2. Mobile Fidelity Super Record Wash has no detailed MSDS so I cannot make any assessment - other than if its working and your happy with the results - if its not broke, don’t fix it. Otherwise, stating that the fluid is a "high-surface-tension water composition" has to be a typo. It should state "low-surface-tension water composition". A "high-surface-tension water composition" would not wet the record and overall be a poor water-based detergent.

3. Rinsing is important to reduce the risk of cleaner residue; and not knowing the constituents/concentration of the Mobile Fidelity Super Record Wash rinsing is prudent and using the Knosti Disco Anti-Stat filled with distilled water is a good process.

4. So long as the microfiber cloths are clean and lint-free, there should be limited risk. Knowing for sure they are lint-free is another story. Unless you are using a UV light as I address in Chapter II and IV, you may not know for sure. I made a dumb mistake by using a cotton towel to dry my gloved hands and when I inspected a ’clean’ record it was full of lint (under UV light). There was enough transfer from the cloth to my gloves (the cloths never touched the record) to contaminate the record - good-bye cotton cloths at any step.

5. The fact that you ’never’ see grit, particles or accumulated dirt of any kind..." in my world is a red-flag. If the cleaning process is truly efficient, you should on occasion see something. The fact that you see nothing - either your records are all exceptionally clean to begin with or your cleaning process has some weakness. As I address above, you may want to try cleaning just one record at a time and see if that changes the equation as they say.

Good luck,
Neil


@mglik,

The Keith Monks Discovery RCM is an awesome machine.  I have worked with some people over at the VPI forum with VPI vacuum RCMs and the Loricraft™ PRC-4 RCM with the following cleaning process (as quoting from the book Chapter XIII): 

XIII.4.a Pre-clean exceptionally dirty records with Alconox™ Liquinox™ at 0.5% (5 mL/L) - vacuum but do not fully dry. Depending on the record condition, two pre-clean steps may be required. Although the Alconox™ Liquinox™ will foam, most of the foam is collected in the brush as noted Figure 15.

XIII.4.b Rinse pre-cleaner with DIW - vacuum, but do not fully dry.

XIII.4.c Final clean with Dow™ Tergitol 15-S-9 at 0.05% (0.5 mL/L) - vacuum and do not fully dry. There will be some foam as noted Figure 17, but most of the foam will be in the brush.

XIII.4.d Rinse final cleaner with DIW - vacuum and fully dry. When drying be careful of drying too long that can cause static to form.

I purchased a Degritter just over a year ago, after using a DIY ultra-sonic setup for 3 yrs. with basically good results. I got tired of wasting an entire afternoon/evening performing labor intensive, noisy work to clean records, of which I own thousands- both LPs and 45s. I am extremely pleased with the Degritter. I generally use the medium length clean cycle, and generally get anywhere from 6-12 records cleaned before the cooling water cycle kicks in. I found if I use the quick clean (shortest) cycle, I almost never have the unit stop to cool. If I have a bunch to clean, then I can use the short cycle 2-3 times for each record. If you like, you can shorten the drying cycle with a quick turn of the knob, and make time between cycles even faster, and on the last cycle, adjust the drying time a bit longer. Not a big deal. Or you can leave it set, and just go about your business doing other things. I premix Tergikleen in a gallon jug of distilled water and add that to the tank. For a rinse cycle, I use distilled water with just a "splash" of 99.9% medical grade Iso alcohol on the short clean cycle. The records come out spotlessly, beautifully clean. This machine has saved me countless hours of cleaning records, and was worth every penny for me.
You need to call Albert Porter at Porterhouse Audio. Before I bought my Degritter, he gave me the whole comparison. He is or was a dealer for all the top line ultrasonics. Without reservation, liked the sound of the Degritter the best.
Neil, thanks again!

Firstly, I think you are correct about the MoFi Super Record Wash. It certainly doesn't behave like a high surface tension solution; quite the opposite. Rather, it looks and behaves like a solution containing a surfactant. I used Kodak Photoflo to manually clean my records years ago. However, Tergitol seems to be more popular nowadays. When I bought the Super Record Wash, I assumed it contained a surfactant and "high-surface-tension" had to be a mistake. The solution is odorless. What it contains by way of natural degreasers & dirt solvents is likely known only to MoFi and the manufacturer(s).

Secondly, yes, all the records I've run through the UCM were exceptionally clean. At this point, my predominant concern is removing mold release agents from new records and whatever might remain from earlier manual cleanings years ago. Hence, another reason why I wonder if the Degritter's 120 kHz might be more effective in this regard. An approach I'm contemplating is using LAST POWER CLEANER as a pre-cleaner, prior to the 40 kHz UCM.

Lastly, thanks for the tip on the power supply gadgets! I just re-read Chapter XIV. Despite being a straight A student all through high school and college, including Calculus, I wish I could confess to a solid grasp of that material. Guess this will require another read with calculator in hand.

Thanks Again!