Record Cleaning Machines

oldaudiophile

I use a carbon fiber brush, as well. I also use an Onzow stylus cleaner that I love. Using one of those shows you what kind of gunk or dirt a stylus picks up, even on a "clean" record after one play.

If you’re truly playing a clean LP there won’t be any visible dust on the stylus after one play.

There’s a lot of good information in this thread and I have a lot of respect for those who are willing to put so much time and energy into this. My protocol is simple compared to many here: I use a Klaudio US cleaner using nothing but distilled water. It’s an easy, convenient, one-button process, which means there’s never a reason to play anything but a clean record.

I still have my original Nitty-Gritty cleaner but I never used it much. It’s just too much trouble. I keep it on hand in case I ever get an LP the Klaudio can’t sufficiently clean, but that hasn’t happened yet in the years I’ve had the Klaudio.

I am sorry but to our Kirmuss KA-RC-1 being made by Isonic  is incorrect. Isonic in Chicagoland is a distributor of sonic cleaning devices. Our machine in purchased from the same factory that makes the Isonic machine. That is the only commonality. As a speaker on technology at the annual Global Sources Electronics Shows in Honk Kong since 2007, I volunteer my time to educate overseas buyers how to protect IT and deal with mainland Chinese manufacturers. I have interest in my own factory in Shenzhen where we take the basic machine purchased die to economy of scale and the manufacturer's expertise and make changes to it. Simply stated, the products do not work in the same fashion. Added, it is impossible to actually see a sonic work reaching all the recorded groove data if records are skewered as in the Isonic offering.  Just wanted to clarify the matter.

Sokogear, I use the Audioquest Anti-Static Record Brush before & after every record side (same with the Onzow) but not in a wet-cleaning regimen. My Knosti Disco Antistat that I use for a final rinse after US cleaning has goat hair brushes. US cleaning, for me, is a one & done type of thing and, then, the challenge is to just keep the records as clean as you can. I might consider running a record that has already been ultrasonically cleaned if I noticed a distinct reduction in audio quality and only after a lot of subsequent plays (e.g. a hundred or something along those lines). Not likely, at my age!

I'm still contemplating antinn's sage guidance and that of others and thinking my cleaning regimen might be improved by using either LAST POWER CLEANER or Alconox Liquinox as a manually applied pre-clean step, using LAST applicators. Then, I'd use the Knosti as a rinse after that, before using the UCM. I think I will, also, ditch the MoFi Super Record Wash and replace that with just distilled water and a small amount of Tergitol in the UCM tank. After that, I'd use the Knosti with fresh distilled water for a final rinse. I'm still going to use LAST RECORD PRESERVATIVE as my final step until or unless someone or something can convince me this isn't a good idea.

All of this still brings me back to my original question of whether or not this crazy labor-intensive labor of love results in any better audio quality than just using the Degritter or something similarly less labor-intensive and considerably less time consuming. If I could be reasonably assured that the Degritter or something similar would accomplish the same results I'm getting now or better, then, I think I would spring the 3 grand it takes to get the Degritter or something like it.

In the bad old days, I always used, initially, a WATTS Disc Preener, otherwise known as a WATTS Parostatik, I think. Remember those? You had to remember to occasionally run this little tube on the inside of it under water. Then, I graduated to the Discwasher with D3. Remember that one? It had a nice hollow solid wood handle (think it was walnut) and the little bottle of D3 solution fit right inside of it. Occasionally, I also used a liquid stylus cleaner, too, but probably not as often as I should have and certainly not as often as recommended. My records always sounded great. However, now, after the US cleaning thing that I do, they sound, noticeably, even better. I'm no scientist. So, I have no real idea why that is. Maybe US cleaning is removing some old D3 solution left behind or whatever the WATTS Disc Preener may have done? All I really care about is the sound improvement(s) and preserving that for as long as I can.

If I were ever to go back to using a liquid stylus cleaner again I probably would go with either the MFSL or LAST Stylus Cleaner. The reason I like the Onzow is because, if used properly and safely, I don't have to worry about eye/hand coordination near as much as using a liquid or the possibly of liquid wicking up the cantilever. Damage to the stylus or cartridge, for me, would represent an $800 PITA, not including shipping & handling and paying a pro to install/re-install a cartridge properly. I did that in the old days with my old Phillips TT and a paper protractor but, now, it seems there are much more accurate ways of going about doing this.

I know there are cartridges out there that cost many, many times more than $800 but, for me, $800 is a lot of dough. Although my hands are still steady, I get the heebie-jeebies anytime I go near the stylus. Handling the tone arm is about all I trust myself doing these days. I just don't want to risk a thousand dollar plus screw-up. I've got just the kind of buzzard luck where something like that would happen one day.

If I ever run out of LAST stickers, I can always buy more but, frankly, the outer record sleeves do the job just as well. One of the mistakes I made was sticking some of the LAST stickers on the record jacket, instead of the outer sleeves. Apparently, this detracts from the value of some collectible records at resale. Somebody else can worry about that after I've gone to the big music hall in the sky. What's that old song with the line that goes "I know they got a hell of a band (up there)"?

All the best!

@antinn, am I wrong? It would seem to me that someone has got his cations and anions mixed up with polar and nonpolar. 

@daveyf,  I think it is both physical damage to the record and build up of "residue."  People who don't not take great care of their records are more likely to leave them out and smoke various combustibles that leave an oily residue on everything present not to mention any cooking fumes that may be present. Nothing is going to correct physical damage and getting rid of that oily residue is a PITA. My own mentality will not let me buy used records for the above reasons. 
Contrary to popular mythology new records are not bad at all. They may have some dust and come out of the jacket with static but that is all that I notice.  I do not have to routinely clean gunk off my stylus, occasionally just some lint that got by my sweep arm. I may go months without touching the stylus. I have never cleaned new records but I will use a spin clean with DW and a few drops of Triton X100 for records that people bring to listen on my system. I have always thought the best way to clean records is not to let them get dirty in the first place. The additives in the PVC/PVA compound are part of the matrix of the material. It is not on the surface. It is mixed throughout. I thought you might be able to remove some plasticizer from the surface to harden it (ESO) but antinn assures me this can't happen. My instinct tells me that pressings people thought were "dirty" are just bad pressings with remnants of dirt and labels from recycled vinyl.