Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning


My Cleaner Vinyl ultrasonic record cleaner arrived today and it’s impressive.

Everything I’d read indicated that ultrasonic was the way to go, and now I count myself among the believers. Everything is better - records are quieter, less ticks and pops, more detail etc.

All my records had been previously cleaned with a vacuum record cleaner and were well cared for. Nonetheless, the difference is obvious and overwhelmingly positive.

Phil
phil0618

Showing 5 responses by dgarretson

Thanks for mentioning the Versa-Clean. I just ordered it to compare to the mix of Everclear and Photo-flo that I’m using in my Elmasonic P. After a 20 minute ultrasonic bath I rinse/vac with distilled water and TergiKleen on a VPI 16.5. This evacuates and dries the LP so well that I don’t feel a need for more rinsing or steam.

With persistent clicks and pops, I don’t find that the 80khz setting on my Elmasonic P improves on a 38kHz cycle. Try 20 minutes at 40-45C and 100% power, with a 1:30 concentration of Fisher Versaclean instead of Iso.

Some records with stubborn clicks and pops just won’t clean up. Sometimes the pops seem reduced in amplitude.

@bydlo After many cleanings, I’ve set aside a few problem records for continuing experiments. Some of these were improved after transitioning from ISO to Versaclean. The 80kHz cycle didn’t seem to make a difference, though I like that its reduced power doesn’t increase the bath temperature as fast as the 38kHz action.

As long as you don’t allow the LP to sit still in the bath, don’t be afraid of cleaning at 45C. I’ve had some luck spinning problem LPs in the hot tub for an hour or so at 45C prior to engaging the pulse cycle. It’s likely that the vinyl expands and contracts repeatedly as it spins in and out of a hot bath, loosening debris over time that is then pounded out during the subsequent pulse cycle.

However, after all is said and done, some clicks and pops are deemed record defects. As a general rule I give every new record a cleaning, on the theory that it is better not to grind in debris with even a single pass of the stylus. However, I’ll usually pass on the pre-cleaning with MoFi and Analog Productions-- and with impeccable pressings like Rhino’s recent Donald Fagen Cheap Xmas box set.

@slaw Just curious if you think Photo-Flo really adds anything to the party.  I eliminated it after shifting from IPA to Versaclean.  Versaclean's principal ingredient is Linear Alcohol Ethoxylate, an excellent surfactant.  Photo-Flo would seem to be redundant. 

If not filtered out after each cycle, visible particles definitely settle to the bottom of a US tank, aggregating into long chains of grey fluff. Some remain at the bottom, and some agitate into the middle and upper reaches of the tank during use, settling to the bottom thereafter. IME, if using a standard open-bath US tank that is periodically filtered, it’s best to draw those heavier aggregated particles off at the bottom. However, as the Degritter filters during the cavitation cycle, the opposite direction of flow may make sense. At that point the unaggregated particles are small, widely distributed throughout the tank, and will likely follow whatever flow of current is presented.

I didn't read the entire website, but it would be good to know how fine the filter is.  Mine catches 1um particles.  At some point I'll probably shift to a .5um filter.