Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning

Machine is a rebranded ElmaSonic P60H (Fisher Scientific). My thinking was that Fisher is a lab supply company, and so the machine would have to pass two levels of QC. Still going strong after 6000 records, plus misc cleaning chores. Works wonders on wine glasses!

@jtimothya

Your example of particle size is unconvincing to me. A ’visible glop’ is made up of tiny particles which can be broken loose by US action, and then either deposited as solids or taken into solution as solutes, or perhaps even suspended. It is not necessary (or desirable) to remove the blob of glop all at once - a 1/4" glop would respond best to a frequency so low as to be reminiscent of a file.

With respect to frequency, my reasoning is as follows.

Bass response is a good analogy because both are sound waves in a confined space. Low frequency energy will be present in a listening room regardless of size - the problem is that different frequencies will manifest at different points. The mechanism is constructive and destructive interference. This is a function of reflections and dimensions (spacing).

If you want really good bass response down to a given frequency f, then the room should have at least one distance equal to or greater than c/2f, where c is velocity. Better is c/f, or even more.

By analogy, record spacing will affect the distribution of energy on each record surface. For a uniform distribution of energy (bubbles) which washes the entire surface, at least one wavelength is required. Consider the case of the US cleaner in Imperial measure, as it is more convenient. Then c ~ 5000 ft/sec = 60,000 in/sec. At a frequency of 60KHz = 60,000Hz, a wavelength is 1 inch. At 80KHz, wavelength is 6/8 = 0.75". Of course, records are not planes; they wobble on the spindle, they are slightly warped, etc. Therefore a safety factor of 1.5 to 2 is sensible, for 1 1/8" to 1 1/2" at 80KHz. I use 2".

By theory, the definition of energy is the ability to do work. The work in this case is microscopic bubbles on the surface to be cleaned. Since we know that low frequency US heats the chemistry much more than high frequency US, much low frequency energy is used to heat chemistry rather than clean. That is, the energy is expended elsewhere than on the surfaces. This is evidence that spacing matters.

By experiment, try cleaning a pipette in an ultrasonic bath. If anything is caked on the inside, it will take forever to come clean. The US agitation is negligible in such a confined space. Also, I tried close spacing and had to re-clean nearly a thousand records. I got as much suspended solids off during the second cleaning as I did on the first.

Your analysis of energy may well be correct. Thank you for enhancing my understanding of this by forcing me to think more about it. But in our practical case, it comes to the same thing - something is happening, so either we increase spacing (and reduce the number of records) or we reduce the number of records (and increase the spacing).

In conclusion, the direct evidence is: fewer records with greater spacing removed more solids. This experiment, however, does not differentiate between two potential causes: spacing and energy/record. Both interpretations of theory come to the same thing: fewer records, widely spaced, is better.

When I tested spacing (using SQ as the determining criteria), in my Chinese 10 L/40khz tank, spacing two records at 2" apart has superior SQ, opposed to 1" apart. I could hear the difference.

I also see that you are cleaning 6 records at a time, which means a spacing of at most 33mm. That spacing is OK for 80KHz, about 1.7 wavelengths, but, at less than a wavelength, that spacing is quite inadequate for 37KHz. Also, with 6 records your effective US power per record is down to about 55W. I find that I get better results at 75W. YMMV

@terry9

Pardon me for being sceptical about the utility of either of those statistics.  I'll tell you my thoughts and then you can explain.

I don't see how the wavelength of a given frequency is relevant to the space between records. If you're saying a given wavelength, say ~40mm for ~37kHz (water, 30-degree C) is too wide to fit between a 33mm space between records, I don't see how that makes any difference.  The frequency determines the number and size of the vacuum bubbles generated that will implode against the record in solution - that is the cleaning force.  My Elma has 6 transducers on the bottom of the tank and they will generate the same number of vacuum bubbles at a given frequency regardless of the spacing between records. I don't see how a wavelength greater than the distance between records changes ... what ?  - the access of bubbles to records, as if that wavelength limits how many vacuum bubbles get to the records?  I don't see it.

The claim of higher watts per record is based on having fewer records in a given tank. I don't see why the ratio of records to watts makes a difference.  The same number of watts will be output regardless of the number of records. Granted there are more bubbles per record with fewer records but the records are in a fixed position and the total bubbles in the tank at any given time is the same independent of number of records. It's not clear that fewer records 'attract' or receive more bubbles than a greater number of records.

Wrt frequency: There is a correlation between particle size, particle tenacity, the efficiency of particle removal, and frequency.  If there was relatively constant particle size on a record we could target the frequency to that.  But given the state of used records, there is no such constancy. From a visible glop of something to a few microns, multiple frequencies target a broader range of dirt.


Btw, which Elmasonic model do you have? As you read, mine is the P120H..

I also see that you are cleaning 6 records at a time, which means a spacing of at most 33mm. That spacing is OK for 80KHz, about 1.7 wavelengths, but, at less than a wavelength, that spacing is quite inadequate for 37KHz. Also, with 6 records your effective US power per record is down to about 55W. I find that I get better results at 75W. YMMV

Thank you for the references, which mainly point out that there is very little formal research on US cleaning, beyond the obvious and the theoretical. Let me give you another reference: the Rushton thread (2016) here on Audiogon, to which I contributed extensively.

It seems that we mostly agree, but:
1) temperature. Your references suggest that low frequency US cleaning might be more effective at removing fats and oils. As I mentioned in the Rushton thread, I had thought so too until I found that it was a temperature effect. The lower frequency US did a better job of cleaning oils, while heating the chemistry more. When I controlled for temperature, the low frequency advantage disappeared. So I use 80KHz, sweep function, and 45C.
2) frequency mix - see above.

By the way, I have done a fair bit of trial and error, including 2000 odd records which were inadequately rinsed! So I had to do the whole lot again, with a better regime: rinsing under running highly purified water followed by a distilled water bath. Air dry in a clean-ish room.

By TDS I assume you mean total dissolved solids. I use distilled water for cleaning, so total dissolved solids is very low - for the first 2 records. Naturally that increases with each pair. That increase is roughly indicated by the colour of the chemistry, which is close enough for hobby work. For suspended solids, I allow the chemistry to settle and use the valve on the ElmaSonic to drip solid-free chemistry into a jug. I use VersaClean 2.5%.

By IPA, I assume that you mean isopropyl alcohol. I don't use anything volatile and flammable, because, while it is easy to monitor and regulate vapour in a lab, it is hard in a garage. Since my Elma machine can be an ignition source, I avoid the hazard.

@jtimothya 

Don't see why a mixture of frequencies should be better. There was a graph posted in the DIYAudio thread of cleaning efficacy vs frequency. For gaps the size we see on records, 40KHz is only marginally superior for the largest gaps, and quite inferior for the smallest. This mirrors my experience.

IMO, 40C is low - only a touch above body temperature. I often start a session with a temperature in the low 40's, but continue to begin 15 minute runs until the temperature hits 47C, when I wait for the chemistry to cool a bit. I acknowledge that it can be disconcerting to see your vinyl come out of the tank a little warped, but with uniform cooling in the rinse stage, the warp disappears. At least in my experience, by my standards. I use a 60RPM Vinyl Stack and running purified water for rinse.

Are you sure that your thermometer is accurate? And that it is monitoring the relevant temperature? Stir the chemistry vigorously - if the temp reading changes, then your tank is not homogenizing the chemistry and hot spots or cold spots may emerge with use. That could be affecting your perceptions of appropriate temperature. Hope that helps.

It's not just about size.  What particle sizes do "we see on records." ?  I don't think there is a univeral range.

If audiogon allowed posting pictures I'd do that here. Take a look at the graph on p.16 of this PDF: 
http://www.idema.org/wp-content/downloads/1622.pdf This is about cleaning perpendicular magnetic tape but it should give you a basic idea. 

Also take a look at my article here:https://thevinylpress.com/timas-diy-rcm-follow-up-2-compelling-changes-improved-results/

There is quite a bit of information on the Web about use of multiple frequencies in USC. Don't just stick to threads about record cleaning, there is a ton of junk information to sift through in audio forums. We are still learning, mostly from trial and error, but the technology has been in the industrial areas for quite a while. Here's one example about particle size and frequency; you can find more with a little research of your own:
https://techblog.ctgclean.com/2019/09/micron-size-vs-frequency/

Wrt temperature, there is a relationship between solution composition, heat, and cleaning efficiency.  Wrt VersaClean, what is the TDS ppm using that in solution?  I prefer high purity IPA.  PhotoFlow is not recommended - a little research will tell you why.

Of course, people can do whatever they want based on what they believe. I'm only passing along based on my experience and research.

Correction: substitute "particles" for "gaps". Should read "For particles the size ..."

@jtimothya 

Don't see why a mixture of frequencies should be better. There was a graph posted in the DIYAudio thread of cleaning efficacy vs frequency. For gaps the size we see on records, 40KHz is only marginally superior for the largest gaps, and quite inferior for the smallest. This mirrors my experience.

IMO, 40C is low - only a touch above body temperature. I often start a session with a temperature in the low 40's, but continue to begin 15 minute runs until the temperature hits 47C, when I wait for the chemistry to cool a bit. I acknowledge that it can be disconcerting to see your vinyl come out of the tank a little warped, but with uniform cooling in the rinse stage, the warp disappears. At least in my experience, by my standards. I use a 60RPM Vinyl Stack and running purified water for rinse.

Are you sure that your thermometer is accurate? And that it is monitoring the relevant temperature? Stir the chemistry vigorously - if the temp reading changes, then your tank is not homogenizing the chemistry and hot spots or cold spots may emerge with use. That could be affecting your perceptions of appropriate temperature. Hope that helps.

j_damon

... I’m thinking of building an enclosure of panel insulation to mute the noise, it is kind of annoying

Yup, US cleaners do make an annoying racket. Klaudio sold a dampening cabinet for its cleaner. Very effective!

@slaw 
mine is admittedly an inexpensive Chinese tank, when I was looking to buy noise was unfortunately not a detail I considered

Yes my tank is 40khz, I’m thinking of building an enclosure of panel insulation to mute the noise, it is kind of annoying 

@ktimothyaI
I have been seeing 45C used in this thread, now you tell me 40C is too hot, I don’t understand 

80kHz is much quieter than 40kHz.  A combination of both frequencies gives the best results.  40kHz means larger vacuum bubbles with greater implosive force,.  80kHz yields less force but more, smaller bubbles.
@j_damon - 40 degrees C is too hot. 

@j_damon,

I assume your tank is 40khz? My new Vibrato is 80khz. I'm not sure if that alone contributes to the quietness of my unit or better parts/construction?

Now if my tank was silent......

I have been following this thread with great interest, I read Terry’s recommendation for the vinyl stack a while ago, maybe on a AT cartridge thread. Purchased one and a Chinese tank and was underwhelmed with results. I’ve been thinking of revisiting the system and found this thread. I had been using low heat setting and photo flow with distilled water for 5 minutes. Tried versa clean added to the mix and 40 degree solution for 30 minutes and now I see the light! I was concerned with warping at those temps. Now listening to previously noisey discs and they are clean, thank you all!!

You seemed to confirm the reason I have my set-up in the way I do.

@slaw In an RO system the charcoal filter is typically last in order to not introduce its ’fines’ (particulates) into other filters. Yet experiments are worth trying. Keep posting so we learn your results.

@jtmothyaI,

I'm continuing my quest with experimenting. I'm still using a Hydronix 5 micron filter after the carbon filter. I think you mentioned earlier that you'd not seen anyone use dual filters before. Just hang with me bro.

No downsides yet.It may be that I'll later ditch the carbon filter?

@totem395,

With the Chinese tank, I found that running the cleaner while having the filter pump on for several minutes did a good job getting rid of the "slurry" in the bottom of the tank after sitting unused for several days.

Upon having everything filled and ready to go with the carbon filter I had bought before the old tank bit the dust, I fired it up and black water was filling the tank...... Note to self, (Always, run water through a new carbon filter well, before initial use). Now that is out of the way, the first thing I noticed is how quiet the unit is! What a welcome nicety.

I've not heard of using a carbon filter with ultrasonic cleaning.  Typically it is used for odor and taste in, eg, an RO system.  

@slaw

The Vibrato has a degauss feature.

Where you previously doing a manual degaussing step
prior to the Vibrato?

The Vibrato has a degauss feature. According to the "manual", if you run the unit for ten minutes with the cover on, in your later cleaning cycle, the temp will not vary as much. Well, for whatever reason, this works. Whether or not it helps in any way, I cannot say.

On the Chinese cleaner I was always setting the heater @ 45 C with no real noticeable changes during the cleaning cycle. With the Vibrato, I'm using 38 C with the temperature rising to slightly above 40 C in a 30 minute cycle. Oh yeah, I was using a 40 minute cycle on the other cleaner.

Yes, the Vibrato allows 1 degree increments whereas the other was in 5 degree increments. Another big plus here!

Finally received my new Vibrato www.vibratollc.com  10 quart/80khz unit.
It has a frequency sweep feature/6 transducers.

So I'm starting off with my earlier/same cleaning/pre-cleaning methods, same cleaning fluid. I'm using Versa-Clean @ 2 Tbl per gal and Kodak Photo-Flow @ 1/2 Tbs per gallon. I rinse under tap water then a final rinse with distilled. Then to the VPI for another distilled rinse/dry.

The Vibrato is not as tall as my former Chinese tank which works out well with the Vinyl Spin as at it's most extended height, the lps are completely out of the water. 

Upon having everything filled and ready to go with the carbon filter I had bought before the old tank bit the dust, I fired it up and black water was filling the tank...... Note to self, (Always, run water through a new carbon filter well, before initial use). Now that is out of the way, the first thing I noticed is how quiet the unit is! What a welcome nicety. 

This unit seems to be a couple of notches above the Chinese tank in several ways. It's functions match (other testing measurement methods) more closely than the old unit. Like the actual heat setting....it's within 1 degree C of it's display. 

More to come..............

The additional length means twice the surface area of the smaller filter.  I wonder if there is any back pressure from the smaller one?
My original USC tank made in China started malfunctioning.  it was replaced by the dual frequency p120H unit from Elmasonic

My tank quit on me. Upon draining the water, I noticed the filters. I'm using two, one is a 1 micron/5" long, the other is 5 micron/10" long. Both are the same type/brand from Hydronix. The 5 micron I had recently added to the system and it is first in-line. It is noticeable dirtier than the other one and actually dirtier than any filter I've ever used and checked since I've set this system up. Maybe it's the additional length? 

I've put myself on the waiting list for a Vibratto 6L/80khz machine. Any thoughts?

The Hotor AC/DC adapter I bought to power my Bay-lite RV pump...... I just had to replace the two prong AC end. The wire/insulation is crap. You can almost cut through it like butter.

@jtimothya 

It's only cleaner in terms of suspended solids, not in terms of soluble compounds. As Slaw notes, the yellow color fades to brown with use. After about 100 records, I change the chemistry. Arbitrary, but probably on the safe side.

FWIW: I'm on my fifth week of this round of cleaning solution and the yellowish tint isn't as noticeable as before on many previous (4 week) changes. I've actually increased the Versa-Clean in this batch  as well. Go figure.

Slaw describes this as a slurry, which is correct in every sense - I should have thought of that.

Okay - let's say that covers insoluables.  What makes you think the "95% of the cleaning chemistry safely in the jug" is any cleaner than it was in the tank?

Slaw describes this as a slurry, which is correct in every sense - I should have thought of that.

The slurry/sediment primarily collects at the bottom of the tank and most of the remainder collects in the dip of the drain tube. With 95% of the cleaning chemistry safely in the jug, I simply rinse out the tank and tube with pure water, second rinse with distilled, and re-use the chemistry.

Yeah, I’m a cheap SOB - and no, I haven't considered a filter because I don't think it would be as good.

I seem to have solved my problem with the "slurry" I notice in the bottom of my tank after sitting for 5 days. In addition to circulating the water, I turn the cleaner on for 5 min. That has taken care of it. The additional filter doesn't seem to help that issue much. I am going to try a 5 micron carbon block filter in my next batch of water to see how it performs with my TDS meter checks.

Dripping overnight allows the sediment to settle out. Almost all of it.

@terry9 - That's interesting - thanks for the follow-up.  Guess I'm still a bit unclear.  Where does the dirt in solution settle or get captured?  In the tank, the dip of your drain tube or in the jug?

Have you considered using a filter? 

@jtimothya 

Dripping overnight allows the sediment to settle out. Almost all of it.

@slaw - Into ~2.75 gallons distilled water I add 1⅓ cups 99% pure Isopropyl Alcohol (roughly 3%) and 0.9 tablespoons of Ilfotol (wetting agent used in final rinse of photograph development.)  In a fresh tank that combination checks out at ~0002ppm.  It stays low thanks to continuous filtering at 0.35 microns.

I agree - always a good idea to to do a TDS test on anything under consideration as a cleaning agent, both by itself and diluted. 

I miswrote...Versa-Clean ...showed 3189 ppm undilluted.

I think next time I replace the water, I'll check the new mixture with my meter and go from there.

@jtimothya ,

I’m using distilled water. What are you using?
..................................
I just testing clean distilled...showed 0 ppm
Versa-Clean undilluted...showed 1358 ppm

No worries @slaw  - If you prefer a DIY system that includes rinsing, go for it.  With a TDS meter reading of 40-59ppm I certainly would rinse.  It's good you're using a meter.

In the context of my DIY setup, rinsing is an unnecessary time-consuming step.  When I pull records out of the cleaning tank the water on them consistently measures 003-005ppm so no need to rinse.  I change the USC tank water if that number goes higher - that's typically after 65-75 records or so.

Each spends his time as he will. I confess I'd rather listen to music than clean records. 

@jtimothya ,

IMO, saying rinses are unnecessary as a blanket statement, is false. Everyone has there own cleaner and depending upon how much is used, will vary and and getting all of the residue off will vary as well.

( "Time consuming" ..... we're all in the hobby of playing/cleaning vinyl records. If one in this hobby is concerned with time, maybe they should look for another hobby or software ?)

I’ve had my TDS meter for two weeks now. I checked the water last week that was changed a week prior, the ppm reading then was 40. A week later the ppm reading is 59. Remember, I pre-clean/steam every lp before it hits the US cleaner.

totally agree. I got a CV about a month ago. Incredible. Like having a new collection.

With my DIY setup, I do no rinses and I air dry the records. Rinsing is an unnecesary step that adds time, especially if it is done one record at a time on a horizontal vacuum which also adds considerable mess.

When records are pulled from the tank after a wash cycle if the water on the record is clean then the records will be clean when they dry. The key is keeping the tank water clean during the cleaning cycle.
More here:https://thevinylpress.com/timas-diy-rcm-follow-up-2-compelling-changes-improved-results/

The Elma has the drain on the right hand side. Since it is very finely controlled (down to drop by drop), I clean my solution by (1) arrange a clear plastic drain line with a dip in the middle (2) let the chemistry rest for a few hours (3) begin the drip into a clean jug (4) wait overnight (5) remove the jug of clean chemistry (6) rinse everything.

I don't understand how dripping solution into a clean jug overnight does anything to clean the solution.  (By 'solution' I assume this means water + chemicals.) 

Can you say more?

@slaw 

Didn't see your July posting until now.

The Elma has the drain on the right hand side. Since it is very finely controlled (down to drop by drop), I clean my solution by (1) arrange a clear plastic drain line with a dip in the middle (2) let the chemistry rest for a few hours (3) begin the drip into a clean jug (4) wait overnight (5) remove the jug of clean chemistry (6) rinse everything.

The chemistry is pretty clean, no noticeable fibre. I love letting Mr. Newton do the work!

Another example of why DIY is better than Audio Desk, IMO:

I just listened to my copy of Eels "Daisies of the Galaxy" that was previously cleaned by my steam/AD method as of early 2018. It was ticky all throughout. I re-steamed it with the AI "down with dirty concentrate" then put it through my DIY US cleaner at 45min/45C/9V setting on the Vinyl Stack. The ticking is 98% gone, along with greater dynamic impact.

I believe the slightly stronger pump helps clear my tank out better. The water still turns yellowish at around one month, (using distilled water). Look forward to checking it when the meter arrives. I still do two rinses then a vacuum rinse after the US cleaning.

Let us know mayor.

Got it. Will do. Was afraid of break such an expensive machine. Overall, though, couldn’t be happier with it. I just can’t believe I waited this long to get one.