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.
Hi. I wouldn't know how to alleviate your concerns on any other level than what I've experienced by listening and reporting that here. Many audiophiles including professional reviewers who've tried it are sold. It's hard to get a more across the board, wide spectrum of people to agree on things but they have in this case.
I've been interested in ultrasonic cleaning for some time. Having a background in ultrasonics in the engineering laboratory setting, I am even more curious now that so many high-end hi-fi users are seemingly impressed by its application to vinyl cleaning.
I'm sure most all of you are aware of the past claims that ultrasonic cleaning adversely affects high frequency information in the vinyl (somehow). These claims I've read were interesting, but the claimants indicated neither the level of sophistication of their cleaning process nor their audio systems.
I'm sold on experimenting with the cleaning process, but my knowledge of ultrasonics gives me pause as I consider these claims regarding high frequency affects on the vinyl. Since I haven't seen it mentioned here, can anyone also address this concern so as to allay my trepidations? Thanks!
RE rinsing, I should add that it is important to start with good water. It's not too hard to get rid of the suspended solids, but the dissolved minerals are hell. RO is about the only way to reduce them, and even then you have to worry about the spec. One key spec is conductivity (high is bad).
If you don't have good tap water, I would suggest successive baths in distilled.
fsonicsmith, "When a reviewer automatically dismisses analogue as a faulty medium or insists upon truthful reproduction of the lowest octave of pipe-organ or double-bass, I know to steer clear."
I share your skepticism with commercial reviewers, while appreciating Dudley. But I'm confused by your statement quoted above. The pipe-organ has the potential for a 16 Hz note which a cartridge may not track. But the double-bass (4-string string bass) low reach is 42 Hz. Any decent cartridge should reproduce that.
I removed my own post. Next week will be 2 years on A’gon. Been thinking about it for 6 months. Have been posting less frequently and letting my posts just get removed as time expires. Will probably become a “Ghost” reader and really not try to participate on the forum anymore.
Although I really don’t pay much attention to the audio press much any more, I did (kind of ) follow Art Dudley’s move towards the AD cleaner. At first he said he could not afford it, then low and behold he bought one. He is the one writer I have respect for. I only hope he’ll possibly do a DIY US cleaner in the manner in which he did his own plinth for the Thorens. ?
I'm in the same boat-Art Dudley is the one S'Phile reviewer I feel I can rely upon. Although I listen to vinyl 95% of the time, based on his review of the Abbingdon Music Research DP777 DAC, I bought a lightly used one sound-unheard and have been very happy with it ever since. With each knew touted hi-res format, I chuckle to myself that well-executed 16bit/44.1 is all I need. More so than any other reviewer in the S'Phile fold, Art seems to totally free himself from "hi-fi" sound and instead values truth of tone and timbre. He understands that all of audio involves compromise and priorities. When a reviewer automatically dismisses analogue as a faulty medium or insists upon truthful reproduction of the lowest octave of pipe-organ or double-bass, I know to steer clear. I apologize for digressing, but JA and his buddy Kal Rubinson still insist that Benchmark DAC's are among the best and yet consumer after consumer on the various audio Boards express their regret for having bought one.
Thanks for the post. Look forward to your findings!
(By the way, "I don’t know who to believe",..I can appreciate that. This is why I spend the effort in several ways to find out for myself...then I report here.) I stand behind what I here. My recommendation for anyone is to try several options for yourself.
Although I really don’t pay much attention to the audio press much any more, I did (kind of ) follow Art Dudley’s move towards the AD cleaner. At first he said he could not afford it, then low and behold he bought one. He is the one writer I have respect for. I only hope he’ll possibly do a DIY US cleaner in the manner in which he did his own plinth for the Thorens. ?
Well, I have no way to know who is right and who is wrong, but I am certain that I made the right move for me. I was on the verge of buying the AD and was ready to hit the button for PayPal to well-known dealer in PA when I happened to read that the transducers in any US machine eventually crap out and immediately concluded it was dumb to pay that much money for a machine that performs such an isolated function. I went the cheap route instead-a $200 Chinese-made 6L US tank and the Vinyl Stack Pro and the various fluids recommended by some chemist on some audio Board thread that was repeated on Arthur Salvatore's site. This dealer in PA was offering $500 off with a trade-in of a VPI RCM so I had my 16.5 in my car to ship off to said dealer. I instead bought two new pick-up tubes on the realization that I very much need my 16.5 to dry off my records after I run them through my cheap alternative set-up. I haven't yet started with my cheap-route set-up thanks to being on crutches at the moment, but when I do, I will report back.
My 3 years plus with my AD machine ( I now look at it as an informative, expensive lesson), was that after pre-steamimg, I did get better results. after going to the DIY machine set-up, it’s clearly better than the AD.
For convenience, which the AD has in spades, for me, the high initial cost and the inability to be able to access the internals, the inability to be able to clean out the cavity properly, the high ongoing cost of ownership and so on makes it hard to recommend.
My experience with ultrasonic cleaning is nowhere near as positive as the those reported by others. I had a choice between an Audio Desk Pro and a Loricraft PRC 6. I chose the Audio Desk Pro. The unit was purchased new from a dealer.
The first album I cleaned was an original copy of Paul Simon's Graceland lp that I could never quite get clean. I gave it one extra beep and awaited sonic bliss. I put the record on the turntable and gave it a good listen and found that nothing had occurred. I re-cleaned it with a Spin Clean, 60 turns clockwise in total, 60 turns counter-clockwise in total. I rinsed the Spin Clean fluid off with distilled water and cleaned this record again on my conventional RCM using Disc Doctor record cleaner and various brushes. A good rinse followed. The record now sounded good.
This is how all the records I cleaned behaved. Use the Audio Desk. Then hit the Spin Clean and my old Hanss Acoustic RCM. It seemed that the Audio Desk loosened the grub on the records but did not remove it. After 80 record cleaning cycles with the same result, I drove the 2.5-3 hours ( one way) to the dealer with the machine ( and a 4 liter jug of distilled water and a new bottle of Audio Desk cleaning solution) and asked the dealer what gives. The filter and cleaning brushes were cleaned and dried the day before my trip.
The dealer mixed the cleaning solution into the distilled water and filled the machine. He then cleaned a couple of records. The cleaning process was carefully observed and deemed okay. The records were played and the dealer announced that this is all I could expect. The machine was working as well as any he had seen.
I had cleaned the filter and brushes several times before I went back to the dealer. I changed the distilled water and cleaning solution several times as well in case the machine was dirty from the factory.
I went home and using a new batch of distilled water and Audio Desk cleaning agent I found that nothing has changed. So, by this time I have gone through 5-6 changes of water\cleaning fluid solutions. My impression so far is all I get is more work going back to my old record cleaning machines to remove the grunge the Audio Desk loosened but did not remove. After just over 100 records were cleaned on the Audio Desk, I drained the fluid and cleaned the rotating brushes and the filter. The filter showed very little debris (2 shakes with a pepper shaker). Much, much less than I have seen on other posts on the internet. My records are cleaned and rinsed before being cleaned with the Audio Desk, but after all the dazzling superlatives that I have seen used to describe the Audio Desk I am truly at a loss.
I have considered sending it back to Germany with a letter describing my experiences, but I doubt that much would come of it. I think if I received an all okay in German I would ask Mr. Glass to just keep his machine as I would not feel I had lost anything but thousands of dollars and my pride for being fooled so easily.
I should have purchased the Loricraft PRC 6 instead. It is exactly the same money. I know what a Loricraft or a Monks can do, and it is a lot more than the Audio Desk can.
Just wanted to chime in on this thread with a shout out for the after sales service from Klaudio on their cleaners. I’ve had an LP200 since last August and love it but in the past month the motor driving the LP started to whine and in many cases would not power the LP round. I contacted my dealer and he suggested I ship it back to KL. Concerned I didn’t want to do this without an RMA I filled in a form in the KL website and next day (although it was a holiday) I got an RMA and also an email for a free shipping label. Shipped it off and less than a week later got it back with new motor and rollers. All in all this is just what you expect in after sales service but is too rarely what you receive. So if you do spring for the Klaudio models you can be confident they stand behind them well
I was somewhat surprised you set a 50% improvement with a triple stage filtering & heroic rinsing. Not to doubt you at all. This gives me more to look forward to.
Ever tried a carbon impregnated filter? Is this a possibility in our application?
stringreen, did you buy all or most of your records new? I believe that can make a big difference, particularly if one is careful about how they treat/handle their records, which I suspect you may be.
But I've become a believer in US even without yet owning one, simply based upon the overwhelming positive comments I've read on line.
My first record cleaner was a Nitty Gritty but it had the manual record rotation. I soon grew tired of that and bought a VPI 16.5. That changed my whole attitude about record cleaning. Now I plan to get an US device but will keep my 16.5 for rinsing and drying.
I agree that in general the vacuum method is better than nothing, but the US method seems far superior. It may or may not be "worth it" to you, but there is a difference. But you are focused on the right things...
Enjoying the music and embracing passions.
@terry thank you for defining what you meant by "heroic rinsing". That's amazing.
..just reading all these posts, and reflecting on my experience....
I have a Nitty Gritty I got many years ago. I've used the cleaning machine to clean records maybe 10 records in about 10 years. In my experience, the little benefit is simply not worth the effort (I'm lazy I guess). I listen to vinyl every day ....I am a violinist and have lived well though the years doing it. Every one should embrace their passions.
I began with a two stage rinse, spinning the cleaned records in a bath of Brita-purified water, then a bath of distilled water. But I could see bubbles forming in the rinse after only a few records, so changed the rinses more often. Then I tried pouring purified water over the records first, and things improved. Including the sound. I tried pouring purified water over the records both before and after the first bath. More improvement.
At the same time, I was increasing temperature from 35C to 45C (80KHz commercial machine). Cumulative of all of the above refinements was a further improvement of at least as much as US over VPI. I re-cleaned everything already done, 2000 records.
As you can see, labour intensive. But I dislike the noise of the VPI 16.5, so I sold mine as soon as I confirmed the superiority of US, and have never used the two methods in combination. My current method of filtered running water is just so much more convenient, that convenience alone makes it worthwhile. But I also note that after 50 records cleaned, the distilled water bath is still bubble-free at all times, so there is probably a further improvement in cleanliness, stylus friction, and sound.
That said, I've now got about 2500 records cleaned to 4-rinse standards, and don't think I'll start again. There are limits to madness, even mine.
I am giving you all of this information so that you can judge for yourself how reliable my impressions are (or are not!).
My impression, which is very crude, is that you would hear a clear difference between my method and yours, perhaps as much as half the difference between VPI and US. Bear in mind that this is more of a guess than an estimate.
If you try it, please let us know if I'm right. Or not. I hate persisting in error.
Heads up on temperature / thermometer readings. As mentioned previously the temperature gauges on my USD units or incorrect - off by 5c - 10c - on the low side. So actual temp may be 45c but the temp gauge on the US unit will read 35c.
I previously recommended a digital thermometer from Risepro. $7 from Amazon and seems accurate. HOWEVER. When the US tank is running these thermometers (I’ve got 2) can read 5c - 10c higher than actual temp. It is dramatic. You turn on the tank and the indicated temp on the thermometer will jump up almost immediately. Turn off the tank and the indicated temp will fall back down to actual. Also note that the behavior is more muted when you have albums in the tank - the temp will jump up less dramatically - which seems to speak to the issue of the albums actually dampening the US action and why you should consider cleaning only a few records at a time. I'm actually cleaning only 3 records at a time, down from my original 6.
So... If you use a digital thermometer be sure to test it with the tank on and off to observe any potential differences.
Consider a non-digital thermometer? I don’t have one to test, but guessing it may not be susceptible to the same interference.
I was thinking about your multi-stage filtering system/rinsing efforts...
Did you gradually work up to this? If so, could you ascribe a % of improvement, say on something like I'm currently utilizing compared to a more comprehensive approach like you are using? I realize these things are somewhat subjective but I assume you have valid reasons for your way. Thanks.
Yes... It IS fun. Really fun. And provides lots of incentive to go back through the collection to rediscover some old favorites and hear them better than ever.
I’m currently listening to a freshly cleaned copy of The Stones - Get Your Ya Ya’s Out. I’ve owned this record since at least college (think late 70’s) and it was played frequently back in the day. It sounds great. Far better than I remember. Mick Taylor’s guitar sounds glorious. There are still some tics and pops, probably due to some damage, but all in all, pretty great.
I’m on a slightly different mission now. I want to get through my entire collection. I’ve cleaned about half of my records with my Cleaner Vinyl Pro using just a 15 minute wash step (initially using distilled water, soap, and alcohol, now using VersaClean, Photoflow and distilled water), and finished on the Record Doctor.
However, as more people have joined the thread, I’ve learned more (thanks in particular to @terry9, @slaw, @whart) and now I want to make sure I add a rinse step before vacuuming. This necessitates going back through the first half of the collection as well as handling the second half.
So, I went all in and bought a second US tank and another Cleaner Vinyl. This gives me twice the capacity to go through the rinse step for the previously cleaned part of the collection. Also, because of the way Cleaner Vinyl just hangs on the side of the tank, when I do the second half I will just pick up the unit with records from the clean tank and drop it in the rinse tank, the second Cleaner Vinyl will already be loaded with records so I will just drop that in the cleaning tank.
Using this approach I can have US cleaning and rinsing going on simultaneously and following each rinse step with a spin on the Record Doctor to dry it. I know some like to air dry, but I’m on a mission to get through my collection and vacuuming speeds the drying as well as sucking any remaining dirt from the album. Once I’m through my collection I will sell one of the Cleaner Vinyl’s and US tanks. No doubt suffering a loss, but the compensation is I will get through my collection at a much faster pace.
I also built a pump and filter assembly as described previously and use that on the cleaning tank. In my case I’m also sold on having an external thermometer - the thermometers on my US tanks are out of touch with reality. See previous post for a link to the thermometer on Amazon.
As you say, this is fun. But no, I didn't put it together - got too much on my plate with my air bearing turntable (working close to the limit, but a quadrature power supply should improve it further) and pre/phono (Version 2.0 with air-gap and vacuum caps ONLY in the signal path).
I asked the good folks at Vinyl Stack to put a special motor on their spinner, and they found something that works brilliantly. I run the unit at about 60 RPM to do a fast rinse and uniform cool-down under running water (about 10C). If you have pure tap water, it's fast and convenient. Recommended.
I'm another 'air-dryer'. Because I don't have a vacuum. So my process is to Spin Clean w/ their solution first, put them on the VinylStack, drop into the bath for 10 minutes and then take it over to the kitchen sink and run warm water over them while the labels are protected. Then I use a spin clean with distilled water and then put them in a file rack with a fan running. Occasionally I'll see a drop but it's pretty rare. They normally come out spotless. But I know a vacuum would be much better. I might head down that path at some point.
When my Us cleaner is finished it’s cycle, I raise the lps out of the bath, let them spin a while, then take them off, pat them dry with a clean micro-fiber cloth, then to the VPI 16.5/distilled water. I have had no issue with spots.
I pulled out Ben Harper's "Both Sides of the Gun", yesterday. It had previously been cleaned with Disc Dr. fluid and a vacuum dry around 10 years ago?
I listened to it like that, then steamed it ( I use Audio Intelligent Down With Dirty Concentrate mixed @ 1.5 Tbs. per 16 oz.) brushed on then steamed off w/ distilled water, then a vacuum/rinse.
It isn't a reference disc but it is I'd say a solid 8. It has enough of every part of the frequency spectrum delivered at high enough level for anyone to hear what is there and what could be there. After hearing it improve somewhat just by steaming, then to the full US bath, it went up one notch to a 9. It's interesting and fun to listen to this happen.
I try and make sure when I drop the Vinyl Stack into place that I eyeball the record grooves and make sure they are slightly under water...IE: equivalent to your adding more water.
Based on @terry9 last post, I'm experimenting with a slower rotation today @ 1 rpm every 2.5 minutes.
Another convert here. I have a 10L 40hz tank and a Vinyl Stack 3 LP combo. My process is:
Spin Clean to remove surface / loose debris and pre clean Blot US Clean using Rushton's formula at 35c. 1/3 RPM; 5 revolutions in 15min Rinse Nitty Gritty Vac Dry
My findings match most experiences. Clean LPs often exhibit a noise floor lower than that of my system. I hear much better transient response, and extreme HF. I hear much more air and space around musicians.
My take is that over time, a layer of dirt bonds to the groove surface walls. This layer is probably only a few microns deep, but it is enough to blunt the leading edges of transients, mask extreme treble extension, and the very low level audio cues that allow us to "hear" space. This layer is generally impervious to scrubbing. A US session removes this layer, exposing more of the very subtle modulations deep in the groove.
Regarding surface noise, even previously cleaned LPs exhibited a shhhhh-woooosh sound in the background and between grooves. After US cleaning, in many cases this sound is gone, and is replaced by silence.
On the other hand, surface damage is now more easily heard probably because the scratches are also cleaned of smoothing junk etc and the rest of the LP is now more quiet.
I have run into an issue where I hear more tics pops as I get closer to the label. I increased the amount of fluid in the US tank, and more carefully vac clean, which seems to have taken care of the problem.
Rinsing - I just implemented a 3 stage water filter: 25 microns, 1 micron, 0.5 micron carbon block.
I clean using a conventional Vinyl Stack spinner. Then I transfer the stack to a high speed Vinyl Stack spinner, located in a sink. Then I rinse the stack in running water, first with 1 micron water, then 0.5 micron water.
Finally, I remove the stack from the high speed spinner and attach a VS handle, and rotate the stack in a bath of distilled water.
My tap water is very, very pure, and so this works a treat for me. YMMV, especially if your tap water isn't Wet Coast pristine.
Great thread! I've been using a USRCM for a couple of years (I guess that may put me in the 'early adopter' catagory) however, I would not say I'm any expert at it, mainly due to a lack of time to really dial in the procedure. Where I'm at today is: Vinyl Stack system (though I built my own stand for it) with a 40kHZ bath, using the "Rushton method fluid", though I started with just distilled water and have moved to a 'chemistry'. 1 micron filter with a 1.2gpm pump. Being an 'early adopter', the timing was shorter than what most of you have described: I've been using 5 minutes. Heat is a must (~40C, I find the temp goes up with sonic usage, too). Is everyone drying with a vac? I have been doing that...but I really don't like the idea of touching the record after cleaning! So - I'm building a blower/dryer rack. Air is filtered, and really 'blows'. QUESTION: after pulling the records from the chemistry bath, how should I rinse? with the distilled water + alcohol mixture, then dry? I don't want any residue left on records. Or spots :)
@slaw Thank you for that! I feel a lot better now. I was worried some of the early experiments might have been softened a bit from higher/longer temps. But once records are US cleaned, the differences between warm and bright recordings are even more substantial.
I haven’t noticed any problems at all. In fact I notice the opposite effect, in this sense... the fact that the lp is cleaner, the stylus can retrieve more info and I mostly notice an increase in transparency, inner detail, w/ better defined/more musical bass. I’ve done 30 minutes/45C for almost as long as I’ve had the cleaner. I have done up to 50 minutes (this is the max recommended time for my cleaner) one time for a extremely nasty gift lp that ended up better than before.
I once left a new lp on a 30min./45C cycle and forgot to turn on the Vinyl Stack. I put it through another cycle and played it. I could not hear any hint of damage.
Wow, thanks guys. @slaw No issues with treble for those longer/warmer sessions? @whart Yeah, I do have a few more valuable records that are very noisy and would love to spend the time to clean them up if it's even possible. One that I really treasure is an RL/ss (both sides) Led Zeppelin II pressing. I just don't know how much is groove damage/scratches vs. dirt. As long as I'm not damaging the record, I don't mind wasting time on it experimenting.
@audiom3- don’t give up on a record just yet. One thing I learned, aside from the various fiddling you may do with the ultrasonic, is that a good old fashioned cleaning, using something like AIVS No. 15 and rinse will, in combination with US, sometimes take a record from noisy to clean. And it requires multiple cleanings sometimes too. It may not be worth the trouble for some easy to get, fairly cheap record, but if it is rare and valuable, well worth the trouble. I don’t rely exclusively on ultrasonic, but combine traditional cleaning with US and that’s where I’ve found the best results on troublesome records. (No guarantee- record could be permanently damaged, but sometimes, it works and worth the effort in the instances I mentioned).
My Vinyl Stack has various settings assigned to various (rpm). I use the 12v setting that is equal to 1 & 1/2 rpm (rotations per minute) for a 30 minute cycle @ 45C.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
