... inexpensive UT tanks like the Vevor can be very noisy; enough to drive you out of the room ...
Even the pricey US cleaners can be noisy. I use the silencer box for the Klaudio cleaner and it’s very effective.
Ultrasonic Record Cleaner 40 v 80 v 120 kHz
I’m new to vinyl. My table is George Merrill’s Signature Polytable. Most of the records are purchased used from local shops, which range from poor to decent condition. Hence, I need a record cleaner.
I have been researching ultrasonic (US) cleaners online, The standard US cleaners are 40 kHz. More recently, however, I’ve seen companies like Cleaner Vinyl and Degritter are offering multi kHz machines that operate at 40, 80, and 120 kHz.
Is there any evidence that the higher frequencies make a real audible difference? Or is alleged benefits just marketing hype? Any real world feedback if the higher frequencies really improve cleaning would be appreciated.
Thanks much.
18 responses Add your response
Be advised that inexpensive UT tanks like the Vevor can be very noisy; enough to drive you out of the room or wear hearing protection. Also, you will want to buy new power supply that can slow down the motor such as Amazon.com: Belker 36W 3V 4.5V 5V 6V 7.5V 9V 12V Adjustable Voltage Universal AC/DC Adapter Power Supply for Household Electronics Security Camera Router LED Strip Light Keyboard Tablet - 3A 3000mA Max. : Electronics. You can add a filter that can extend the bath life for not too much money - Amazon.com: iSonic 1 Micron in-Water Filter for P4875II+MVR, P4875II-4T-NH+MVR or P4875-NH+MVR : Industrial & Scientific. You will have to adapt it to the Vevor. If you can keep the bath clean, you then monitor the bath with a TDS meter. They are available for <$15 but they are generally not very accurate at low levels with this being the lowest accurate unit I have found - Amazon.com: HM Digital 716160 COM-100 Waterproof Professional Series Combo Meter, 7", White/Purple : Industrial & Scientific. You refresh the bath when it reads 5-10 ppm. Or, pre-clean with Merril unit and then final clean/dry with the HG HumminGuru Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner | RCM | Recording Cleaning Machine; see the manual here HumminGuru Owner's Manual. The HG only uses 400-ml of DIW and you just replace about every 6- records. FYI, the general consensus is that the new more expensive HG-Nova adds some convenience, but it cleans no better. Good Luck, |
Had an Audiodesk rcm the year it came out. After about 100 records, the pump broke and it could not be sent back for repair. So I received a discount (not very much) on a new improved Audio Desk. When that pump broke, I was utterly disgusted having spent about $7,500 on the two machines. I switched to the current KL Audio with which I am very satisfied. Bonus--if it breaks, I can have it repaired in the U.S. |
Well, thanks again everyone, all great info. I should mention that I did purchase the Gem Dandy hydraulic cleaning machine. It is inexpensive and at least according to George Merril, it works well, as good as US. I was also considering the CS6.1 Pro. I figured after hydraulically washing 10 records, I would give them a second US cleaning, rinse and then spin dry. But based on the comments and a review by Fremer, it seems that iSonic is not really an US machine.
I am starting to think the best option for US is a basic Vevor $200 cleaner. The unit has 180W of power. After US cleaning, I can use the Merril for a 2nd cleaning and rinse. |
If you read the book, Chapter XIV XIV.4 Record Spacing, and XIV.6 |
@jwr159 I am a long term user of Vinyl as a Source Material. I am today a total advocate of the Manual Cleaning method supplied in Neil Antins PAVCR shown in the Link in earlier posts. I am not going into the ’vs-this -- vs that’ debate. Using the Guidance in the Document for Manual Cleaning combined with a 'few tips' from others contributing in another thread, along with my own teaks to the method. The Manual Cleaning Method has left myself with Vinyl LP’s that I now Class after having owned for 40ish years as being ’ PURIFIED’. I am actually convinced the PURIFIED is an audible quality able to be detected I now clean Albums that are Brand New Purchases and know what an improvement that is to be had on some. Following Neil’s Guidance in the Document will achieve identical results, the tweaks referred to are really methods used for the applications of the Solutions and Rinse Methods. As for a Tweak, I use a modified Lazy Susan to mount the LP, this is positioned over the Kitchen Sink. I also use Different Coloured Baby Scalp Brushes, for the different treatments for the solutions to be applied. A bowl is used as a DW rinse bowl for each of the coloured brushes, where I dip the brush clean, prior to each new solution to be brush treated when applied, this is a measure to improve on avoiding cross contamination. It suits my way of thinking this one as a practice. I also use a Horticultural Gardeners Pump Up Pressurised Bottle for all DW rinses of the Vinyl LP. Again select the preferred Nozzle Setting and Jet Power Rinse the LP, totally suit my way of thinking. Back to Neil’s Guidance, on old Vinyl Albums, I found the White Vinegar Treatment created an Album that had the edge in quietness. More Important, when familiarised and organised, if the Space is available, 10 Albums are easily able to be cleaned in a Hour, with the first Three to Four Albums being ready to be replayed or put into the sleeve within 30 minutes of the cleaning having occurred. |
Speaking of iSonic, which of these two options would do a better job? |
The Audiodesk_Pro is a very low powered UT device. The manual Audiodesk_Pro_Manual-2018-7-Inch-Kit.pdf (galibierdesign.com) indicates an overall power of power 90W (which include the rollers) and a volume of 4.5-L which at best yields 20W/L but more likely 60W UT power for 13.3W/L. Comparing against other 40-kHz machines, the HG max power is 60W, but the UT power is ~50W in 0.4L = 125W/L while the king of the hill, the KLAudio is 200W in 0.78L = 256W/L (the KLAudio is a beast). However, the smaller tanks need more power because the ratio of tank surface area to volume is high, while the Kirmuss 35-kHz is about 165W and about 6.5L = 25W/L (it uses the same basic UT tank as the Isonic P4875 https://questforsound.com/pdfs/iSonic-catalog-P4875+MVR10.pdf. |
No I do not use UT. I do not clean enough records, and convenience is not something that is a priority to me. The manual process leverages chemistry (detergents & acid, Liquinox, Citranox & Tergitol) especially the acid that you would not use with the other cleaning processes and with the right brush and the right technique achieves a very clean record. But the manual sink method is technique sensitive and is not convenient and much beyond cleaning 6 records at a time is not practical. It’s pretty much as the book end of Chapter XII states: XII.16 The final chapters of this book will discuss machine assisted cleaning methods: vacuum record cleaning machines (RCM) and ultrasonic cleaning machines (UCM). It’s important to consider that machines are generally developed for two primary reasons – reduce labor and improve process efficiency. Process efficiency can mean faster (higher throughput) and/or higher probability of achieving quality or achieving a quality that manual labor cannot produce. Manual cleaning in the appropriate environment with appropriate controls can achieve impressive levels of cleanliness, but the labor, skill, time and probability of success generally make it impractical for manufacturing environments. But for the home audio enthusiast, depending on your attention to details, adopting machine assisted cleaning may or may not yield a cleaner record. However, the ease of use and convenience provided by machines can be very enticing and cannot be denied. But, let me stress, as the book Forward states - All cleaning procedures specified herein are presented as only “a” way to clean a record. No claim is made there is only one way to approach the process. In the final analysis, the best cleaning process is the one that is best for you. Good Luck |
Antinn, wow great post. The links provided are a great resource. Thanks for sharing. By selecting the links you provided, I was able to navigate to your book on cleaning records, V3.1. What a great resource. After reviewing the chapter on US cleaning, I take it you do not have a US machine. I apologize if I missed an explanation in your book, but may I ask why not? Do you feel other alternatives are just as good? Thanks for any words of wisdom you care to share. |
First - recommend reading this article awad-reprint II (crest-ultrasonics.com), and the take-away is that for record cleaning, much above 80-kHz has no real benefit. Second, if you read this post - Ultrasonic Cavitation & Cleaning Explained | What's Best Audio and Video Forum. The Best High End Audio Forum on the planet! (whatsbestforum.com) pay attention to the basic rules regarding kHz vs power. Quick takeaway, is that a low powered 120-kHz is not going to clean very well. If you are going to do the UT-DIY, the best UT tanks are the Elmasonic P-series elmasonic_p_gb.pdf (vwr.com) dual frequency 37/80-kHz with a variety of operating functions and are well powered by real power. Most people with the Elmasonic P-60 or P-120 operate 10-min auto-cycling between 37-kHz and 80-kHz; then 10-min at 80-kHz. Some of the other UT tank reported power levels are a bit optimistic. But going the DIY path, there is a lot of details to get it right such as the spinner speed, number of records, bath management, filtering, etc. If you want to explore this further this free book Chapter XIV does a deep-dive - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press. Otherwise, the general precision aqueous cleaning process is based on two steps, pre-clean and final clean. New records can go straight to final clean, but used records generally need a pre-clean step, and you have many options. The book above has a simple manual sink method using multiple chemistries, but there is also the option of vacuum-RCM, and combinations followed by UT final clean. Keep in mind that except for the $$$$ Clearaudio unit, vacuum RCM do not clean the record - you clean the record with the brush and chemistry. Vacuum-RCM adds convenience with speed to dry. But, the UT record specific HumminGuru, Degritter & KLAudio all have the benefit of convenience - drop the pre-clean record into the slot and push start and ~10-min record is clean and dry or mostly dry with each having its own pros & cons. If curious I did a comparison between the DG and KL here Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition | Page 13 | Steve Hoffman Music Forums. But, let me stress that as far as I am concerned, there is no best cleaning process. The best process is the one that is best for you. Good Luck, |
Thank you all for the reples. Yes, I agree with you dogberry, one can spend considerably more for a 120 Khz machine vs. a 40 kHz machine, the latter of which can be purchased for $200 from China. I am considering the Degritter (120 kHz only I believe) or a machine from Cleaner Vinyl, now selling triple frequency machines. https://www.cleanervinyl.com/shop-multi-frequency-cleaners.html George Merril also sells an inexpensive machine - $200. He claims it is as good as US. Relies on a jet of water from your faucet.
Part of me thinks an ititial manual cleaning using the Merril machine followed by a US cleaning at a higher frequency is the way to go. But this is just a hunch. I need to do more homework.
|
Neil will come and give you the low down before long. One consideration is that the size of the cavitation bubble that forms (as well as it's energy) is related to the frequency of ultrasonic vibration. 120kHz bubbles are likely to clean the bottom of a vinyl microgroove, whereas I believe 40kHz might not do such a thorough job in theory. Does that make a practical/audible difference? There's the rub, as there's a lot of money to be saved with a 40kHz machine. I have a MkI Degritter and I'm completely satisfied with it, used after a vacuum clean on a Loricraft. |
@jwr159 IMHO ultrasonic cleaners are a bad way to go. Ultrasound strong enough to clean a record will damage the vinyl. The weak ultrasound used in record cleaners does not do much, but the real problem is drying. Place a few drops of record cleaning solution on a glass slide or mirror and let it air dry. You will see a spot where the fluid was. This is what happens when a record is air or fan dried. To get a record really clean it has to be vacuum dried. There are a number of fine vacuum cleaning machines on the market. I like the Nessie. It does the job, is well made and a good value. The very best record cleaner is the Clearaudio Double Matrix Sonic Pro. It cleans both sides at the same time. You get a totally clean record in about three minutes without a drop being spilled. It is, unfortunately, more expensive than most people are willing to spend. |
I think you have to back up and look at what kind of cleaning you need. I buy a lot of older pressings. They don’t clean up fully solely by use of US type cleaners. I learned that through experience. The question of frequency is a factor in choosing US machines-- the non-made for LP machines, like the Elma, can do two frequencies. Other machines can fire at different frequencies as well. These are not all the "audiophile" made for convenience machines. If you are using a surfactant, you need a way to get it off, other than blow drying. Some, more elaborate adapted systems include two baths, one for rinsing. I’m lazy. I clean on a big Monks Omni, then pop into a KL RCM- I do not do any chemistry on the US side. But, depending on budget and objectives, as well as the nature of the records you buy, you should aim for what best suits your needs. I tend to buy M- older pressings. Nothing goes under the stylus before it has been cleaned and inspected (and on occasion, de-warped). |
