Ultrasonic record cleaners

Before you go to the expense of making a Purchase of a Machine that has been thought of as affordable.

There are Vinyl LP Sales Outlets, that offer Services that will clean a LP in a US Tank. I have pointed this out a few months' past to another member. 

Some of these services have machines that have cost a few thousand $$'s. This could be a very good way to see how the Top End Devices used for US Cleaning can improve your LP, that is not achieving a standard of a clean you would like to see.

It should certainly help you decide, if a US Bath is worthwhile pursuing. 

I use the Neil Antin Manual Cleaning Method, combined with a few tweaks offered up by individuals that are using the same methodology. It suits me just fine for a few reasons.

I like the personal input to showing a care for Vinyl that has been owned for 40ish years and less.

It represents a method used on past manual cleaning attempts, but the new method is offering an end product that is unrecognisable to older used methods.

I now have a method in place that enables six LP's to be cleaned in not much more than a 30-minute session.

I don't refer to Cleaned LPs as the end product, I refer to them as Purified LPs, resulting from the impression made during a replay.

The solutions that Neil advises on to be produced, are in my mind able to dissolve deep in the groove and lift out residual / particle that has once been in contact with a styli. 

I have a USM that can mount Six LP's, it remains boxed and unused, even though I did consider for a Brief Period to use it as a device for a rinse cycle during the manual cleaning methodology, the end result of the manual cleaning does make this seem unnecessary.

The Solutions that Neil suggests being mixed, might help produce a much-improved outcome on your RCM available for use. The Manual Clean Method can also be carried out as a Comparison.

Neils has a solution mixture also for a USM, so if this method is selected, very useful Tank Fill Solution will already be at hand.    

PACVR-3rd-Edition

 

@antinn Your Contribution is much appreciated, it certainly reaffirms why I chose to use the Manual Cleaning Method, with a Planning for the Method in use, that can be honed to one that can achieve Six LP Albums cleaned in approx' 30 minutes.

Why Manual, as stated previously in various Threads and within this Thread, I own prior to the Manual Cleaning commencing a US Tank and Rotation System to manage 6 LP Albums. The Manual Cleaning proved so satisfactory and satisfying, the only way I could describe the finished item was as a Purified Album.

I was not motivated to change from this and use the US Tank, being left wondering if all the requirements that you have made known are best to be in place, were in place.

The evidence from the replays of Albums following the manual cleaning I have carried out, have left me totally reassured all the requirements you make known, are addressed, and the methods suggested are present when cleaning, with the result leading me to feel quite confident the overall advisories offered from your Vinyl Cleansing-ology Document have been very accurately applied. 

I lean toward the idea, a Clean LP with certain sized contaminants removed from the Groove will be an improved environment to allow a Styli to have an extended usage life.

A cartridge styli is one of many parts that are impacted on by contamination.

The Crud that collects at the Armature Base at the Damper and Coils interface is quite something, it is a hard to believe the collection of particulates when seen.

A not too old Cartridge with not too many hours of usage can easily be in a state of cleanliness that will be a condition that will most likely impede the Cart's performance. 

I am even aware of Metal Dust Particles entering the body to come into contact with the Coils and ultimately burning/shorting out a channel.

The cleanliness of the LP Groove is only one area of cleanliness to show a concern for if the very best replay is the ambition, if the longevity of the Styli is the only concern, then the Groove being clean, seems to be a good measure to assist with achieving this, it certainly produces a valuable 'peace of mind'. 

    

The use of a Jewellers Putty has been reported to me via a friend as being a very good method for cleaning Styli.

My friend is impressed to the point this is their only method used, other methods are no longer considered.

I was informed that Jewellers Putty is the same as other Styli Cleaning Putty available via HiFi Outlets, but the J' Putty will be cheaper to acquire.

If concerned about the cleaning method for a Styli, the Putty is worth a investigation. 

I do wear Gloves during cleaning and sleeving the dried LPs.

I do not wear Gloves whilst assembling or putting the cleaning items away.

I have a batch of Sponges, and as I only Clean Six LPs in one session as the average, the sponges absorb hardly any water as a new one is used for an LP.

A Sponge might get used on a second occasion if I run out of Dry Sponges, when an additional LP is to be cleaned but this is rare now, the habit is for six

The Lens was dry when the T'cloth was used to clean the Protective Filter.

As said, I do not view this as a concern for the process of cleaning a LP, unless there is something to be added as a contribution that would identify it as a condition present that is of a concern.    

With the Tiger Cloth, I have made a recent discovery that is not a concern, but as it is inquired about, it may be relevant.

The Tiger Cloth has now been used as Neil Described on approx' 70ish Albums.   The DIW Rinse is carried out with Pressurised Bottle with a Jet Nozzle, it does work sufficiently as a Blast Rinse. 

I too leave the T'cloth out to air dry and then in a sealed bag to store it.

Recently I purchased a Camera Lens that I have put through the wringer of learning its qualities over the past few months and only a few days ago decided to give the Front Protection Filter a Clean. My thoughts went to the Tiger Cloth which I utilised.

The cleaning was not successful for the Lens with the Tiger Cloth, as there was a new produced smearing showing on the lens filter that was remaining. I had to use my usual method that is a Lens Fluid Cleaner and Lint Free Paper Towels to clean the Lens to the standard usually achieved.

As said, this is not a concern, as I genuinely don't see the T'cloth as causing any cleaning issues with the Vinyl Lp's, it is very efficient at absorbing the thin film of DIW following a rinse and Sponging Dry.

 What the T'cloth is most likely also collecting, is a very miniscule quantity of a Solution, and after 70ish uses has enough contained in the proportion of the Cloth I used on the Lens to be detected on the Glass. 

Prior to using the T'cloth on a Lens in the future, I will soak it overnight in a distilled water and when dry, try it on a Lens to see if the smearing has ceased from occurring.    

A cleaning comparison is one that I had attempted to encourage in the Past, as the methods used across a Group of Friends has variations.

After pondering the method that seemed most suitable for the comparison purposes only. It seemed the best practice would be to use Three New Albums, as the deterioration and contamination would have the most potential to be a shared condition.

The Albums would have been demarcated on the Cover or Label to identify the cleaning procedure. 

There is not any real-world method commonly used, that would enable a method of measuring the outcome. This is one that is assessed as an audible experience and receives merit, if an increased attraction for the changed condition has occurred.

The final analysis was to be carried out in front of a group of attendees, on a System to see which of the Albums seemingly was being perceived as the one that benefitted the most from a given cleaning procedure. The Trio of Albums were to be made available for others to assess within their own systems.

Interestingly within the Group there were Three Identical New Jazz Albums purchased, but the cleaning comparison never materialised.

As for Album Cleaning now, using the manual method from the @antinn Textbook, I can't foresee how an Album is able to be perceived as being any cleaner, so I am not needing to attempt to have an experience of comparisons. 

In a similar method to make a discovery about a reduction in noise from a LP.

A long time before the above idea developed. I had success in having been offered the support from a Selection of Bearing Producers to supply their Alternative Bearings for a Comparison of Idler Drive Turntable Bearings.

It took a period of time to Win the Producers over, and maybe it was their own curiosity in the end that won through to allow my requests to be met. 

From recollection there were Seven Bearings to be used, which was inclusive of an owned Original Bearing without any service history known and my owned PTP Bearing.  

It was to be a simple affair; a Bearing was to undergo a Pre-use/ Warm Up on a Standard Model of the Idler TT and then be swapped to a 'PTP Version' of the TT. 

It was estimated that time of 5-8 minutes would be the downtime between demonstrations.

From recollection, one Bearing producer was putting a condition on their supply of a Donor Model and requesting that all the Bearings used should have a Lazer Temp' taken and the Demo's should be carried out at a given temperature. I thought this a little anal, but the same person uses a Stethoscope to assess the noise produced from their Bearing Work, and what do I know about an optimised operating temperature, apart from that there is most likely one. 

Again, the assessment made, would be to see where a group in attendance was to make it known which of the Bearings in use was seemingly being perceived as having the most impressive performance as a result of the materials used and work undertaken on the Bearing.   

This one got tricky as there were Bearing Producers that wanted to attend, and that was to prove very difficult.

As an individual who has a long-time interest in Bearing Modifications, this one slipped through the net, and was a much-wanted experience. 

I have seen quite a few Artisan Producers of Ancillary Parts for other TT's today, that are using quite similar materials and designs as used in some the bearings I was to use for a comparison.

The Artisan Producers have adopted the methods used and are creating parts offered as a commercially available product.   

I have only tracked the results being reported on for the @antinn PACVR Text Book on the 'gon'.

It was good to be able to link to another forum and see the results being made known from another. Who has obviously taken their LP Cleaning very seriously and developed a method not to commonly seen.

The report on a small change being made to a regularly used Solution, brought a notable change, that was perceived to be a betterment to the cleaning process and is desirable to be maintained, is one further reason to give Niel a 'Hats Off' 🤠 Salute. 

Something that might be off interest to a wider group could be, if the comparison cleaning method I was referring to previously in the thread was carried out. As the control available through using forum members to participate is better than my previous thought for the planning. The reason being, is that there are common solutions/mixtures being used for cleaning, as a result of the PAVCR Textbook.

These mixtures are being used in conjunction with different ancillaries in use to support cleaning methods.

The rethink on the methodology is as follows:

New Albums of the same Band/Title could be purchased between a selection of cleaning enthusiast who are using Different Cleaning Methods, but where all individuals are using Neils Suggested Solutions/Mixtures.

It does seem feasible this could be created, as the advisories from Neil seem to be adopted by quite a few enthusiasts.

Once LPs are Cleaned, the Albums will be Posted to each Participant, who in receipt will then be able to replay all the Cleaned LPs in short duration between replays and assesses the impact of the cleaning methods used, on their own systems.

For the few $$'s it would cost to set something up like this comparison trial, which could easily be funded as a Group Buy from an extended group within the forum, with an interest in the Outcome.

As a Guestimate:

4x Albums @ $100.

3 x postages to send all Cleaned Albums to One Address, approx', $30.

3 x Postages to send the Batch of Cleaned Albums for the additional assessments to other Addresses, approx', $30.

3 x Postages to return the Albums to their original cleaned address, approx', $30

Approx', $200 to put a valuable comparison information into the mainstream, for a group of experienced LP Cleaners to make their assessment known on the impact of a variety of LP Cleaning methods compared side by side. There does seem a lot to like, especially when the costs are accounted for, to acquire a device to assist with LP Cleaning. When others with an interest are looking into this as a practice, a machine is usually to be considered, and a Mid-Priced Model with a Brand Name can easily ask for a $1000ish to be paid.    

From experience, I have cleaned New Purchased Vinyl, and have heard improvement (Surface Noise Decreased) as a result of the Cleaning Method, especially, when using the PAVCR Textbook Manual Cleaning Method.

It is to prove quite impossible to presume a purchase of used LPs will share a similar deterioration or contamination level.

I would suggest a purchase from Amazon of LPs to be selected for the comparisons, as there are quality issues that can be discovered with a purchase of New Vinyl and with Amazon the option to return and receive a replacement is very useful. I have returned particular Modern Bands Albums on at least three occasions, and on one particular Album returned it twice, to receive what I would class as an acceptable condition LP.   

An undertaking of this type, if a few participants can be found to take part, will certainly be a good use of a connection between interested enthusiasts within a forum.

It would certainly assist with extending on advice being made known for others, 'if a common selection of cleaning ancillaries were to be used', whether a Manual Cleaning Method, RCM Method, Cheap range of US Tank Method or Expensive US Tank Method would be the most worthwhile to consider as a set up for cleaning. 

The assessment would be quite straight forward, as recording quality is not being scrutinised, the assessment will be solely if a Particular LP has offered an impression that it is clean/quiet, and whether this impression is different depending on the cleaning method used.

I would be more than happy to donate a percentage of the overall cost to see this materialise, I'm sure a few others would be willing as well.

Working on the basis that a US Tank offered to be sued, is one with the most desirable design and build, is used as a cleaning method for the Trial, along with the monetary value attached, might be considered the one that will produce the best results.

If one such Tank is offered to be used, this could be the last Address to receive the Batch of LPs for an overall assessment. Once the assessment is done the US Tank could be used to clean the Three LPs not cleaned using the US tank and then returned to the original cleaners, they could then assess through recollection if the returned LP was presenting an impression of cleanliness that differed from their own recollection of their cleaned LP. 

Hi @antinn, I am not looking myself to be persuaded to do something different to the Manual Method, I have produced results that have been very satisfying, as said in previous posts, I don't refer to LPs having been through the PAVCR Manual Method as Cleaned, I much prefer the term 'Purified'.

My earlier report on Cleaning as a comparison exercise is prior to having a PAVCR Textbook to consult and producing a Cleaned LP that when purified, it is difficult to suggest it can be cleaned to the point, by other methods that it can be perceived as cleaner.

My suggestion for a Comparison Cleaning as referred to, is that the PAVCR Solutions/Mixtures are in use across a variety of Cleaning Methods, where ancillaries to support these methods are on other radar of others with an interest and can prove to be quite costly to acquire.

My thoughts were that if a Method was noticed out of all used, to be able to make a very good impression, and was one achievable on a reasonably easy to afford ancillary. The interested individual, with a purchase in mind, will be with a good base knowledge, certainly not having to buy blind, in the same manner I did when I purchased a US Tank. The interested party will have made known a Solution/Mixture, Ancillary and the best practice to be used for the procedure to be carried out, to mimic the result being reported back on.

I can't muster up the desire to use the purchased US Tank, to clean with or the later idea of a final rinse tank, neither seems required. 

Altruistic approaches are even able to be shown when it comes to cleaning a Vinyl LP.