If the machine in question is a Humminguru, there was a YouTube video I watched where the Humminguru was used to clean an album over 20 times, and there was significant damage. The other record cleaner (might have been a Degritter) did not cause such damage even after so many cleanings. One line of thinking is that the lower frequency US machines are potentially not as gentle to the vinyl as the higher frequency machines, and ones that have the transducers located very closely to the vinyl are potentially more damaging, and there are machines that oscillate across multiple frequencies like the AudioDesk that should be safer. I also saw an US piece that described how the technology could, if not implemented properly, damage the vinyl by removing particles and this was proven in testing. I was going to go with the Humminguru to replace my AudioDesk until I saw that YouTube review and starting be concerned about my valuable collection (some of which are irreplaceable) being damaged. I liked what I heard regarding the AudioDesk upgrades to the pump, refined US approach, etc. and got one at a substantial discount from Ultra Systems even though the one that broke was 9 years old and that unit was one that replace a machine that I had bought 3 years prior. I thought the new replacement unit price and upgrades made for a reasonable deal, and it would be better to pay more and protect my collection than going with an US machine that is a newer design, as much as I was intrigued by the Humminguru concept, positive reviews, and relatively affordable purchase price. I figure if the AudioDesk lasts several years, prior to replacing again, the cost per month and utility will be justified. Hopefully we get confirmation of the unit in question that is damaging vinyl.
ultrasound record cleaning machine damaged my records
I recently purchased an ultrasound record cleaning machine. For reasons which I hope you understand I won’t name brands, because I am not wanting to make bad publicity to anyone but to discuss the matter.
Previously, I had anather ultrasound machine which broke. I cleaned more than a 1000 records with it, with no concerns at all. The machine broke and, due to its steep price, I decided to go for a less costly solution.
With the new machine I cleaned 7 records. One of themLeonard Cohen’s “New Skin for the old ceremony”. When listening to “Chelsea Hote”, I remarked a distortion that wasn’t there before. IT was clear on the low notes, like the instrument being out of focus or vibrating. I had some old very worn records which had that problem due to bad stylus. At first I started to think that there was a problem with the stylus of my Lyra Atlas. So I went to another version of the same album I have at home, to check if there was a problem with the stylus. Clean passage. No problem at all.
As on the previous cleaned record I noticed a similar problem, not so apparent, I decided to clean the second version of the LP on the new machine. Playing it i heard the same distortion on the same music. Checking out all the 7 records I cleaned, I heard issues on all of them, some less apparent ( the mono ones) and some more appparent.
I couldn’t believe it but the new machine was damaging my records.
The combination of my atlas and my SME 312 arm gives some “needle talk” - music heard when with everything muted you put your hear next to the stylus on the record. Doing it, I heard the same rumble distortion that was being amplified by the system.
I used distilled water (not a new one but one which was opened for the previous machine) but it was clear clean. I put the exact amount of surfactant liquid on the mixture of distilled water. I kept all the operating instruction rules. I don’t understand what is wrong, but the fact is this machines damages the grooves on the record.
Does anyone had this problem before? Any help provided?
Note: I already contacted the dealer who sold it and I am going to see him next week. It is a very good a solid dealer. It I’d like to hear your opinion.
Best regards,
I make no secret of the Label I now give my manually cleaned records using the PAVCR Manual Cleaning Method, as being Purified as the end product after the cleaning process. I attribute 90%+ to this end result as being the Mixture for a Cleaning Solution that Neil Antin carefully calculates. In posts in other threads, I have made it known I bought in extra ancillaries to enable myself to produce the Solutions to be used to a very accurate ratio for the mixture. The mixture ratio for the cleaning solution are critical, the tools are aids to optimise the impact of the solution on the material being cleaned. The following can be challenged quite outwardly with rebuttal. How many US Tanks have been filled / are filled / to be filled, with Solutions that are with ratio's for the mixture of the Cleaning Solution, that does not enable the Solution to perform to the necessary requirements ? It does seem Cavitation used for Cleaning is optimised when manifesting in a particular solution? It does seem Cavitation manifesting in a non-optimised solution, does not have the cleaning capability to effectively stop cleaning solution residual forming in the LP Groove, to the point the presence of the residual is audible?
|
Cleeds, I drive a well known German automobile. Can you name it with any certainty? No. I would have guessed that US might damage an LP by affecting high treble frequencies first, since those are encoded by the most tortuous grooves. So I’m a little surprised at this report. Also 40 kHz and 60W do not seem excessive. So I’m wondering whether his generator is out of whack, delivering higher energy than rated. Or whether this is a red herring.
|
Thank you all for your contribution. Thank you Antinn for your suggestion. I cleaned the record again with distilled water only. But the problem keeps there. I believe the grooves are damaged for good. Regarding your suggestion that an existing detritus got removed and showed the problem, all my 12” records were cleaned at least once, more than a year ago, with my late,Audio Desk machine, which broke the pump. It is very unlikely that some detritus was there, IMHO. but I made further actions following your advice. I decided to clean another record (old and with a new spare copy) with the distilled water ONLY. After a listening, I didn’t hear anything remarkable. Then, I put again on the tank the old mixture of water and cleaning solution (which I kept on a bottle for my dealer analysis). Listening again, the problem WAS THERE. It seems the problem is on the mixture. I remember when putting in the 3 drops, the last one might have been doubled. However, if one drop has this effect, it is concerning. I will do another experiment with the old bottle of distilled only and let you know. Regarding some comments of not disclosing the OEM, I do think when someone puts an atomic bomb opinion on a forum like this it might be very damaging for the particular OEM, so I like to be prudent and respect other people efforts and investment in their products. At least until I spoke with them and get proper customer care. My old machine was an Audio Desk, which had a pump problem and is impossible to repair because the machine is sealed. Audio Desk offers a new one for half price with return of the original unit. However, it still gets expensive, with no assurance that the e pump won’t break again in the next years. With the audio desk I never had my problem at all I cleaned more than 1000 récords. the new machie Brand was añready guessed by some of The members, but please dont jump with conclusions. I Will keep you informed of further progress regardisns the distilled water or The “overdose” ou cleaning surfactant. |
Sure it can. Based on the specs it can be a well known RCM. If I said I'm having trouble with my amp and don't want to say what the make is but it has prominently colored VU meters, you'd say it's well known though undisclosed by me. I'm guessing based on the specs it's a Humminguru. |
Based on the specs it sounds like a Humminguru which is touchless. I bought one after my Audio Desk died. I’ve cleaned maybe 30 records with it, does a good job, no issues. The only thing I can think of is maybe very old vinyl gets brittle and cannot withstand the US? Or your unit is faulty. As an aside, my thought is you only need to US clean a record once. After that a brush before each play should be good enough. |
I do agree totally with @cundare2 in the post above. I am in the process of buying a second US rcm to place in my summerhouse. In my permanent house I use a Degritter and never have encounterd any problems. For the summerhouse I am looking at a cheaper US rcm to replace my old Okki Nokki. Now I do not dare to buy one of the ones I have been looking at the records in the summerhouse are carefully choosen so I do not want them destroyed in any way So, please @pfmaudio, do provide us with more detailed information as the majority of answering members are wanting. I do not think I am alone hesitating right now.. |
IMHO, the OP really should have considered revealing the make & model of the cleaner, liquids used, etc. I understand & respect the rationale of not initially wanting to criticize a specific manufacturer without knowing if the mfr is at fault, but in this case, that seems inappropriate. Even if the problem occurs only during a specific use case, it does a disservice to the community to conceal the details. Many of us may have the same model or may be about to do whatever it is that specifically damaged the OP's records. And those of us who do duplicate that use case without a problem should be given the opportunity to say so. But if there is a real product-specific issue, that should not be concealed, nor should a manufacturer of a defective product, or one that publishes risky procedures, be encouraged to continue without addressing the issue. If the OP's experience is rare, due to an isolated product defect, or even the OP's own fault, that fact would be more likely to come out in the thread if we know the details. But if this is a legitimate product issue that affects all units, reporting the issue in detail without giving readers a way to know whether their own systems are vulnerable, or even giving the mfr a chance to evaluate and rectify the issue, doesn't get anyone anywhere. E.g., if someone reading this thread reports a similar problem, we wouldn't even know if the issue can occur in more than one model of ultrasonic -- a crucial fact for armchair-analysts trying to understand exactly what is happening. Just my 2c, but worth considering. |
The machine @pfmaudio is using based on the power, kHz and volume is a well-known unit (he has decided not to disclose the OEM, and I will respect that) for which there are 1,000’s in use. The damage being described is contrary to what others have experienced of which no similar type damage has been experienced. Note that the KLAudio is the most powerful of all the specific record cleaning UT units with a power of 200W at 40kHz and a bath size of only ~700-ml, and this works out to 286W/L whereas the unit @pfmaudio is using is 150W/L, and both spin at near the same speed (~2-rpm), It is entirely possible that detritus that was there before and essentially burnished into the groove has been removed. However, some people on other forums have noted that the cleaner (some unknown surfactant of unknown concentration) provided with the UT machine was not satisfactory. Most people are happy with 1-drop of the Groovewasher G•SONIC ULTRASONIC CONCENTRATE G•Sonic Ultrasonic Concentrate – GrooveWasher. @pfmaudio, try recleaning a record with just distilled water. If the source of the issue is cleaner residue noting that you did not rinse and may have used too much cleaner (even using the OEMs recommendation) then the 2nd wash with just distilled water will act as a rinse. If this solves the problem, you can consider continuing use of the supplied cleaner but reduce the concentration. Again, not knowing what surfactant they are using and what the concentration is, it impossible to tell you what a "no-rinse’ concentration would be. Note that most people are satisfied with the G-Sonic used at 1-drop/tank for a ’no-rinse’ cleaner. Optimally, for best achievable results, some people buy a 2nd tank and then use that for rinsing. There is an active thread at Audio Hardware | Steve Hoffman Music Forums just search for the thread using the OEM name. Hope this helps
|
A picture is worth a thousand words. How many pics to tell Neil Antin’s 145 pages of words? Here’s my 1,000.
I also made totally beat LP's from my college days quite listenable again. Surprised me. I think it is getting the grunge out of the bottom of the grooves, where the old stylus never went, and the new advanced stylus's do get. |
There are uses of a US Tank that can cause damage to materials. In my early days if setting up a tank, I was advised to put Aluminium Foil in to it for a period of time and check to see when it perforates. The idea being to substantially reduce cleaning time for the LP, to not expose the LP to a cleaning period that has caused the Perforation in the Aluminium. Today there are much better guidance's available for the different Cavitation Dimension available to be produced from different Hz Ultrasounds. The question is, How accurate is the guidance, especially considering Vinyl is being Cleaned and certain Vinyl Materials are valued albums, that can have multiple years usage. Does a Unused Album or Brand New Album need the exact same US treatment, as an Album that might have had a 100+ replays? Maybe the 100+ Hours Album has a wear damage that is inaudible, but a US treatment can be a detriment to such a condition being present. This is all conjecture but has to be on the table for discussion, as their only seems to be one type of info out there, Tank Degas, Tank Temp, Rotation Speed and Clean Time. The guidance all seems to be generic for the differences in the Hz of a Tank and Cavitation Dimension. I eventually opted out, and use the Neil Antin Manual Cleaning Method, I now have specific instruction using a formula for a mixture that is extremely Vinyl Friendly. Additionally I now have LP's that are Clean in a way not before experienced, that I refer to as Purified. I have a 40 Year owned Album that was put through the Wringer of being Teen Owned and a Party Favourite. The Album was in the end unusable and kept only for Sentiment, in use it was seemingly able to destroy a Styli. After being impressed with the Manual Clean, I dedicated Six Minutes of my time to do a Manual Clean on the long time owned Album. With the result being I would take this Album anywhere and allow it to be used on any Value of a Cart', the end clean was way beyond all expectations. Even when US was still lingering as a tool to be used, I thought a US final rinse might benefit a manual clean process, but today that is certainly not thought to be necessary. The Neil Antin produced process for cleaning as attached is worthwhile being familiarised with, especially the section on the Manual Cleaning Method.
|
