A custom-made fly fishing rod would mean little to me, but I understand that, for the avid fisherman, it may be desirable. So too, with those of us who have lots of records-in my case, accumulated over the course of almost 50 years. I started with a basic VPI in the early ’80s. I have owned several of the fancy, expensive machines and still use two constantly, in combination. Why are they expensive? I guess, for the Audio Desk, the developer had to recoup his development costs and make a profit. It’s far more than a glorified vacuum cleaner. The KL is simpler, but overbuilt. The Monks- it’s a sort of Rube Goldberg affair of tubes, jars, outside vendor supplied pump, various motors, housed in a case with some fabrication cost involved. (Monks is now introducing an even cheaper cleaner than their Discovery machine, which adapted a commercial turntable into a cleaning machine to reach a broader market). The Loricraft is very similar in design and operation.
If all you need is a basic vacuum system, there are plenty of semi-DIY kits that permit you to add a small shop vac. If you are after ultrasonic, and want to do it without full automation, there are semi-DIY kits that add a rotisserie to a generic ultrasonic bath, and get you there for far less than a commercial machine.
Not sure what your complaint is-- there are plenty of alternatives. My sense is, the ’push one button’ ultrasonics designed for vinyl cleaning are not just about effective cleaning (though I still use them in combination with vacuum cleaning), but about convenience. When I first got one, I was overjoyed at the thought that I didn’t have to do any work, just pop a record in, and come back when it’s done. That alone has value to many audiophiles who find cleaning records a tiresome, noisy exercise that takes (limited) time away from listening. |
Map, I think you can get in for about a grand, if you use one of those kits and a generic US bath. Still too much? |
Perhaps the question, reframed, is "I have a modest record cleaning system (X and Y) that I’m happy with, but wonder if those expensive record cleaning machines are really that much better and worth the money?"
A little less antagonistic, particularly since you seem to acknowledge that one can spend money on handcrafted or bespoke items that have importance to the buyer.
Most folks are allergic to hype, and I’m not going to tell you that veils were lifted or the orchestra was in the room. What I will tell you is that I’ve spent a fair amount of time and money messing around with various record cleaning methods, machines and techniques and not only have a lot of records, but some very valuable ones. I can get a record very clean using a basic VPI. But some records, particularly older records that have been exposed to who knows what, require multiple cleanings, and in my experience, multiple approaches. That’s where the combo of a couple different devices, including ultrasonic, starts to pay off.
If you don’t think it’s silly to spend money on a suit, a fishing rod or a vacation, why would you think it’s crazy to spend 3 grand on an RCM? (which, as noted, you don’t have to do if you are willing to go the semi-DIY route).
|
Cedar- good post- sometimes i view record cleaning as a task to be dreaded, and other times, I look forward to it and can actually enjoy the process. I've had both commercial ultrasonics- the Audio Desk and KL and have used them in combination with vacuum machines, like the Monks. The best results I have obtained have come from washing a pre-cleaned record in the ultrasonic, and vac drying it on a point nozzle, like the Monks (or Loricraft). The vacuum seems to be more effective than forced air drying in removing the last iota of crap from the grooves.
So, the notion of a DIY ultrasonic makes huge sense to me, not only as a cost savings, but because it enables you to remove the record before the forced air drying cycle (something that isn't really possible on the Audio Desk and, while possible on the KL, isn't recommended by the manufacturer). |
Slaw- really? When I had the Audio Desk, I don't recall any way to stop the machine before it goes from wash to dry- yes, I suppose you could just pluck it out before the drying cycle started- then, the machine would continue to dry with no record in it?
The why is a different matter. No static using a Monks (or Loricraft). And it sucks out the stuff in the grooves, rather than blowing air on the record. In more than a couple of instances, this method helped me remove tracing distortion on records that I would have attributed to groove damage. |
Slaw- sorry, you mentioned it in a thread about record shows.
Not sure why you are offended, but if so, my apologies. I may reply later to the method issue, not something I'm trying to be competitive about- it was a friendly, genuine offer. Again, sorry for the offense, happy to try to delete the post if that's an issue. |
Actually, Slaw, I was responding to Cedar's post- where he described a DIY ultrasonic rig as a way of saving money. My post added an additional point- that there was a benefit to the DIY, in my estimation, over and above the commercial ultrasonics. That had nothing to do with you or your preferred methods. I'm sorry I got you upset over this. It was not my intention, and for those who know me on this board, I rarely engage in Internet sparring. Nobody is a 'bad guy,' and no one, in my estimation, needs absolution. Take it easy,
bill hart |
Slaw: You are up in Buffalo if I remember (from a thread on record shows)? Do you get down to NYC metro area? I’m north of the city, near Nyack when in NY- would love to show you what I’ve been doing with various cleaning machines. (And you are welcome to be our guest). Whoops, just checked, you are in N.C. Well, the invite still stands.
Sim- don’t get us started on stoves now! :) |
Sim- to answer your outstanding question, I've never used the Spin Clean or equivalent. By the time I started getting into record cleaning in the early '80s, the VPI was available and I bought one. I'm pretty agnostic when it comes to machines and methods. However, I do believe it is important to remove the cleaning fluid from the record (which, if it has done its job, has suspended within it, various contaminants from the record grooves). Apart from the ultrasonic machines addressed above, getting the (contaminated) fluid off the record usually involves a couple steps- a rinse step with some kind of purified water and vacuum. Getting the record "dry" is not the equivalent of removing the fluid/contaminant slurry. So, my assumption is that wiping the record dry will not fully remove it. Hope that helps. |
I don't hear that voice. I do like vintage bikes, though. Gave up riding a few years ago. Mostly had Italian bikes, though I did have one Harley- a V-Rod, which was a great motor in search of a decent bike. The chassis flexed, the brakes didn't work very well (I was told that's typical for HD), so I installed Brembos on it and stripped it down to a bobber. It was actually a nice bike at cruising speeds, heavy, low, easy to ride, but not very nimble. If I were going to analogize the cleaning machines I have here to bikes, the Monks is almost like a Brough- dated in design, but still performs at the top tier. Only difference, it doesn't leak oil. :)
|
