Record Cleaning Machines


Has anyone out there done an A/B comparison of the cleaning results or efficacy using the Degritter ultra sonic record cleaning machine which operates at 120 kHz/300 watts and an ultrasonic cleaner that operates at 40 kHz/300 or 380 watts (e.g. Audio Desk; CleanerVinyl; the Kirmuss machine; etc.)?  I have a system I put together using CleanerVinyl equipment, a standard 40 kHz ultrasonic tank and a Knosti Disco-Antistat for final rinse.  I clean 3 records at a time and get great results.  Surface noise on well cared for records (only kind I have) is virtually totally eliminated, sound comes from a totally black background and audio performance is noticeably improved in every way.  Even though the Degritter only cleans 1 record at a time, it seems significantly easier to use, more compact and relatively quick, compared to the system I have now.  I'm wondering if the Degritter's 120 kHz is all that much more effective, if at all, in rendering better audio performance than the standard 40 kHz frequency.  I don't mind, at all, spending a little extra time cleaning my records if the audio results using the Degritter are not going to be any different.  I'm not inclined to spend three grand for a little more ease & convenience and to save a few minutes.  However, if I could be assured the Degritter would render better audio performance results, even relatively small improvements, that would be a whole other story.
oldaudiophile
@antinn, seems I can't thank you enough for this incredible wealth of knowledge, guidance and experience! You are truly amazing! I wish I could express my gratitude more tangibly (e.g. buy you a beer, fine single malt or beverage of your choice).

If I'm not mistaken, that lash-up pump & filter system is what Tima uses. I use a Pentek Big Blue whole-house water filter for my home. Makes lots of sense to incorporate a smaller version for this application.

I've noticed, along the way, that you have judiciously avoided subjective issues like sound quality achieved or capable of being achieved by different record cleaning methods and kept the discussion strictly focused on quantitative cleaning results. Not surprising for a person with a good mind for science! However, I can't help but wonder if you may have some preference(s) for one cleaning method(s) over another as it impacts on sound quality. The prevailing wisdom or opinion in audiophile circles is that US cleaning yields the best sonic results because it obtains the best cleaning results with the least wear & tear on record grooves. Seems to make sense, in theory, but audiophiles are fond of splitting hairs and chasing their tails in search of the holy grail of best audio quality. As such, I can't help but wonder if careful & proper manual cleaning can achieve the same sound quality improvement(s) as other methods with inconsequential wear & tear on those precious record grooves where the music lives.

All the best!
@oldaudiophile,

Yes, the pump/filter system is the same one that Tima uses, and if you read this lengthy comment section  Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records - The Vinyl Press you will see where I worked with Tima to develop it.  I have work with a number of people developing similar pump/filter systems - its gets tough sourcing equivalents for people in Poland & New Zealand.

Regarding what method will achieve the best cleaning, as I wrote in the book - "XII.13 The final chapters of this document 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."

However, make no mistake, if your process throughput is very high; i.e, you need/want to clean 5-6 records at a time - UT is it.  But, if you are not careful with all the details, you may process records fast, but that does not mean that they will be 'cleaner' than a process/system that cleans one at time.  

Devil is in the details,
Neil
@bdp24,

The process you use is very similar to that used by @whart for some years now -  System Notes-Austin, 2017 - The Vinyl Press.  He uses a Monks vacuum-RCM for pre-clean, KL Audio UT for final clean (DIW only) and then dry with the Monks.  I have worked with a number of people using this process with variations in chemistry and equipment, but once dialed are very satisfied - its a proven process that works.  People cleaning many records at a time with good UT tank filtration do get excellent results with just air dry.  

But some (many) people want the ultimate convenience provided by the Degritter,  But some are now using a separate tank for rinse which is easily swapped-in and does elevate the performance of the unit.  

Take care,
Neil

@antinn , this paper is incredible! It has me rethinking a lot of things and looking at purchasing what would probably be a lifetime supply of industrial cleaners, lol.  

Could I ask, if you were to recommend an easy/fast version of your cleaning method, what would that look like? Would a one-step process, for example, even be possible?  Thanks in advance. 

@wavez,

 

One step, of course, its called a $3000 Degritter or maybe a $6000 Clearaudio Double Matrix Pro Sonic.  Convenience is expensive.  There is the ~$500 (w/shipping) Humminguru, but to get good results with it you need multiple steps.

As far as a manual cleaning process, there are the one-step record cleaning brushes that many people use, but that is not what the book is addressing.

A fast easy version is shown Figure 6.  You can skip the acid-wash if you want - but it can prevent you from getting the most out of the process.   But there are details described in Chapter V to make sure you get the results you can; otherwise you will attempt to do me death by a 1000 questions and I am just going to say - Read Chapter 3 on how to prepare the cleaning solutions and read Chapter 5 on how to use them.  The Devil is in the Details.  

Good Luck,