I have not. I emailed Charles to see if maybe he would bring it to LA Audio Show but have not heard back from him.
He is based here in Denver but last I heard was out of state. I'm going to call the place I ordered my RCM through and see when they are expecting it to come in. Already have a few albums I want to run thorough and see how they sound.
This is actually the "other" LA Audio Show. The Show in Newport is the weekend of June 1/2. That other show had some, "ahem," problems. Fremer wrote a little blurb about it a couple weeks ago if you're interested in the dirt.
Hey Bill, I'm trying to find a good rinse solution. I see you mention "reagent grade 1" but can you tell me what brand or where you purchase it from? Also, how long do you store it before use? I ran across this blurb about various waters for medical/lab applications and it got me a bit spooked to just order something blindly: Which Type of Reagent Grade Water do I Need? Published in Water Filtration Written by Nicholas Papp Creation Date Wednesday, 20 April 2011. Common sense tells us that dilution water must contain significantly lower levels of impurities than the sample to be analyzed. Most modern analytical instruments and procedures generally call for Type I water, since they are analyzing at the “parts per billion” or very low parts per million level. Type I water is almost always produced by a “DI polishing system” at the “point-of-use”. Thus, Type I water is not produced and stored for later use, but is produced and used “on the spot” as required. In fact, those who specify reagent grade water quality, specifically state that Type I water should not be stored for later use. In most modern labs, Type II water is only used for rinsing glassware, and as feed water to a Type I DI polishing system. Type IV reagent grade water (typically generated by reverse osmosis) has become meaningless, in that it has almost no practical use in the modern laboratory other than as feed water to a Type I or Type II DI system. While “distilled water” is still used in some undergraduate and high school laboratories, the high energy and labor costs of a still, combined with the relatively poor quality of the distilled water, are serving to rapidly phase out distillation as a practical technique for purifying water. “Standard Methods” points out that there are significant problems with distilled water in that the quality is dependent on the incoming tap water quality, and upkeep on the still can be difficult, and distilled water degrades in the storage vessel. In discussing reagent grade water, Section 9020 of “Standard Methods” advises as follows: “To avoid contamination, do not store such water.” “Stills produce water that characteristically deteriorates slowly over time as corrosion, leaching and fouling occur.” “Stills efficiently remove dissolved substances but not dissolved gases or volatile organic chemicals.” “Freshly distilled water may contain chlorine and ammonia.” The National Committee for Clinical Standards (NCCLS) states in Section 7.1 and 7.2 that: “Type I water should be used immediately after processing.” “Type I water cannot be stored because its resistivity will decrease, metals and/or organic compounds will be leached from the storage container, and bacterial contamination will occur." "Storing water in large vessels (carboys) for extended period of time is unacceptable because of the inevitable, unpredictable rate of degradation of the water quality." this is the URL: Which Type of Reagent Grade Water do I Need?
@rollo5 - you are somewhat limited in the places where you can source this. I buy Casco-Nerl brand which is made by Thermo Fisher Scientific. I order it online. You must designate a business address for shipping. It cannot be shipped to a residential address (even if a home business). As to storage and degradation, I'm not using it for lab cultures and go through about four 5 gallon carboys a year, so on average, buying 2 at a time, I'm not storing much longer than 3 months before I open the second container. I have never had any problems with that. Note that it is fairly expensive and some may conclude it is overkill but for rinsing, I find it very effective. I fill one gallon non-BPA jugs from the spigot on the carboy which makes it easier to work with, and then, depending on the use--mixing fluid or rinse, fill the appropriate smaller container. (For rinse, I use plastic bottles with a flip top spout, little different than those used for store bought record cleaning fluids). Not sure if I have answered all your questions.... Labs that go through a high volume of this stuff usually just make it to meet demand. The problem is that the equipment is very expensive to go from reagent II to I and for most people, isn't cost effective. (Plus, the filters and other ancillaries have to be refreshed periodically, so it is just cheaper for me to buy the finished water than try to run a water processing plant). Compared to the price of "pure" water from audiophile suppliers, it's cheap.
Thanks Bill. This is exactly the type of info I was looking for. I'm going to see if I can get it shipped to my wife's office at the studio. Even if it's overkill, I'm all in for something that's at least not going to make the situation worse, in terms of contaminants. Gracias!!!!
Keep in mind that the standards you are citing are for lab use, this stuff is used for "preparation of buffers and culture media for mammalian cell culture and IVF; production of reagents for molecular biology applications (DNA sequencing, PCR); and preparation of solutions for electrophoresis and blotting." Water purity at a molecular level is a little more critical than cleaning records. I suppose that bacteria could get introduced into a jug of the stuff, and that there is some leaching from the plastic liner of the carboy, but it's pretty well within the tolerances I find acceptable for mixing cleaning fluid and rinsing records. I'm still careful with how I handle it, seal the containers immediately, I flush and wash any lab glass ware I use for mixing, etc. If you were making products that were being consumed by other humans, I'd be a little less sanguine about it. Don't drink this stuff, though!
It is true that very pure water will re-ionize even if in air-tight containers. The water Perfect Vinyl Forever uses starts out at 0.1 uS (micro-siemens) of conductivity. But it soon pulls ions from everywhere, including air. It will stabilize to around 0.4 uS but after a few weeks, it will be up to 0.6-0.7 uS. At that point we only use it for cleaning our equipment, not for processing records. Bill's comments, as usual, are on point.
I circled back to looking at this system and realized it would be idea for me in the compactness and the lower hz tank but I wouldn’t use it for 78 and 45 so it seems like just getting half of what I need, I emailed the company to see if they have plans to eliminate 78/45 to add space for 4 12” Otherwise I’ll be going diy for now
To anyone interested I received a very prompt reply, they have no plans to make changes at this time...was worth asking
So, @Rentz - if you've been following this thread, the Kirmuss appears to adapt an iSonic unit, with one apparent difference being the record slot rotation mechanism. The iSonic unit that is offered for record cleaning offers the more conventional, DIY style rotiserrie, which might suit your needs better. The only caveat to that would be not to try and clean too many records at one time (given the formula for bath size, transducer power and record surfaces). Where in the great State of Texas are you?
I’m in the dallas ft worth area . I’ve gone back n forth on this us cleaning for so long, I decided to build my own then saw this and started thinking a self contained device might be idea to combine with my vacuum method. I didn’t like cleanervinyl it didn’t leave much space between records, which vinyl stack does. But if you buy a really good tank the price adds up which led me to getting plans for a diy rotisserie setup I’ll go back and read the thread again and check isonic
@Rentz - The first video has a short review of the iSinic, same tank but I didn't like the way you take them out..... kinda drip dry where the Kirmuss they come out almost dry all but a little on the bottom. Charles has always gotten back to me with in hours of sending email...… to me that's customer service big time.
Looks like Charles will be at Newport this Sunday for The Show. Although he won’t have my machine ready yet, I’m excited to see an in-person demo.
I'm sure you have a good time chatting with Charles and bring him a couple of your worst albums so you can see what I did. Right after cleaning I got to hear them on the system they had (very nice too) and when I got home I really got to hear the difference. The place where I'm getting mine from called and said for sure by the end on next week. @5-String - Watched the video and I'm still amazed at the results he is getting on new unopened albums. I have a 1st press SRV - Texas Flood and a 1st press Emmylou Harris - Luxury Liner both still sealed. They are going to be my test albums to see what they have on them.
Fremer also has just published a lengthy post which will undoubtedly open up a big can of worms! If Charles Kirmuss's Record Cleaning Machine and Regimen Are Correct, Are Everyone Else's Wrong?
Good article from a person who doesn't have a machine. I'll tell ya I was the same way when I first saw the video here and saw from the adjacent AXPONA booth the same tub of their machine. Then I watched how he cleaned the records with his machine and wanted to see what it was all about. Seeing the machine up close then hearing how much better my records sounded after being cleaned by his machine is what made me buy one. I will say that I haven't heard any results from other Ultra Sonic and that this is my first. I will go back after he gets a machine to read what he thinks. Is the article opening a big can of worms,,,,,, sure, but this hobby is very much the same. Tubes v Solid State what interconnects are best...…. and we are never lacking in opinions to back it up that is why I love this hobby.
Well, the surfuctant went from propane-2 or propal(sp) to ethyl glycol or anti-freeze. Not being a chemist, I don't know if there is a correlation between the 2. Seems the story has changed from the original presentation and the 2nd offering somewhat as well. Not that I doubt the machine is a good one, and it does appear to be doing good things for the records, it just seems a progression of methods as Charles continues to use and present the machine. I am seriously considering getting one, but I think I will wait for the final story as I strive to save for one.
Same I like the package size because space is an issue for me needing. To store cleaning equipment between cleanings but I’m still a sceptic, no rush I can wait to see it play out