Kirmuss Audio Ultrasonic RCM?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Steve0, Apr 28, 2018.

  1. rollo5

    rollo5 Forum Reprobate

    Location:
    Altadena, CA
    I saw Charles at the show and was impressed with the fit and finish of the machine. I'm happing I'm getting one. Two updates: 1. There will be a 3-LP cleaner option coming sometime in the fall or winter, as opposed to the current 2-LP, 10 inch, 45 rpm configuration. 2. I asked Charles about enzyme cleaners as a precursor to an ultrasonic cleaning. He was completely against it, but I don't want to misquote him as to why he feels this way. I don't understand the science behind any of this but am trying to gather as much info as possible.
     
    Shawn likes this.
  2. Rentz

    Rentz Forum Resident

    Location:
    Texas
    Thanks, he replied to my inquiry about a 3lp model with not at this time. I would be much more interested in 3 12” and 1 45 model. But I’m still waiting to see how this shakes out with more users
     
    rollo5 likes this.
  3. bluesaddict

    bluesaddict High Tech Welder

    Location:
    Loveland, Colorado
    If anyone is looking for one of these for a good price check out the classifieds.
     
  4. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic

    Location:
    Sweden
    Biggest exposing act by Fremer yet and I love that he asked the questions I wanted to hear.

    No release agents in records and the only respons is records are living breathing things with sugar on them.

    - Its soap coming off
    - It was never cleaned
    - I mean Fungus
    - But its 2 weeks old
    - I dont know, its the release agent
    - But there is still more building up after you cleaned it
    - Yeah isnt that great?
    - Oh wait maybe I did clean it, but this other new record has none
    - of course, it was soap
    - But shouldnt this other new record also have stuff come off like fungus or release agents?

    Tons of 50s papers and camera angles in the bath etc etc, but barely any sources.

    I mean how gullible do I need to be?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2018
    Frost and SandAndGlass like this.
  5. 5-String

    5-String μηδὲν ἄγαν

    Location:
    Sunshine State
    Fremer's video made me also very sceptical of this cleaning system...
     
  6. Mugrug12

    Mugrug12 The Jungle Is a Skyscraper

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Just watched the video. He woulda made his point better if he showed the record not producing the film w the brush after x amount of cleanings. As far as the 'plasma wave' and lab coat, it's awfully self-damaging. I have no experience w the device but I have used cavitation which has worked well for me (besides one or two problem-child lps!).
     
  7. Record Genie

    Record Genie Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Natick MA
    I see comments here from a few people I've talked to about ultrasonic record cleaning over the last 5 years or so, including at least one customer, and I've copied below my comment on the second video Fremer posted about the Kirmuss machine, which is a 35khz iSonic P4875 tank cleaner with a custom made 4 record insert.

    It was painful watching Charles Kirmuss mishandle records in the first Fremer video, at least he got better at handling them in the second video, and wasn't putting his fingers all over the playing surface, but there is a lot of controversial "new information" to consider here, all the things Kirmuss is saying while busy talking up his version, and putting down everyone else.. Others have noted concerns here and elsewhere..

    I'm not a manufacturer, so I have no vested interest in one machine or another, and obviously the marketplace needs an affordable ultrasonic record cleaner, but I'm not convinced Charles Kirmuss can meet safely meet that need, I need to read more about his "research" that he talks so freely about, but nothing scientific is shared on his (rather muddled) website.. As a commercial cleaning operation, I am free to use whatever equipment will meet my goal, which is simply to achieve the very best record cleaning results.. I do have concerns about what is going to happen to (many) people's record collections if Kirmuss is wrong about 35khz and the chemicals he's using..

    Here's my comment I made on Fremer's video, slightly edited:

    I've been using ultrasonic machines from Audio Desk and Klaudio since 2013, when I started Record Genie cleaning service, and have happy customers all over the USA (and beyond) who have sent me records for cleaning. I also use a Loricraft PRC4 "point nozzle" cleaner for pre-cleaning when needed, and it is very effective on heavily soiled records..

    My best cleaning results have been cleaning with an Audio Desk first, then doing a second cleaning in a Klaudio machine filled with RODI water. Drying is done in a second Klaudio. This "double-cleaning" combines the benefits of both machines: The surfactant or cleaning agent added to the Audio Desk helps its microfiber rollers clean more effectively, aided by an (unpublished) lower wattage of ultrasonic power, and the RODI water in the Klaudio is a perfect second cleaning/rinse, with that machine's higher wattage ultrasonic power, a claimed 200 watts. To get consistent results, careful attention needs to be paid to how dirty cleaning solutions are, especially any final wash/rinse step which should be as close to 0ppm as possible, to leave no residue. I use a TDS meter to measure water quality often, so I know exactly when to change the water, rather than just relying on the number of records cleaned in each batch. You can buy a budget TDS meter for as little as $15, but the one I use resolves to 0.1ppm and costs $60, which is still affordable for such a valuable tool..

    I am currently testing a multi-step cleaning workflow using Elma P60H tank cleaners that can run at 37khz or 80khz, and I chose them for their 80khz capability. 40khz tanks are cheaper than 60khz or 80khz tanks, and the Kirmuss cleaner is based on a 35khz iSonic P4875 tank. I do have concerns about frequencies lower than 40khz causing damage to vinyl records, simply because the lower the frequency, the harsher the cavitation effect since the bubbles are larger and implode (not explode, as Kirmuss said) with greater energy. The shockwave of each collapsing bubble is what actually cleans the record surface, on a microscopic level. Conversely, the higher the frequency, the finer and gentler the cavitation effect, when the bubbles are smaller, each one implodes with less energy, and a smaller shockwave. 80khz is perfect for cleaning into the tiniest cracks and crevices (think record grooves) while still providing enough power to clean effectively, it just needs to be paired with the right cleaning chemistry..

    Life is full of comprises, and time is important, but I do believe that a multiple step cleaning process is the most effective, with a gentle cleaning agent and physical agitation followed by at least one pure water clean/rinse step. Of course it's going to take longer to do multiple steps, but anything else is going to be a compromise. Please note that I do not use any isopropyl alcohol in any of my cleaning steps, Audio Desk, Klaudio, or Loricraft, as I share the concerns of others about plasticizers being stripped from the PVC, making records brittle over time.

    I also share some of the other concerns mentioned by others above, while Mr Kirmuss obviously has a big personality, I get the feeling he may be guilty of selling "more sizzle than sausage" with his (admittedly clever) record rotating insert in an iSonic P4875 tank cleaner. Is it really a modified unit, manufactured by iSonic with a different "ultrasonic angle" specially for Kirmuss Audio? I have to question that point, and the flood of other assertions from Mr Kirmuss, simply because "records contain sugar" is utter nonsense! I also find it puzzling that Kirmuss (and apparently his entire staff) are all wearing white coats. I'm looking forward to seeing actual scientific proof to back up what he's saying, but also worry that perhaps "the men in white coats" will come and take him away.. Quite soon perhaps..

    Anyway, this is certainly an interesting time for those who love listening to really clean records - I'm trying to keep an open mind, and following this whole Kirmuss development with interest!

    Read more at If Charles Kirmuss's Record Cleaning Machine and Regimen Are Correct, Are Everyone Else's Wrong? *
     
    Leonthepro and rollo5 like this.
  8. I continue to use it without adding anything to the bath and I’m getting good results. It seems the issue is with using what they suggest as an additive, but my thoughts are that this is a great buy at $650 and I can use whatever cleaning agents I want.
     
    rollo5 and bluesaddict like this.
  9. 5-String

    5-String μηδὲν ἄγαν

    Location:
    Sunshine State
    I think that is the smart thing to do. Ultrasonic works and I have no doubt that the Kirmuss machine works as good as the other ultrasonic systems in the market.
    The stuff about plasma, release agents, fungus and sugar is a matter of debate.
     
    bluesaddict, Leonthepro and Shawn like this.
  10. bluesaddict

    bluesaddict High Tech Welder

    Location:
    Loveland, Colorado
    @Shawn are you using anything as a pretreatment on your records? I was also going to do like you and just use DI water (can get all I want from work for free) and see how well it works. I'm really not sures why Charles is using the glycol at this point.
     
  11. Smokinone

    Smokinone Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Southern Nevada

    I too would like to see a little more hard copy or visual proof of all the tests that went into the research of the KA-RC-1.

    I also have been reading a lot on the time to do a clean on a record and that the Kirmuss method take too long etc. I personally use a OKKI NOKKI, and I use the AI #6 as a kind of step saver. However, it still stays on the record for 3 to 4 minutes a side, and then gets a distilled water final rinse. Sometimes I actually clean it twice with the AI #6. It seems to work well for me though it may seem labor intensive for some and time consuming, but if the Kirmuss option is a viable one, it would take less time in my estimation, and possibly provide a cleaner, better sounding vinyl. And definitely would be less noisy unless a vacuum at the end of the Kirmuss cycle...:cool:

    I'm not a super audiophile or anything like that. I just like to listen to a fairly clean and fairly noise free record, but can stand a little bump here and there. I've bought new records that have little imperfections and still get the occasional tick, and I use the ONZOW and carbon fiber brush between every play. 99% of what I own in vinyl is used, most of the time the record is in better shape than the cover, but not always, and if the noise doesn't over take the music, and it doesn't skip, I'm a happy camper.
    Sure, I would like to have perfect records, and own a $4K plus dollar cleaning machine, but I'm just a working stiff with more hobbies than green:D
     
  12. Record Genie

    Record Genie Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Natick MA
    There's a big convenience factor to both the Audio Desk and Klaudio machines, but they're way too expensive for what they are.. Audio Desk came out in 2009 and Klaudio launched their machine in 2013, so it's been 5 years before any true competitor like Degritter came along, and while their machine is interesting in that it's 120khz and cleans and dries, it is also going to be overpriced in the US market..

    Honestly I'd never have the equipment that I have if I wasn't cleaning for other people and could justify the investment as a small business.. That being said though, with reliability problems on the Audio Desk machines (multiple failures: pump, roller drive, ultrasonic) and worries about Klaudio (factory rep Tim told me that transducers and driver circuit boards have to be replaced as a matched set) and given that others have had problems including pump failure, just like Bill Hart, I now think a multiple step tank based solution with close attention to chemistry and water quality is going to be the way forward to the best possible cleaning results..

    I purchased three Elma P60H tanks to set up a multiple step cleaning process because they can do 80khz and that makes sense to use. They can also run at 37khz, although I consider that a bit low, based on everything I've read in the last 5+ years.. The experiences of contributors to that massive "DIY thread" show that 40khz (or higher) is the way to go to safely clean vinyl records, so it's become the generally accepted consensus.

    With Chinese 40khz 1.6gallon ultrasonic tanks affordable at anywhere from $115 up, and Vinyl Stack's magnetic rotisserie $290 (both on eBay) for $405+ you have a budget rotisserie and tank cleaner that has exactly the same limitations as the Kirmuss "system" in that it cannot dry records, has no filtration for the cleaning fluid, and has no precise water level control to keep the water at a precise point near (but not above) the labels. Same on both, fill the tank, set the timer, then dunk your records and it spins them around..

    I know the Kirmuss record holder lets you swap records easily, but I'm really not sure why people are getting so excited about paying almost exactly double the $405 setup, so $800 to Charles Kirmuss & Associates for a "system" with all the same limitations? Plus it's built around a proprietary iSonic tank shape/configuration that's only 35khz and can't be affordably replaced like an eBay unit when (not if) it breaks after the 2 year warranty expires.. Why not put the $395 difference towards adding filtration and buying a Pro-ject VCS or other vacuum machine, to properly dry the records?

    Perhaps all the fuss is just because the Kirmuss is the first ultrasonic record cleaner that most people have ever personally experienced? With lots of sales and marketing effort, it's "coming soon" to an audio show or store near you! As we've seen on the Fremer videos, it's being demonstrated with an awful lot of white-lab-coat nonsense and razzmatazz! Charles Kirmuss is laying on the "sizzle" so very thick, are people really blinded by that, rather than looking closely at all the available tank based solutions, and understanding the actual quality of the underlying "sausage" you get for your money..
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
    Dmitry, Gumboo and Robert C like this.
  13. I have a Spin Clean and am using that first to remove oils/fingerprints. Then it’s the Kirmuss, using only distilled water in the bath. Good results so far, and not seeing/hearing any damage to the records.
     
    rollo5 likes this.
  14. Mugrug12

    Mugrug12 The Jungle Is a Skyscraper

    Location:
    Massachusetts

    If you sell a record cleaning service, then it's a little disengenous to say you have no vested interest in one machine or the other, imo.
     
    bluesaddict likes this.
  15. rollo5

    rollo5 Forum Reprobate

    Location:
    Altadena, CA
    At this point I realize I don’t know who or what to believe in all this. Maybe my records will be destroyed? The machine will break after two years? Dunno. I don’t have the background in chemistry or engineering to be sure of the answers to either of these questions. Once I get my unit I guess I’ll get the answers in time. For those of you who take a negative view of this product, is it more due to concerns with its efficacy and safety, or cost relative to value? Thanks.
     
  16. rollo5

    rollo5 Forum Reprobate

    Location:
    Altadena, CA
    I’ve had David clean some records for me in the past, as well as speaking to him at some length about his process. He is very serious about it. I think he also has a very open mind to all methods and machinery for the very reason that he wants good results even if it means rethinking his process. So I take it seriously when he has reservations about this product— especially since I’ve already ordered one!
     
  17. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic

    Location:
    Sweden
    Im having an issue with the mqn himself right now so I wont buy any of his products, thats for sure. He best explain real well all the problems and questions about his methods.
     
  18. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic

    Location:
    Sweden
    I take a negative view because of how its trying to be sold to me. With as far as I can tell is just lies so far. And thats why Im not interested until he explains himself real well.
     
  19. Record Genie

    Record Genie Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Natick MA
    I've used Spin Clean, Audio Desk, Klaudio, VPI 16.5, and a Loricraft PRC-4, Elma P60H tanks, and at no time have I ever sold any of those products or been an agent for them, even though plenty of customers (who could afford it) have bought their own equipment after having records cleaned by me, and usually after detailed discussion so they knew exactly what they were getting into..

    Like any service, time is what I'm really selling, I get paid to clean records. I'm free to use any available equipment that I feel will give the best results, and customers are basically buying "machine time" on the equipment I have, and I get paid for that and my "labour" or "time spent" while I clean their records using whichever process they chose from what I can offer..

    It would really shake things up if there was a genuinely affordable machine that can give better cleaning results than an Audio Desk, Klaudio, Loricraft, Degritter etc, and if everyone could afford one then of course there would be no need for any cleaning service, but we're not there yet..
     
  20. bluesaddict

    bluesaddict High Tech Welder

    Location:
    Loveland, Colorado
    Sounds like you have a few questions for Charles on this machine. He always answers my questions fast via email. Maybe you should email him so you can get first hand info just not opinion.
    [email protected]
     
  21. Record Genie

    Record Genie Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Natick MA
    Thanks for the kind words Rollo5. I think most of my customers know it's never been about the money for me, especially when they start to realize the high cost of all the equipment and the amount of time it takes to do things properly. My accountant thinks I'm crazy!

    I still only work part-time as Record Genie, cleaning in the off-hours around my three young children's schedule, and my wife's corporate job makes it all possible. My youngest is now 4, so Kindergarten is coming in September 2019, and I will then be looking to make Record Genie into something full-time rather than be forced to return to a corporate job. I'm probably unemployable now anyway, after 7 years as a stay-at-home dad and being self-employed!

    I'm not tied to one machine or another, and pay close attention to all the details, always trying to get the best results..
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
    sacsongs likes this.
  22. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic

    Location:
    Sweden
    Fremer asked the questions I wanted to hear. What he answered is not opinion.
     
  23. Mugrug12

    Mugrug12 The Jungle Is a Skyscraper

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Unless we are there, because of the Kirmuss. Which presents a vested interest for you to comment on it. I'm sure your service is great, I'm just advocating for honesty in the discourse.
     
  24. Record Genie

    Record Genie Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Natick MA
    I've got absolutely no problem with open and honest discourse, and there is nothing wrong with being an informed consumer!

    I think anyone who really cares about records (and preserving them for future genrations) would agree too!

    To be honest, I think we've "already been there" for quite some time! Anyone can purchase a 40khz ultrasonic tank, and a Vinyl Stack spinner. Total cost ~$400, or about half the cost of a Kirmuss tank and record holder/rotator. You'll still need filtration for the best results, or an endless supply of clean water. I used to buy DI water in 5-gallon boxes called "cubitainers" but it's expensive to buy and ship, so I now have several hundred dollars of RO/DI filtration equipment here on site to make my own pure DI water (as needed, pretty much on demand) which I make from affordable distilled water that I buy in gallon jugs at my local CVS, usually several boxes of 6 gallons each whenever I get a 20% off coupon..

    Since Michael Fremer is on this, hopefully he will get to the bottom of what Charles Kirmuss is claiming regarding the following:

    Release agents, including powder
    Records contain 20% sugar
    Fungus, fungus, fungus, even on new records
    Ethyl-glycol (car antifreeze) to clean records
    Plasma waves
    17 camera underground, or under water
    35khz is superior
    Other frequencies (40khz, 60khz, 80khz, 120khz) are dangerous and damage records
    Air drying is a problem
    etc..

    Since this is hardly an exhaustive list, I added "etc".. Who knows what Charles Kirmuss will say next on camera if there is more video?

    Like I said, I don't build or sell equipment, so I'm pretty open minded when it comes to choosing what will give the best results, and if Fremer says Kirmuss' machine is okay after testing it, and the Kirmuss "system" is okay with those chemicals, then go ahead, but right now all my alarm bells are ringing!!

    If Charles Kirmuss is confident in his "system" then I think he should have no problem sharing his "research" to settle these issues..

    Hell, I may yet buy one and offer it as another option to customers, alongside cleanings on Audio Desk, Klaudio, and Loricraft machines..

    Until then I'd recommend proceeding with caution, and that a safe and proven approach would be the accepted practice of using a gentle surfactant/detergent in an ultrasonic tank cleaner (although I don't use it, many use the Library of Congress mix to good effect) and a thorough clean RO or DI water rinse afterwards, with nothing applied to the record surfaces after cleaning/rinsing that may cause problems later on..
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
    Leonthepro and rollo5 like this.
  25. eddiel

    eddiel Senior Member

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I think we were there before the Kirmuss showed up...Okki, VPI, ClearAudio, Nitty Gritty. My only caveat is against the Loricraft as that machine is more of a mystery to me in terms of how well it can clean. The others, not so much.

    Any of the machines mentioned will clean your records as good as any Ultrasonic machine, generally speaking.

    I am going to give the perfectvinylforever.com service a try though, but I look at more as a multi step process I'm curious about rather than just a "throw it in the machine" type record cleaning. In addition, I like to keep an open mind as best I can :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018

Share This Page

molar-endocrine