Help! Is my new ultrasonic cleaner broken?

Some time ago, I wrote a quasi-review of both the KLAudio and the AudioDesk to try to balance out the wildly exaggerated early reviews in magazines and audio websites ("it changed my life!!!")

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...c-record-cleaners.356153/page-3#post-11327090

I therefore wonder whether the OP was subconsciously expecting a level of before-and-after difference commensurate with the claims in the early reviews (but not commensurate with reality in my experience, at least for a normal human with normal hearing).

In sum: The KLAudio is very good at what it does if one is expecting improvement but not life-altering miracles.

 

As someone who has a stringent cleaning regimen using a modified off-the-rack ultrasonic bath > VPI 16.5, I can say that there is not always an audible difference. I should point out that ever since implementing this system, no LP ever graces my TT until it has gone through my cleaning system. However I have had LPs with micro-grunge that cleaned up drastically after multiple cleans and literally hours in the ultrasonic bath. But that is a rare case. Most old records simply have irreperable damage. Anytime I do a run of new LPs there is always a collection of vinyl bits floating in my ultrasonic bath afterwards. That is proof even new LPs need a clean to remove manufacturing debris.

All that said, as you upgrade your front-end you should know the higher-end stuff (particularly cartridges and phono preamps) are way less forgiving to LP damage, poor mastering and shoddy pressings. The more revealing the system, the less tolerant you will be of vast swaths of your LP collection ;-)

 

UPDATE: Just got an email from Klaudio - apparently the ultrasonics in my cleaner were not set up properly. They've recalibrated it and are shipping it back to me. I'm looking forward to trying it again.

Also: huge kudos to Klaudio for the great support and incredibly fast turnaround time!

 

Why do you say that? One of the salient advantages of ultrasonic is that the wave action/vibration gets into the deepest part of the grooves and into all of the tiniest of nooks and crannies. In terms of microscopic detail, the bristles of the VPI 16.5 simply do not get down into those places.

 

I know I voted for front end first earlier in this thread, I'm not sure the RCM is the front end. For 4 grand you could buy a pretty special turntable.

 

I swear I need to make a video of my VPI 16.5 cleaning regimen. I use separate brushes and vacuum tubes for wash and rinse. I use Disc Doctor Miracle Record Cleaner mixed 1:1 with distilled water and a distilled water rinse with just a few drops of the wash mix as a wetting agent. I do one wash and vacuum (on the dirtiest of the dirty I will wash and vacuum twice), change the vacuum tube and brush to do the rinse cycle. Each vacuum time is 1.0-1.5 revolutions. Turn the LP over and repeat. I swear this process takes no more than 3-4 minutes per LP and they are DEAD QUIET, unless they're damaged.

 

That's happening as well.

 

FYI, my pre-needledrop cleaning regimen up until now for a record I haven't played before:

- Remove record from shrink (if it's still on) and cover
- Discard the inner sleeve immediately (to be replaced with a MoFi inner sleeve)
- Zap it with a Milty
- Blow loose debris off
- A thorough vigorous pass with the Spin Clean, followed by a microfiber towel dry
- A pass on the VPI 16.5 RCM with AIVS 3-step fluids. I use the enzymatic formula (allowing it to soak for a minute if it's a particularly gnarly pressing), then the super cleaner formula, followed by the super cleaner formula and then an ultra pure water rinse. Use separate VPI brushes for each step, which are cleaned between sides.
- Zap it with the Milty after each drying cycle on the VPI
- Onto the turntable. Zap it with the Milty again.
- Visually inspect for any particles on the surface, blowing off with canned air or using a carbon fiber brush if necessary
- Drop the needle
- Zap it with the Milty between sides
- Zap it with the Milty before removing from the TT and putting back into the sleeve

I have yet to determine if I'm going to stick to this regimen if the Klaudio comes back and I'm happy with the performance.

 

Because I believe a 1/2 hour cleaning routine with a VPI using reputable record cleaning fluids will be just as effective. I have an ultrasonic machine and while I like it, it's not the be all that ends all.

 

I think if I had to have a regimen to clean records I would give up, life is too short.
Slap it on the cleaner, spread some liquid give it a rub vacuum, play, no time.

 

Further clarification from Klaudio: "The transducers were pulling about 1A and they should be twice that. There's a knob inside for the adjustment, but going too high will fry the board so we don't document the calibration for customers."

 

YAY!!!!! Must have been a 'Friday' unit!

 

You just described MY regimen!

 

Agreed. Done.

 

I don't think the importance of a decent cleaning regimen - whether it's with an $89 Spin Clean or a $4K ultrasonic RCM - can be overemphasized, though.

 

Wow...how long to clean a record? Or have you ever finished one yet?

 

Ha!

Anywhere from 5-15 minutes, depending on how dire the record is.

 

Sounds like me in some cases. I do the full 3 step AI routine on the tough ones. But I don't have a Milty....suppose I should ask for one from Santa.

 

Especially for thrift shop finds, I think you need to pre-clean the records using a cleaning fluid and rinse them before putting them into the KL. I know it sounds like too much work-- part of the appeal is the ease of use- but my experience with both the Audio Desk and the KL is that for grotty stuff, you really need to use a combination of more standard cleaning techniques in combination with ultrasonic. For brand new records, the ultrasonic is probably fine.
I've experimented a lot with different cleaning techniques and my best results have come from combining fluid/vacuum/rinse in combination with ultrasonic. The other bonus of this approach (particularly rinsing after the pre-clean before inserting the record into the KL) is that the ultrasonic bath will be less polluted with the fluid residue, let alone the contaminants originally on the record. Perhaps that's just peace of mind on my part, but I like to know that water in the ultrasonic is relatively free of additives or contaminants, since you are basically leaving whatever liquid residue on the record and 'blow drying' it off. My preferred way is to vac dry the record after an ultrasonic wash, using a point nozzle vac machine, but KL warns against DAMAGE to their machine if you pull a wet record from it after a wash-only cycle. The KL has met my expectations, and was not as complicated as the Audio Desk, with better build quality overall. You should experiment a little once you get the device back from KL, particularly if you are cleaning used records that came from somebody else.

 

I spend more time cleaning if I'm going to be doing a needle drop.

I find the Milty to be essential...although I'm dismayed at how many I've managed to break.

 

I asked this once before in another thread, but I don't think you answered. I'm curious why you think the record needs the vacuum after going through the KLAudio if you've already run it through your Monks or whatever?

I'm probably going to spring for that new Clearaudio machine soon. As much as I actually do like cleaning my records, I'm finding that I'm listening to less music than normal or only running a record thru the KLAudio. The Clearaudio is nearly as automatic as the KLAudio, so I can setup an easy assembly line for cleaning (I keep all of this in a separate room so noise doesn't effect my listening).

It's another pricey option that I try not to think about. Instead I think about how pristine the records will be with almost zero effort on my part.

One thing I never see mentioned with regards to using standard RCM's with fluids and brushes is the amount of dust and other nastiness records cleaned this way pick up AFTER a cleaning.

When I pull a record out to play that was only cleaned with fluids, it's almost always covered in hair and dust, even though I always put clean records in new MFSL anti-static sleeves. Records cleaned on the KLAudio rarely exhibit this.

 

I can't stress enough how important a Milty anti-static gun is if you're into vinyl, especially if you're using a vacuum record cleaner. They're overpriced and poorly constructed, but I consider them essential. Static is the enemy.

 

Two things: first, you just got your KL back from service or will do so soon, right? See if you still have a static problem after you finish a record in the KL. Cleaning using the KL (even if you use a vacuum RCM as part of a pre-clean) really is effective in eliminating static.

 

Yep. Should be here tomorrow.

I actually did see a huge decrease in static before I sent the KL back. Maybe my Miltys will last longer now.

 

I thought I did Brian, but if you read the piece I did on My Cleaning Odyssey, I came up with two different approaches, both of which rely on using two different cleaning machines.
The basic approach is to pre-clean a used or grotty record using a cleaning fluid, ranging from mild to more aggressive, vacuuming and then using a reagent water rinse, and vacuuming. Then the record goes into the KL, for a 4 minute wash and 2 minute dry. Done.
The other approach is to pre-clean as above, but when I put into the KL, I turn the 'dry' setting to zero. I then pull the wet record out of the KL and point nozzle dry in on the Monks. I think, as I mentioned in the article, that this does a better job than blow drying. KL CAUTIONS AGAINST PULLING A WET RECORD OUT OF ITS MACHINE, even though the wash and dry settings are separate, because it risks wetting the electronics in the KL.
The reason I have done this is that the Monks can pull the stuff out of the grooves better, in my estimation, than blowing it off the record using the dryers in the KL. (In theory the goal is to remove the contaminants, and in practice, taking this step has actually gotten rid of some mild tracing distortion that the first approach didn't eliminate).
This augers for using a DIY type ultrasonic that has a wash only function, and buying (perhaps used), a Loricraft or Monks. I would not recommend using a wand type cleaner after the ultrasonic because I think you are back to square one with potential cross contamination, static and some of the other issues associated with wand vacuum RCMs v point nozzles.
I hope that's clear enough.