Ultrasonic Record Cleaning, What a difference!

I have the Spin-Clean, and I like it. I just got the Speed Box S for my Pro-Ject Debut Carbon, so every other play I think I can use my Discwasher and ZeroStat Gun. Before the speed box the record spun too slow for a Discwasher, so I'm hoping that I can Discwasher without dragging the vinyl. I don't have the Speed Box yet, so it may still drag too much for my liking

 

Why 60khz? It seems most of the market has cleaners at 42khz. Is that not enough?

 

Only what I have rad, no personal experience and that is a topic of debate, though not really a hot button topic. And I am unfamiliar with 42. The debate was 40 vs 60 (vs 80) that I saw with many feeling 60Khz was much preferable to 40.

 

I just read the higher frequency cavitation bubbles are "much smaller, more numerous, but not as powerful." The 60khz+ is said to be recommended for more delicate objects.

My unit is an 8-transducer 42 kHz cleaner and it does an amazing job knocking out grime and other particles. It is definitely complimented by immediately putting the record onto the VPI HW-16.5 for a scrub an vac.

 

Rob303- it sounds like you are doing ultrasonic first, then scrub/vac. I have been doing precisely the opposite, for the reasons explained up-thread. Wondering if you experimented or came to any conclusion regarding the sequence of the different cleaning steps- no agenda on my part, much more about knowledge base. TIA.
Bill

 

I borrowed a friend's Audiodesk and there were a couple really clicky but nice looking records in my collection it couldn't save. I suppose that no one system can solve everything.

 

Yep, I also went down the Ultrasonic path as well. I came to the conclusion that the ultrasonic is perfect for those who only buy new vinyl and just need that first wet-wash to knock out any loose debris. The audiodesk/klaudio are easily the most convenient cleaners on the market, but they're not the best cleaners in my experience. A loricraft will clean better. Wood glue cleans better. Hand washing with liquid detergent cleans better. I'd run an lp thru the AD over and over on the long 5M clean cycle and there would still be noise. I'd then hand wash or wood glue the same lp, noise gone. If you're going to get a ultrasonic get the KL over the AD as it's way more versatile how it can be used. If you want ultra convenience and either only buy new vinyl and/or don't care about getting the absolute cleanest vinyl you can get, go with ultrasonic. If you don't mind the hassle and want the cleanest vinyl you can get stick with other methods: hand washing, loricraft or titebond II etc. All IMHO.

 

Anyone concerned about cavitation causing microscopic damage to the delicate groove lands? This is my main worry with these machines. Even if the power of one cycle is relatively safe, what about long-term wear from repeated cleanings?

 

Rischa- my recollection is that all of the commercial makers of these things for vinyl, and some of the DIY'ers, have shown that it doesn't harm the vinyl, even with far heavier usage than a one shot cleaning, but I see little need to test that thesis by doing multiple ultrasonic cleans. Basically, it is a finishing stage for me on old vinyl, which I clean using other methods, or a once-clean for new vinyl. One of the benefits of the ultrasonic is far less static, but frankly, I've been pretty successful in eliminating static as a problem without it.

 

Did you post anywhere what the specific model is you are using? How much was it?

If you have personal experience that a 42 does the job, that trumps my reading.

 

Brand is Kendal. You can find many models on eBay that are relatively inexpensive.

Just one ultrasonic clean should do the job.

 

I came to that method via referral from a member who is well known for their vinyl A>D transfers. I have not tried your method. The logic behind my method is using the ultrasonic cleaner first will remove and dislodge particulates. Then scrubbing with L'art du Son and VPI brush removes anything that did not fully dislodge in the ultrasonic while also providing antistatic properties through the surfactant in the soap. Then I rinse with lab-grade water and a MoFi brush.

To be clear, do you scrub with soap then go into the ultrasonic and then vac, rinse, vac?

 

Not soap, as such. Lately, I've been using AIVS No. 15 (I was using Walker's 4 step), agitate with a MoFi brush/pad, soak, vacuum on an old VPI; then, same drill using reagent water, using separate wands and brush/pads for each step. Then into the AD ultrasonic. On the one hand, I get the concept of letting the ultrasonic loosen the dirt. Downside is that the ultrasonic 'bath' is then potentially dirtier, and gets re-used on other records (even though I switch out the bath about every 70 records, based on practices from other users). I also found, as indicated above (I think), that just cleaning in the ultrasonic alone didn't get some records- usually old records (that were probably subject to cigarette smoke or other things that effectively glued crap into the grooves)- fully clean; that the manual pre-cleaning as described brought some records back from potentially unsalvageable to eminently playable, quiet examples. In some cases, i have resorted to clean (both methods), play and reclean, but only in a couple of instances. These were valuable records that were not easy to find, let alone in minty condition.
I'm method agnostic, and keep refining my methods, so I'm not advocating "one" way. It's pretty fascinating stuff, if you don't have a life.

 

I could not disagree more. The audio deske has dramatically improved my sound quality over the VPI 16.5. That being said for my real treasures I also revirginize them and find that adds to what the AD has done/. I'm using a fine line shibata stylus so the cavitation in the smallest grooves may be making the difference. It's not the the end all b-all, but I save my physically dirty records for the end of the water/roller cycle and find that is can very capably clean soiled records, I use 6-9 button presses of cleaning. One of my best vinyl purchases hands down, as I am able to spend more time LISTENING.

 

Oh, the Audio Intelligent #15. I have that for special jobs, but I do not use most of the time. I should also add that I use a medical grade enzyme soap in the ultrasonic bath.

As for the sonic bath getting dirtier, my bath is pretty big at 21 liters and I wash no more than 10 records in a sitting. Therefore, that is not really a concern to me. Plus, there is no way I can justify anything other than tap water in the ultrasonic so I would rather have that as the first step and use the VPI, L'art du Son and lab water as "detailing" final step. I believe the cavitation of the ultrasonic bath is intense enough for me not to fret over the details.

 

Thanks for the reply. Obviously, I spend time thinking about this while I ride the bus.

 

Anytime! Love your TT btw.

 

I don't know why that cobbled together one cost $1500 either. It's wacky looking. He's got an ultrasonic tank, a roulette wheel (?!) and a fish tank filter! http://www.ultrasonicrecords.com/latest-upgrade.html

Ultrasonic cleaners are not some rarified thing. you can buy little ultrasonic jewelry cleaners for nothing. You could start with one of these for $175 and be 80 percent of the way there to building one.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Stainle...895?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4869d3b2ef


Get one of those and build a little "barbecue spit" hanger (you could skip the motor and just hand crank it like a Spin Clean") and be done with it. The whole reason for his hanging rack is he's buying one of these cheap chinese ultrasonic cleaners. They don't even need to turn really. If you could find one with a tall enough steel tank, you could just set them in there on a rack. I worked in a medical lab where we used these tanks, you just throw the surgical tools into these tanks to clean them. I'm surprised no one in China is making one that dimension yet. You could specially size them for records with a little retooling and sell them for the same $175.


Here's another homemade monstrosity for $900. And he sold one! How dumb are people they can't see the parts these guys are cobbling them together from?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ultrasonic-...=US_Vinyl_Record_Cleaning&hash=item1c42860109

 

Yeah, these are all jokes! My cleaner cost me less than $600 and that includes the $550 I spent on a giant 8-transducer, 21L ultrasonic bath!

 

Great post. Literally $175 and a couple of BBQ parts and you are up and running provided the 40Khz is good enough. That's great thinking. I spend several minutes hand cleaning records, no reason not to try one and worry about getting a mechanized spinner later.

 

Nah! Use a carbon fiber brush now that you have the Spin Clean. All you need to do now is remove whatever dust accumulates on the LP during a single play. The Dishwasher brush isn't needed . . . you're just adding another fluid and possible grinding more gunk back down into the grooves at this point.

 

its seems much much easy do a DYI ultrasonic machine than a normal brush RCM like VPI or Okki...
Im really interesed on Ultrasonic cleaning,

my questions:
1. can ultrasonic cleaning can damage the record? if you use a lot time...
what the right time for a cleaning?
2. so if I clean a record I cant cleaning again in the future? for the same point 1... use a lot can damage a record?
3. is possible use just distriled water with NO alchol liquids? alchol can be inflamable inside the machine... ?
4. ultrasonic DYI on a machine like this http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Stainle...895?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4869d3b2ef
is enough to clean a record, why I ask? look this video,

this guy first use ultracleaning and later a vpi brushes liquids etc...
5. I found this to spin the record: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ultrasonic-...=US_Vinyl_Record_Cleaning&hash=item25945c087d

again make a ultrasonic RCM looks easy and you dont need spend 4K in a Audio Desk... it seems! but Im not an expert.

 

I have a a professional jewelry/eyeglass ultrasonic cleaner, they are like 800.00 or so. I've left glasses in it way too long and nothing in the plastic, lenses etc were damaged. I realize that is not the same as a record but the zyl plastic, silicon, polycarb and CR 39 lenses were not damaged in the least.

 

FYI, a very interesting discussion from "the man" himself, Harry Weisfeld of @vpiindustries .

vpiindustries.com/forum • View topic - Record cleaning »

Short version: clean first on an ultrasonic, follow up with a distilled water rinse-n-vac on the Cyclone.

 

I'm saving my sheckles for an ADS after I heard the results on my minty and very clean original mono 6-eye Columbia Dave Brubeck Time Out. I've had a Nitty Gritty for about 13 years which, I use with L'Art du Son (an extraordinary record cleaner BTW) and can't complain about the results but, the ultrasonic cleaning takes it to another level. You have to have a sizable collection of records to justify the cost outlay (I'm well over 20K). My problem will be how to sneak it into the house.