Ya its to bad the your Nautilus Linda is noisy too such a good album. If you take the record out at a angle not just up and down there is very little water left to dry off. Adam was good at it and said it took him a couple times to get it down. Then you use the micro cloth to dry the rest (I will post pic of the kit when I get it). It is surprising how dirty a new record can be. I go to Salina, Kansas every year to a place called Blue Heaven Studios Its run by Chad Kassem who owns Quality Record Pressingsing in the same town and they let you tour the pressing plant to see how its done. Lets just say they don't do it in a clean room environment. Its a good time very friendly people and they will answer any question you might have. Chad also owns Acoustic Sounds Vinyl Records, SACDs, DVD Audio, Audiophile Equipment|Acoustic Sounds and that is where I order most of my new albums from (takes two days from order to at my door )
Did you ever clean the brushes or just replace them? Couldnt find any info on anti fungal being used on the site. I dont at all see the point of it after cleaning either. Unless he actually used something like gruv glide.
Yes, I would put new (replace) brushes in 3 to 4 times a year then I would know they were doing their job. I think the video will help with your other question. Its not gruv glide at all it prevents mold and mildew form getting on the record.
For you gents that are new to ultrasonic cleaning, welcome to the fold. As I've written about at length, I buy a lot of used, older pressings so I combine methods, using both conventional record cleaning and ultrasonic. My suggestion for challenged records is to give them a really good pre-clean using something like AIVS No. 15 and a pure water rinse. Bonus if you have a vacuum RCM to do this, but some people apparently do it by hand. Then into the ultrasonic. I've managed to resuscitate some records that I thought were a lost cause by combining enzyme/scrub/soak (more conventional) with the ultrasonic. A good ultrasonic product at this price point is a winner.
Why I ask is because I know someone who despite using a new ProJect RCM made his records dirtier. Not because of the machine mind you, but because he didnt clean it out like he should have. And Im not sure but never cleaning your brushes, just replacing them seems like an unsanitary cleaning method like his.
I'm no expert on mold (fungus) remediation, but in all the years I have owned, stored, played, collected and accumulated records, I have never had a problem with mold. I think the conditions for it are wet, damp basements, water damage due to flooding, etc. On the few occasions when a record would come to me with evidence of mold, I would quickly segregate it from others. There are a few methods to kill mold without damaging vinyl, but I never went in-depth to explore these. If the mold has taken hold, it is not only risky (you don't want to breathe that stuff while trying to get rid of it or let it migrate to other things, including other records), but may have already damaged the record. That's basically why I shied away from remediation. Applying something to prevent mold as a prophylactic measure may seem to make sense but I would first concern myself with the conditions of storage-- why is there a risk of mold growing in the first place? I have no experience with the material Kirmuss is recommending as an anti-fungal so cannot comment on whether it has any sonic signature if left on the record. Perhaps those of you who buy his machine can make that comparison- the sound of a record with and without anti-fungal treatment. I certainly have not found it necessary over the many decades that my records have lived in one place or another, have remained packed at times, and moved over the years. And I had a lot of records at one point, virtually all used, or from other collections.
This is where I get a bit confused - the surfactant is also the anti-bacterial agent. So you use it in the ultrasonic, take the LP out of the bath after cleaning, rinse with distilled water to rinse away the surfactant/antibacterial agent, then re-spray with the same agent and put back in its sleeve after drying. I'm with you, Bill, in not seeing the need for that last spray as well as being concerned with both short and long term consequences. Charles from Kirmuss has assured me there is no issue with the surfactant/antibacterial agent but I have too much invested in my collection to take a chance. As I mentioned up thread, the agent is 99%water and 1% propane-1/2 dial mix. Perhaps someone with a chemistry background could comment on whether this would adversely affect vinyl?
Shawn, I can't help with the chemistry, though I could certainly research it. The one thing I would point out is that even if it is "safe" for vinyl-- something I wasn't addressing-- does it leave a sonic signature? Just to clarify, though, Kirmuss supplies a single fluid that is used both as a surfactant in connection with the ultrasonic washing, and to be applied afterwards, as an anti-fungal agent? (I had somehow believed there were two different fluids).
Looks like a very common food and cosmetic additive, used in plastics, can function as an anti fungal agent, anti-freeze, etc. 1,2-Propanediol’s Uses And Preparation and more detail: Propylene glycol Not sure I'd drink it, but it is probably already in food or beverages.
Thats what Im saying. Seems extremely counterproductive unless its something like grooveglide or LAST.
The final application of the spray is entirely optional. It also is not sprayed directly onto the record. A very light mist is sprayed onto the camel hair brush that comes with the system, which is then gently run across the surface of the record as it spins. It is such a light coat that there is no real visible signs of its application. It can be skipped, as I said though, if you're worried about it. I think out here in CO it's probably unnecessary but on the east cost, might be worthwhile.
I haven't had time to read this yet but here is the Owners Manual. http://new.morrowaudio.com/media/W1...A-RC-1 Owners Manual.pdf?sha=f83114d01d687ccf
Overwhelmingly dense. His science may or may not be accurate, but he definitely needs a good copy writer!
They were out of stock but soon (couple weeks). Did you get yours yet? If yes would love to hear how you're liking it so far.
I have a similar process (five-step) for ALL records: 1. Soak with AIVS Down with Dirty for 5 mins per side, vacuuming with VPI 16.5 2. Into Spin Clean #1 for distilled water rinse 3. Into ultrasonic cleaner pre-heated to about 30-32 degrees celcius with special cleaning solution for 10 mins 4. Into Spin Clean #2 for distilled water rinse 5. Final clean with L'Art du Son then vacuum with VPI 16.5 My new and used vinyl has never sounded better!
Using a ruler (not the most precise way of measuring) the middle of each slot is app. 1 5/8” from the middle of the adjacent slot. Since this is a rough measurement, looks to be close to 1.66”. I only clean one album at a time so for me it’s a bit of a moot point.
So, it looks like the Kirmuss adapts this Isonic unit, perhaps has the temp settings changed and added a different mechanism to rotate the records. Saw a few mentions of the Isonic unit elsewhere-- apparently an industrial machine that can be used for parts cleaning (which may also explain why some of the instructions for the Kirmuss seem to include language about using it for other than record cleaning). Interesting, no? iSonic Inc Ultrasonic Cleaners
If you watch the video from the audio show the iSonic is there too. I noticed that it was very similar to the Kirmuss machine just different part to rotate the records. The iSonic you lift the records out of the wash (in the video on their site) so I guess that is why they have the covers for the labels. The Kirmuss machine IMHO dose a good job of drying them all but a small amount when you take it out of the machine (mine is out of stock). I also noticed they both can clean other things.
Interesting, looks like both use the same tank with the only difference being the rotating mechanism.
Thanks Shawn. Looks to be an interesting and fairly affordable machine. I also like the fact that there are no special additives to the water, no extra process of skewering the records...just drop and clean. I would think that with the ability to clean 2 LP's at a time you could clean a double album set at one go, nice. I love my OKKI NOKKI, but it can get time consuming and tedious at times, but much better and quicker than gluing and the Spin Clean I was doing before the OKKI. I don't know what the cost of the Surfactant being used is, but it does about 300 records from what I remember hearing so it could also cut down on some of the chemical costs. I have been using the AI #6 for a while and have had good results, but appears it wouldn't be necessary with this package. Definitely on my Christmas list.
You would probably need to get the basket that fits into the tank to use for other cleaning. I wish I had waited for an US cleaner as I bought the wife an fairly expensive USA made US jewelry cleaner some time back...I could have had one dual purpose machine instead of potentially having two. However, the ultrasonic revolution hadn't quite made it to the surface yet and she has gotten a lot of use from the machine. The OKKI may be for sale in the near future.