Yes, that is really nice. The machine is not labour intensive. But a Nessie Vinylmaster, Clearaudio Double Matrix Professional Sonic or Clearaudio Smart Matrix Silent aren't either. If you want your records to be as clean as possible, the Degritter does the job for you, I am convinced.
Yes, I think what you say is exactly right and is in accordance with my experience. A good wet vacuum record cleaning machine will do about 95% of the job and will give very satisfactory results. If however, you want to address the remaining 5% which has to do with factory residues, mould release agents and things like that, you need to follow up the wet cleaning with ultrasonic cleaning. This will give you the very best results. I get superb results using both types of cleaning in tandem and I have silent, flawless vinyl replay on my M and M- collection. As you say, VG and VG+ records that have issues such as noise, ticks or pops is down to the way the records are, possibly that way from previous handling/playing or pressing defects, and cannot be transformed to M, M- records. I have many original 1970s and 1980s U.S. pressed records that were 'transformed' to sounding like new without any noise whatsoever but they were in top condition when I bought them. For some reason, I found from the very beginning that ultrasonic cleaning worked particularly well with 1970s and 1980s U.S. vinyl. It adds a whole new sonic dimension to the vinyl experience!
I'm seriously considering getting a Degritter or another US brand. My Pro-Ject VC works pretty well but it's by far from perfect even on new records. I'm also getting increasingly lazier and just want to play music! I've been trying to do some research lately and right now the Degritter seems to be winning. What I don't like from reading from others here is theres a lifespan of about 3000+/- records. For such an expensive machine (and similar US machines) I'd like it to last 10-20 years!!
Then it's most likely the record is physically damaged and no cleaning will improve this. I have, and use, a Nessie for my "pre-clean" and in my experience it does not clean as well as the Degritter. I use it just to remove the grunge I don't want going into my Degritter. The biggest difference between the two is that the Degritter lowers the noise floor further than the Nessie (vacuum type cleaner) and there are records that the Nessie leaves crackly that the Degritter can get to silence. No contest.
Which Nessie model do you use? Of course the Degritter does a better job cleaning a record, that is for sure. And it is comforting to know that the cleaned record is completely static-free!
One thing that tends to be overlooked or even forgotten about, is that the cleaning action of the ultrasonic transducers cannot extend to the entire dead wax area, for safety reasons. I have seen many records in my time where the entire dead wax has been 'lined' with mould and other contamination in as far as the edge of the paper label. This can arise from less than ideal storage conditions, over a long period. Wet Cleaning with a vacuum RCM can easily handle and remove this kind of contamination right to the edge of the label. For this and a number of other considerations, I will never abandon wet cleaning. It also removes the 'nasty stuff ' that you do not want getting into your machine's filter mechanism. On that basis, wet pre-cleaning is the perfect adjunct to ultrasonic cleaning, in my experience.
I'm using the vinylmaster. It's almost a perfect match for the Degritter in terms of timing in that I can have a record cleaning in the Degritter (on Medium) while doing another manually on the Nessie and they both are close enough in their timings that it's almost a constant flow of records through the Nessie and Degritter.
The video demo of the Nessie looks lovely, but the fact that it can only handle one fluid puts it out of the running for me. At a minimum, I would want one cleaning fluid and a pure-water rinse, with separate vacuum wands, so I'm kinda stuck with the manual machines for now. (A pair of Nessies would be ideal, of course! But maybe a little over-the-top, cost-wise.) And as a partner for the Degritter, I was still thinking I would use a vacuum RCM for a rinse and dry after the Degritter, rather than using the latter's air drying cycle. From what I've read from users of other US machines, they find this sounds better than air drying, probably because surfactant and loose stuff in the water can settle on the record during the drying cycle. But I am curious to hear if anyone with experience with other machines feels that this is not necessary with the Degritter.
Which programme do you usually use? I know it has an intensive cleaning programme of 15 or 20 minutes. I wonder if records cleaned with this intensive programme still show improvement after being cleaned by the Degritter afterwards?
I've started last few days doing an RCM pre-clean and vacuuming post-degritter with no drying followed by a final rinse. A big improvement, a lot of which I think is down to not using the drying cycle
I don't hear any sonic issue with the air dry and most importantly it leaves no static. Zero. No dust is sticking to the record when I'm sleeving it or playing it. This to me is a noticeable improvement. I run dirty records through my old 3 step regimen on a VPI cyclone and then use the Degritter as a final step.
I didn't either, until I tried it (and compared needle drops) and found an improvement via vacuuming - am guessing because the vacuum leaves no chance of leaving contaminants drying on.
Only anecdotally - I've had records that I've been unsatisfied with after Nessie/Degritter so I've experimented with further cleaning - longer cycles - only Degritter, only Nessie, Nessie after Degritter etc and the sound never changes from the first clean: one pass through the Nessie and then the Degritter always gets me to as good as it gets... any degradation left is physical on the vinyl and so the only step left for further improvement is to replace the vinyl.
Hi All: I'm new to the site. Just ordered my Degritter today, expecting it on Saturday. I have a question and if it has already been answered, I apologize. Most of my records are not filthy dirty, some dust mainly. Would running the degritter without any cleaning solution and only distilled water be an effective way to clean? I'm trying to avoid the whole extra "rinse" cycle which many seem to advise after using a cleaning solution. Cheers and stay safe, everyone.
You can run the Degritter with just water, but perhaps it's not *as* effective as when using surfactant due to the way cavitation works. Or you could use the surfactant to get a better clean and simply ignore the post-rinsers... Why not try both and see if you hear any difference?
Where did you order yours from? I have one on order with Music Direct but they are waiting on a shipment from Degritter.
I ordered mine from Just Great Sound which is the Audio business portion connected to The Computerist located in NJ. I ordered mine yesterday and I believe they had 4 in stock at the time. Ask for Tony (owner). (973)226-0100 is the number.
Does anyone know if it's ok to use this fluid with the degritter instead of the Degritter's own surfactant? https://www.amazon.com/Professional...sed-Concentrate/dp/B019YI38Z2#customerReviews It's supposed to be the best cleaning fluid, and normally applied with a cloth or brush, I think, but I wondered if it could be used as a few drops in to the Degritter tank.
Read this review: Degritter Ultrasonic Record Cleaning Machine - The Audiophile Man and scroll down the page, he has used it and is very positive about its use.
Yes, that's where I got the info on TergiKleen. The problem is The reviewer has a self-admittedly more involved system than the normal audiophile, and his use of TergiKleen involves a separate TergiKleen procedure - brushing it on I believe and wiping it off I believe - and then moving on to using the Degritter. What I'm wondering is if the TergiKleen can be used IN PLACE of the Degritter's surfactant, in terms of using a few drops in the tank.
I have some Tergikleen incoming to try (probably a couple of weeks out due to eBay shipping). I'll be putting it in the tank as I also don't want to go down Paul's route of manually applying. I've tried Ilfotol but it foams in the Degritter so it's a no go. Will be interesting to see how the Tergikleen goes, particularly as Paul feels there's a sound quality benefit from using it...
How much ILFOTOL did you add; i.e., how many mL ILFOTOL per L of water? I do not use the product, but I know others that do and at low concentrations they do not mention foam. ILFORD recommends as a wetting agent a ratio of 1:200 which would be 5-mL of ILFOTOL/L-water. Note that the ILFOTOL is diluted so that the non-ionic surfactant is only 5%. Diluted 200:1 = 0.05/200 = 0.0250% = 250 ppm. If you used 5mL/L you could reduce to 2.5mL/L and still get the 'wetting' capability but no detergency. FWIW - this is what is Tergikleen http://www.sdpickups.com/pdf/msds.pdf : its s a blend of Tergitol 15-S-3 (which is not water soluble) and Tergitol 15-S-9 (which is water soluble) = and its stated to mix 15-20 drops per gallon. 15-20 drops works out to about 1.25 mL and 1-gallon = 3786 mL. So the final overall concentration is 1.25mL/3786 mL = 0.00033 = 0.0033% = to about 33 ppm. At this concentration the CMC-critical micelle concentration of the 15-S-9 is not achieved and no surfactant micelle reserve is achieved. The 15-S-3 being insoluble with water has no CMC. It will lower the surface tension of the water; but not to what the Tergitol 15-S-9 is capable of at 52 ppm, and there is essentially no detergency. If you add too much of it to the mix (I do not how much is too much) the Tergitol 15-S-3 which at best exists as an emulsion will likely come out of solution. BUT, BUT, if you are using Tergikleen as a single application with no water rinse - since it has so little concentration - the risk of leaving residue behind is pretty low. Not sure if the 15-S-3 will be removed by the Degritter filter.
Measured with a syringe, 0.5ml is enough to get foam in the Degritter. Perhaps this is too little and causing a foam effect? I'll try with more and see what happens. What I tend to do is keep an eye on the surfactant effect while cleaning and if I notice it's not working, ie the water beads rather than sheeting, then I drop 0.5ml more into the tank and it starts working again. So, yes, either the filter is removing it or perhaps it's just evaporating during use/drying.[/QUOTE]
Hi guys I got Degritter on preorder, friends and family have preordered for my bf directly from Degritter, my partner spoke to Taniel directly, since we are both Estonians, she was very surprised when i told her that this device is made in Tartu Estonia, so she decided to treat me with it. I understand that they have a line of preorders and my cleaner will arrive at some point in november. I've been using Okki Nokki for the past 3-5 years. I'm happy with it, kinda. It does the job, I'm mixing isopropyl with distilled and ilford wetting agent. Good results. I would clean with that and then just rinse again with distilled water. Frankly it would put me off to listen to new records for a while, I know i would not drop a needle if record isnt clean. When you cleaned everything before that. I own around 1300 lps and change sleeves on all new coming records, clean, rinse re-sleeve. I hope that this device will bring back the joy of cleaning and listening.
If you are only adding 0.5mL of ILFOTOL to the Degritter 1.4L bath, this the final concentration - [(o.5mL)(0.05 NID concentration)/(1400 mL Degritter tank)](100% to get ppm) = 0.00178 = 18 ppm. The fact that you are getting foam at this very low concentration is kind of remarkable. This is the MSDS https://www.digitaltruth.com/products/ilford_msds/Ilfotol GHS.pdf, and the ingredients are nothing more than an anti-bacterial agent that is commonly used in water cooling systems - so it does not foam, and some non-ionic surfactant which (likely BIO-SOFT® N25-7 to N25-9 BIO-SOFT® N25-7 ) that is not known for being a high foamer, but can product some foam at higher concentrations (i.e 1% = 10,000 ppm) - but should not foam much if at all at 18 ppm. I wonder if there was a reaction with some post manufacturing residue left in the Degritter that caused the foam. You may want to mix a 0.5mL ILFOTOL to a 1L bottle (pre-rinse with tap-water) with just tap-water. Then shake and see how much foam develops - some will form, then let rest the foam should subside very quickly. This 'may' confirm that there may be/was some residue in the Degritter (the pump/filter for example) that caused the foam. [/QUOTE] Note that Tergitol 15-S-3 since it has no CMC and is not soluble in water will provide no contribution to 'wetting'.
