Degritter Users

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by WntrMute2, Jun 30, 2019.

  1. 12 Hz

    12 Hz Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Covina, CA
    After using a Record Doctor VI for a couple of years with decent but uneven results, I decided to take the plunge on a Degritter in December when the Mark II was announced. I was lucky enough to get one of the first units to arrive in the USA. Right out of the box I was happy with it as it is user friendly and was a notable improvement over the vacuum method that I had been using. (It should have been, considering the cost of the Degritter.)

    For the first week or so of cleaning, I stuck to the simple formula of using 1.5 ml of DG fluid in my wash tank and finishing with a rinse with straight distilled water in my rinse tank. Although the sonic improvement of my records was clearly audible, I couldn’t help but be slightly bothered by the residue foam I saw happening during the rinse cycle. Clearly, enough of the DG fluid was carried over to the rinse on the lp that it was cumulatively contaminating the rinse each time I washed a record. (I have a background in photography and cross-contamination in the darkroom was always something to be avoided for archival reasons.) To remedy this, I added a “pre-rinse” step with distilled water in my Disco Anti-stat. This reduced the residual foaming, but not entirely.

    Since those first couple of weeks of cleaning in December, I’ve tried a variety of methods with my Degritter, including alcohol-based formulas, Tergikleen, Photo-flo, and the Audio Intelligent US formula. (And variations using a pre-wash with my vacuum cleaner for dirtier used records.) All of the methods seemed to be effective in ways that were difficult to discern from one another, which, of course, leaves me thinking that the simplest approach is likely the best. As reinforcement to this thinking, I watched a Norman Maslov YouTube video this morning while I drank my coffee, in which both Michael Fremer and Mike Esposito asserted that the best (and only) way to ultrasonically clean vinyl is without any surfactants or additives of any kind, just distilled water. After reading pretty much the entirety of this group’s posts and learning a lot about various cleaning methods, I don’t recall seeing anyone advocating for “pure” cleaning in simple distilled water. (We’ve all read volumes about how important it is to break the surface tension of the water.)

    I’m the first to admit that part of what I love about this hobby is all the tweaks, modifications and experimenting that one can do with everything from tube-swapping to power cords to cleaning fluids, but I’m honestly wondering if we have collectively over-complicated what is supposed to be a very straightforward process with the wonderful Degritter US machine. I’m spending the day today cleaning records in my Degritter with nothing but a single tank of distilled water. This evening I’ll listen to the results. I’d love to hear if anyone else has been wrestling with the dilemma of finding the “perfect” solution to use in your Degritter. (With an understanding that different vinyl conditions might require different solutions and methods.) I’m new to this forum and I’ve found it to be helpful and generally supportive and positive. Thanks to everyone for all your thoughts on the Degritter.
     
  2. MattHooper

    MattHooper Forum Resident

    Location:
    Canada
    I was wondering the same thing. It had been drilled in to my head that without a surfactant US cleaning just wouldn't do a good enough job.
     
    12 Hz likes this.
  3. One thing I’ve learned in cleaning records is that there is no one-size-fits all solution. Different contaminants will be better cleaned bu different solutions. Manual scrubbing has benefits and ultrasonic has benefits. Some of them overlap, but others do not.

    I will say though that I will always use at least a small amount of alcohol in my US tank. It’s anecdotal, but to my ears the benefits are audible and apparent.
     
  4. Johncan

    Johncan Always learning

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I can clean 30 to 50 records a day on the weekends. I have not had any issues with the heating protection kicking in. I also clean the vast majority of my records on the Medium setting. On weekends, I can usually clean 15 to 20 a day if I have the time.
     
    JHC3 likes this.
  5. racer59

    racer59 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Bonita, CA
    People are overcomplicating this. US cleaners only need water due to the nature of the cleaning method: Cavitation.

    Cavitation does not require a surfactant or any other chemical. Those are for manual RCM.

    Cavitation: “...in cleaning applications, cavitation has sufficient power to overcome the particle-to-substrate adhesion forces, loosening contaminants.”

    RCM obviously do not use cavitation as the cleaning method. Hence you require a surfactant and some sort of cleaning solution to break down the contaminants (particle-to-substrate adhesions) that is then vacuumed away. It’s the detergent that does the cleaning on an RCM, the scrubbing motion is what activates the cleaning detergent to do it’s thing.
     
    Classicrock and 12 Hz like this.
  6. Laszlo Colombani

    Laszlo Colombani New Member

    Location:
    Belgium
    Hi, i'm new here but i own and use my Degritter MKI since October 22. I've read a lot of posts here regarding the cooling cycle, but I've never had one, even though the machine is used frequently (sometimes 5h straight). Is it normal ? :)
     
  7. Tiger Rag

    Tiger Rag Well-Known Member

    Location:
    UK
    Keep an eye on the water temp. If it's not going up after cleaning your records the transducers might not be working.
    Are you washing on heavy or medium. You can clean a lot more records in succession on medium, i personally use heavy on my records whether they are clean or dirty. But like i said keep a check on water temp.
     
    madrac likes this.
  8. Surfactants decrease water tension, allowing water to be more “wet”. This does not in and of itself clean anything - detergency is required if you are making a solution to break down contaminants and clean.

    Surfactants are integral to the ultrasonic cleaning process, as the reduced surface tension allows the bubbles to get closer to the vinyl, deeper in the grooves, and for the US to properly and efficiently do it’s job.
     
  9. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    FWIW:

    Commonly used surfactants for cleaning have two basic functions - wetting by reducing the surface tension of water, and then if the concentration is high enough, then you can get detergency. The key property is called critical micelle concentration (CMC). Up to the CMC, the surfactant is reducing the water surface tension. Beyond the CMC, the surface tension does not drop, but now you get detergency such as emulsification (break up oil and hold in suspension). Every surfactant has its own specific CMC and its own slope (how does the surface tension change with concentration), and there can be other items to consider.

    The Degritter cleaning solution based on its ingredients (previously provided in this thread), the primary nonionic surfactant has a CMC of about 100-ppm, but as little as 20-ppm will reduce the water surface tension enough to wet the record. But the primary nonionic surfactant is a low foaming type intended for rinse aids and >CMC you do not get any great detergency. Degritter SDS showed the primary nonionic surfactant as 2.5 to <6%. If the Degritter cleaner is at its lowest 2.5%, then 1.5-ml = about 27 ppm which is good for wetting with very low with little risk of residue (if not rinsed), but if its 5.9%, then 1.5-ml = about 63 ppm which is OK, but more than you need for wetting, and some report foaming and audible residue because it has another ingredient (<1.4%) s that adds to residue. This all then goes to the general user experience that 1-ml for the Degritter cleaning solution (assuming they have not reformulated), is the sweet spot.

    Photoflo based on its ingredients (listed in the SDS), the primary nonionic surfactant has a CMC of about 120-ppm, but the particular nonionic surfactant has a cloud point of about 25°C/77°F. Cloud point is a property of nonionic surfactants and is the temp where the surfactant comes out of solution. So, Photoflo is not good for a heated UT such as the Degritter with continuous filtration. Additionally, Photoflo is mostly propylene glycol which is not helpful for UT cleaning and if you add enough for wetting, you get a lot of propylene glycol; and you really want to rinse to avoid residue.

    Unless you know the chemistry, and its exact concentration in the cleaning solution, any use by trial and error is nothing more than subjective which leads to the never-ending conversations. Manual and vacuum RCM are not as sensitive to cleaner concentration, but the Degritter and the KLAudio with continuous filtration can be very sensitive.

    Devil is in the details.
     
  10. racer59

    racer59 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Bonita, CA
    LOL. This makes no sense.
     
  11. You should research this subject more then. Because it makes perfect sense and is an integral part to understanding the chemistry and science of ultrasonic cleaning.

    Start by reading here, courteousy of @pacvr.

    A relevant quote:
    “As the fluid surface tension drops less power is required to develop cavitation, and more cavitation bubbles are developed, but with less cavitation intensity, but cleaning efficiency increases.”
     
    pacvr likes this.
  12. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    What @Greenmonster2420 is saying is correct, but the detailed science of this is pretty complex:

    From the PACVR book, here are some quick concepts:

    1. Power to produce cavitation is inversely proportional to kHz, so less power for 40kHz and more for 120kHz.
    2. The cavitation bubble size is inversely proportional to kHz, so larger bubble for 40kHz and smaller for 120kHz.
    3. Cavitation intensity is inversely proportional to kHz, so less intensity for 120kHz (small bubble but more of them) than 40kHz (larger bubble but less of them), and cavitation intensity is proportional to power into the tank up a point beyond which no additional cavitation intensity occurs.
    4. Particle adhesion increases exponentially as the particle size decreases.
    5. High density fluids like water provide excellent cavitation because water is 'stiff' and it can produce high cavitation intensity.

    And all this is still subject to boundary layer, and the thickness of the boundary layer is inversely proportional to the kHz; so 120kHz has a thinner boundary layer than 40kHz and you need to penetrate the boundary layer to clean the small stuff. And this is where a surfactant that reduces the surface tension of the water, but does not change its density has benefit.

    This post provides further details with some pretty cool (to engineers & scientists) videos of the cavitation process which is anything but simple Cavitation and Ultrasonic Distinctions . In use, it's easy to summarize it as cavitation which it is, especially since you really cannot see it. But the details are far more complex; and getting good results can be a challenge.

    Devil is in those details.
     
    madrac likes this.
  13. racer59

    racer59 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Bonita, CA
    I’m clearly under informed on this. I’ll take the L.

    What I do know is the Klaudio works very well and only uses distilled water. I wonder why they wouldn’t recommend using solutions.
     
    Greenmonster2420 likes this.
  14. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    The KLAudio is a very powerful unit. Its 40kHz and 2.5L but 200W. Compare that with the cheap $200 40kHz, 6L and 160W, and the KLAudio has the transducers pointed right at the record. For the KLAudio, if the record was to stop rotating, it probably has enough power to erode/eat the record. Additionally, the KLAudio has a continuous pump fill/drain/filtration system, and many surfactants can foam, and the foam can cause problems with the pump. Furthermore, KLAudio has had problems with its water level sensors (auto fill & drain), and depending on the chemistry it cause some issues. So, I can see why KLAudio say distilled water and I believe their latest unit LP200T says to use bottled water - manual_kd-cln-lp200t_d100eng.pdf (klaudio.com) for better performance of the level sensors (bottled water has some ionic impurities), although many people appear to continue to use distilled water.
     
  15. Classicrock

    Classicrock Senior Member

    Location:
    South West, UK.
    Dingly Dell pressings are not that great. Charisma had issues in the early 70s. Fog On The Tyne is a better pressing though there is still some surface noise.
     
  16. Classicrock

    Classicrock Senior Member

    Location:
    South West, UK.
    KLAudio are outrageously expensive. Mike E of TheInGoove has them but he has modified them with additional filtration tanks.
     
  17. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    So maybe 2 or so weeks ago I noticed my water tank developed a little micro crack. You could not feel it on the inside or outside, so it was completely internal and did not leak. However, I expressed concern to degritter about it possibly worsening and they quickly sent a replacement which arrived today. The new one looks a little different - a smokier matte like gray vs the somewhat more transparent of my old one. I also noticed my old one was starting to “deform” (too strong a word but closest I can find” and was actually pretty bowed out, my new one is perfectly flat. Finally the new one looked thicker, and i thought maybe eyes were deceiving me so I measured with digital calipers and it appears to be around 0.1-0.2mm thicker throughout.
     
    JamsOnly likes this.
  18. VinBob

    VinBob Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Jersey, USA
    Yes, I had issues with my water tanks where they would deform at the base and cause issues with the water loading cycle, to which the unit would then drain and ask me to add water, when there was plenty of water available. Degritter have resolved this as their tanks are now made by another company for them so any tanks in 2023 should be a lot better and should last longer. Of course, they replaced my faulty tanks with no questions - truly excellent customer service from this company...
     
    Fractured, madrac and recstar24 like this.
  19. recstar24

    recstar24 Senior Member

    Location:
    Glen Ellyn, IL
    agreed! In my scenario the tank was still working fine and functional, but I give credit to degritter for understanding my future concern and went ahead and just took care of me now rather than later
     
  20. AnalogJ

    AnalogJ Hearing In Stereo Since 1959

    Location:
    Salem, MA

    Derisive laughter. That will win lots of friends, won't it??
     
  21. racer59

    racer59 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Bonita, CA
    The good new is that it wasn't meant as derisive and it would appear Greenmonster2420 didn't take it as such. He and I have had friendly exchanges before in assorted jazz threads. Nothing to get excited about.
     
  22. AnalogJ

    AnalogJ Hearing In Stereo Since 1959

    Location:
    Salem, MA
    I'm skeptical, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But when you make an assertion that it makes no sense, it could be taken that you don't understand it, or it could be taken that his statement is nonsensical. You were asserting that factually an ultrasonic cleaner needs no surfactant or detergent. Degritter espouses a user uses it, and HumminGuru now not only sells one of their own, but has endorsed Groove Washer's G-Sonic concentrate fluid. For you to come back and respond with "That makes no sense", I took it as you asserting that using such an additive was nonsensical, it didn't make sense.

    But if this was merely a private joke between you and @Greenmonster2420, fine.
     
  23. racer59

    racer59 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Bonita, CA
    This isn't any type of private joke.

    You might be taking this a little too seriously. If you note, I responded to him that I was wrong and that was that. What I don't get is why you are making a big deal out of it.
     
  24. AnalogJ

    AnalogJ Hearing In Stereo Since 1959

    Location:
    Salem, MA
    Sorry, I didn't see your apology. I could only react to what I see, and I saw the "LOL. That doesn't make sense."

    Carry on. :righton:
     
  25. No harm no foul as I see it. I don’t shy away from discussion and debate on this forum - none of it is personal to me. I am here to learn and celebrate the hobby and the music. Sometimes I can shed light, other times I get schooled. It’s all good in my book :righton:
     
    5-String, VinBob, recstar24 and 3 others like this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine