It doesn't. I've tried this before, running a record through the Degritter multiple times. Once is enough.
No longer have a VPI, but I do have a Nessie vacuum cleaner. My normal routine is vacuum first and then Degritter. I use the vacuum to remove large debris I don't want going into the Degritter.
So, with the two samples I posted I will say that I clearly preferred the Kirmuss. It has a clarity and ease missing on the Degritter. Thinking about this since, I have noticed a certain softness, a certain lack of sparkle, to my sound that wasn't there until recently, which has caused my to scratch my head. The only thing I've changed is adding TergiKleen to my Degritter and I'm now thinking a residue is left on the record, which the Kirmuss method removed. So, today, I'll revert to the original Degritter fluid and try the test again. I did a click removal count in iZotope RX - the uncleaned file had 8998 clicks - the Degritter took that down to 5180 and the Kirsmuss 5252, essentially no better, but showing a large improvement over the uncleaned.
I'll dig through my lot purchases to see if I can find anything grimy looking... generally the records I clean are VG+ or better. Can you define the improvements you hear with multiple cleans?
Specific pops/skips removed with additional cleaning. Overall SQ improvement on albums that have been noisy for years. That type of thing.
Round 2 starts, to see if I can confirm Tergi residue in the Degritter and then resolve it. Starting with Kirsmuss. Next observation: an *insane* amount of static generated on this new record after polishing. A quick test I do is to wave my bare forearm over the record - you can feel the static in your arm hairs. The field was huge. Was a great test for the Furutech Destat which very effectively removed the static, but I had to brush the record to remove attracted dust. Not good. Coming out of the Degritter there was no static whatsoever and clean into the sleeve.
OK, I'm ditching TergiKleen. There's a definite loss of clarity, compared to the stock Degritter fluid, transients are ever so slightly muted and the noise floor is slightly higher, making the soundstage less open and the overall sound softer. Which is what I've been hearing overall recently with my newer records. Given that the record had been cleaned with the Kirsmuss and now sounds slightly worse, it must be TergiKleen residue? On this brand new album track, the click reduction is: uncleaned - 684 clicks (note that this is extreme software detection; I don't hear anything like that listening live) First clean with Kirsmuss - 472 Next with Degritter/TergiKleen - 406 Then Degritter/Degritter fluid - 374 I'm now going to do one final clean of this new record with the Kirsmuss again, to see if any Degritter fluid residue is present and to compare sound quality with the Degritter/Degritter fluid clean, to decide my preference, and then move onto another old uncleaned record.
Oh, dear. Once again, I prefer the Kirsmuss cleaned version. Opens the soundstage and adds clarity to transients, bringing things more to life. The Degritter's own fluid get's a very close 2nd. But the best of all so far is Degritter, followed by Kirsmuss. Onto the third record. Starting to wish I hadn't gone down this particular rabbit hole!
Again, thanks for your effort to do all these comparisons! If you could clarify this for me. You say that you prefer the Kirmuss (opens the soundstage, clarity, etc) but then you say that the best of all so far is the Degritter?
Track four - Kirsmuss wins again. Once again, opens up soundstage and brings clarity to transients. That's enough for now. Need to do some more head scratching.
No, the Kirsmuss seems to bring more out the record - the Degritter has a very slight veil in comparison. The Kirsmuss is a pain to use, whereas the Degritter is a joy. But, I cannot ignore my ears... Kirsmuss currently winning on sound quality... I'm thinking it must be residue left by the Degritter, and so will look at this to see if I can get better results. I may try hand drying/polishing, as per Kirsmuss...
Welcome to the detergent-residue-sensitive club. This is the reason I clean my vinyl with uncut alcohol. The difference is not subtle at all. (BUT CAREFUL PUTTING ALCOHOL in ultrasonic cleaners.) We have a "connection," I used to supply/maintain the IMDb servers in the U.S. back around 95 to 2000. You need to find an additive to these baths that leaves no audible residue.
@r.Din Thanks for these comparisons to the Kirmuss! Very helpful. Are you using the prescribed Kirmuss process of using distilled water and alcohol, multiple cycles with the Kirmuss spray applied with a brush between every cycle until the white paste disappears? I’ve tried that approach, having watched him demonstrate it personally at the CAF a couple of years ago. The paste bothered me, and I’m still not clear if that paste was from the cleaning spray or from the record itself as Kirmuss suggests it is. I will say that with one record, I repeated the process until the paste was gone. Even with the water still in the safe range, the many cycles dulled the sound (the lack of sparkle you suggested was a good description) of the record. I can only surmise that the repeated cleanings softened the grooves ever so slightly, thus deadening the sound a bit. Since then I’ve only done a couple of cycles in the Kirmuss followed by a rinse on my trusty old Nitty Gritty. That gave me the best noise floor in my comparisons compared with only Kirmuss. But the process is a royal pain. I just received a new used purchase in the mail yesterday that I would love to just drop into a Degritter and quickly clean before playing. The thought of filling up the Kirmuss and going through 15 minutes of work to play this record was too much, so I didn’t spin it yet. That is where I see the Degritter as being maybe the right option for me. Then again, if I gave it a quick wet clean with the Nitty Gritty, that would take less than 5 minutes and would probably yield comparable results. Does a $2900 ultra sonic machine make a big difference from a traditional wet machine?
For a wickedly grimy copy of Earth, Wind and Fire's "I Am" that has been on my shelf for a hundred years (might have been an old pilfered from my sister's collection when I was young), I decided to do a run through the SpinClean first, before the degritter. That seems to be a fairly good use of the SC. (Was thinking of ditching it after getting the DG, but now I know I'll hang onto it for sure.)
If you compare this process to cleaning cars (and there is a whole science to that among fanatics as well), there is a lot debate surrounding if it is better to remove water through blowing air, or using quality towels. I have found that when you use air, no matter how well filtered it may be, the paint is not quite as smooth as if you used a quality cloth. No matter what, some particles are being blown back onto the surface and clinging to it. I’m concerned the Degritter would cause this effect as well. I think the vacuum approach is probably better, although Kirnuss stated that even this causes a similar effect to blown air (some kind of Venturi effect). My own results show that his drying method caused both more static and more noise. The vacuum after a clean water rinse was most effective for me so far.
Interesting - I detail my car and typically dry with towels. I do have a Master Blaster as well but it tends to end up just pushing water about. Perhaps I should try it on my vinyl! I'm going to try hand drying from Degritter to see if I can prevent the residue laying down.
I am. I have the same concerns... It looks to me that it's the process of swirling the surfactant that causes the whiteness, more than anything. I'm still hoping to see an obvious extreme example of "toothpaste" in order to get some idea of what to look for. Thanks. Something to be aware of. The rinse is perhaps removing any residue left? Agreed. The Kirsmuss is a novelty for me at the moment and I'm enjoying it, but when I want to clean lots of records it's going to be very cumbersome. So, I hope I can figure out how to get same results with the Degritter. In my experience, yes.
I normally use alcohol in my vacuum cleaner as a first pass prior to the Degritter. But then, of course, the Degritter seems to be laying down residue after that. Hey! That feels like another lifetime ago. But, yeah, they were really fun times!! Indeed. Next test is to towel dry the record out of the Degritter to see if that mops it up...
I've sometimes run the Degritter with just distilled water and that seems to do as good a job as with a surfactant. Have you tried that comparison (I am losing track)?
The 'toothpaste' that the Kirmuss produces could be a reaction between the anti-static (which likely contains a cationic surfactant) and any residual anionic surfactant (in every dish detergent) residue. Cationic and anionic surfactants are not generally compatible - they form a white paste type residue. Non-iomic and anionic surfactants are compatible - they easily dissolve within each other. The filter in the Degritter is marginal at best - if Degritter says its 30 ppi = 30 pores per inch; its not filtering the very fine particulate released from record to the water. But the Kirmuss unit has no filter so this should have no bearing. For the air drying - do you know how clean are the Degritter air filters? However, the air filters should only impart particulate which would affect the ticks but not the dulling of the sound. What is curious with your results is that they appear almost opposite of what Paul Rigby has reported. But how you are using the Tergikleen is different. Paul just sprays it on and runs the process. But, you added it to the tank which increases the overall concentration, and residue from the non-soluble 15-S-3 cannot be dismissed, and we do not know what is in the Degritter solution. So coming full circle - and back to Ilford Ilfotol. TIMA tima's DIY RCM | What's Best Audio and Video Forum. The Best High End Audio Forum on the planet! (whatsbestforum.com) has had good success with a cleaning solution of 312 ml 99.9% pure IPA & 16 ml Ilford Ilfotol to 12.75 liters distilled water, with no post rinse. The active solution is about 65.2 mg/L, and if you let 2-mL dry = 0.125 mg which is really insignificant. Just some thoughts.
