Din, When you say the Degritter has a slight veil, do you mean only relative to a cleaning with the Kirsmuss? Or do you mean if you take a record and clean it with the Degritter, you perceive a slight veil, softening? (E.g. have you tried the Degritter on new records?). Also, have you tried the Degritter with only water, no surfactant?
fascinating. I wonder if the ultimate is to have 2 degritters, or there is that new kickstarter that is quite cheap - perhaps that could be used as a rinse tank. I truly can't be bothered to switch tanks back and forth
Interesting. So, with repeated cleaning the anionic is removed and the white paste disappears? Indeed. It was following Paul's lead that I started using TergiKleen. Correct. I didn't want to add a manual stage to the Degritter, particularly one that seems to risk spraying fluid onto labels, so the Tergikleen went in the tank. I may have to try Paul's method if hand drying doesn't solve the problem. And, yes, I note the irony of that statement. Any concerns over IPA flash points? You have successfully put me off using IPA
I second this question. I reported earlier that I get a white residue on my stylus after the Degritter with 1 1/2 ml cleaning solution per tank. I'm getting more and more convinced that this is cleaner residue since I saw where a drop of the cleaner had dried white. Reducing the concentration of cleaner should help proportionally but something that doesn't leave residue would be nice. After my LPs are cleaned once with the Degritter, maybe any subsequent cleaning should be done with DW only?
The veil is with reference to the uncleaned record. The Kirsmuss is able to remove that veil. I have used the Degritter in the past with just water, but not in relation to this round of testing. We know surfactant is needed for the ultrasonic bubbles to penetrate the grooves. Looking at click removal analysis, the Degritter is consistently removing more clicks, so it seems to be the better cleaner. Now I need to find a way to prevent the veil from appearing and then the contest is over.
Has anyone reached out to Degritter to see if they have a solution? They really ought to be in the thick of this.
Since I don't have more than one cleaner to compare, I can only say that the change from before to after the Degritter is still well worth while.
Degritter is designed for that anyway, most of large debris are getting stuck in filter anyway. I change water pretty much every 30-50 records, and I'm rinsing tank as well. I'm not sure i see a problem here.
I get that too, I had a e few new records, actually new that were improved from several degritter cleaning cycles.
Yes 2.5% IPA has a flashpoint of 65C (150F) which much higher than you would ever heat your UT tank, and it has no explosion hazard. How much does 2.5% IPA help the cleaning - who knows; there may be some synergistic effect with the ILFOTOL non-ionic surfactant (or any other). The IPA is not going to change the foaming of the ILFOTOL or any other water soluble non-ionic surfactant. But if you degas before adding the cleaner you should minimize foaming. TIMA and others using ILFOTOL with pumped/filtered system with likely higher flowrate are not reporting any significant foam.
I know. I know. I'm being paranoid. I just like the idea of keeping the water in the Degritter as clean as possible for as long as possible to give it the best chance to do it's job and also to not leave residues - which now seems to be the focus of this discussion...
I'm near 300 cleans on Heavy Cycle and suddenly the water isn't getting warm which makes me thing the ultrasonic generators aren't working. No error codes. Everything cycles normally. I noticed that for the first time a "cleaned" LP had a couple drops of water on the rim where it contacted the bottom rollers. Now I think this was because the water was staying cold (20C). So, that sucks!
Ok, so you don't find simply using the Degritter to clean a record softens transients or loses any top end sparkle, vs the uncleaned record. Correct?
If you run 2-3 cycles and inspect the tank the water should be very warm. If not a call to customer service is in order.
I agree! Yeah, I can do only about 3 heavy cycles in quick succession (or maybe 5 medium) before the water gets too warm to clean without it adding cooling time during the cleaning cycle.
Exactly. The temperature readouts are consistently 20C and the water stays cool after several cycles. I contacted the vendor and he is contacting Degritter to see if they have a solution. If not he will send me another unit and take mine back. I don't know how these are wired but I'm wondering that since both ultrasonic emitters went out together, if there could be an internal fuse.
Very much so. I got a call from my vendor, Jeff Harris at Reference Analog and he said the guys at Degritter think it's just a premature failure and I'll send the unit to them once they send me a shipping label. In the mean time, Jeff is sending me a replacement tomorrow. That is some of the best CS I've ever seen! I talked with Jeff about the cleaner residue and some of the experiences being reported on this thread. He thinks that some kind of surfactant is necessary and he thinks the Degritter solution has some other things in it in addition to surfactant. I happen to have a bottle of Kodak Photo-Flo which I used to use with distilled water with my Discwasher pad. I think this is only surfactant and might make a "cleaner" additive. Does anyone have experience with Photo-Flo and any idea how much to use in a tank? I could try 1 to 2 ml and see if the water "sheets" on the vinyl.
Kodak Photo-Flo is a combination of water, propylene-glycol and non-ionic surfactant. The propylene glycol is at 25-30% and at that concentration is a biocide, and it loves water so it is often used in humidors, and loving water it can act as a weak antistatic. But it you dilute to 1% or less it promotes bacteria growth; and as a solvent is pretty weak. The non-ionic surfactant that is used has a low cloud point which makes it not the best for a heated application, and overall I would not recommend Kodak Photo-Flo for a heated ultrasonic tank - it was never designed for that application. In the US (unlike the UK) you can buy concentrated Tergitol 15-S-9 Tergitol 15-S-3 and 15-S-9 Surfactant | TALAS (talasonline.com). This is a pure non-ionic surfactant with a cloud point higher than the UT tank temperature and is the improved replacement of Triton X100. For final clean with an ultrasonic tank to be used only as a wetting solution with no post rinse - you only need 0.01% (100 ppm). For the 1400 mL Degritter tank, you would only need (0.0001)(1400 mL) = 0.14 mL, so no kidding with 15-20 drops = 1 mL, you would add 3 to 4 drops of Tergitol 15-S-9 to the tank to get a full-on wetting solution; it will drop the surface tension from 72 dynes/cm to 30 dynes/cm. But, even this 'tiny' amount can cause foam - so make sure you first degas the tank before adding. I have advised a number of people over at the VPI Forum on use of Tergitol 15-S-9 and so far all have been successful. Because the concentration is very low, if you extend bath life, keep an eye on how well the fluid 'wets' the record, and add a drop or 2 to replenish. Otherwise, if you want, to this you could add up to 2.5% IPA - it will not alter the foaming and not sure of the benefit, but it 'may' be of some benefit.
Incorrect. I'm currently losing top end sparkle vs the uncleaned record. Just drinking morning coffee and plan to explore the residue issue today.
What I’m finding interesting is that both the Degritter users and the Kirmuss users are experiencing a white paste. This despite completely different liquids and processes. Kirmuss thinks that the white paste is the crud that has been released from the record, presumably mold release compound or residue from prior cleaning fluids. The prior fluids argument part goes out the window when the white paste appears on brand new records after two cycles on the kirmuss. That white paste is more than an annoyance - it can totally cake up on your stylus. So much so that you have to say to yourself, are you better off not opening up that can of worms? Once opened, you have to get all of that paste out. I think the wet cleaning step (traditional wet clean with quality brush) helps remove this paste better than subsequent ultrasonic cleanings. At least it has in my experiences. That said, I’d really like to know what that paste is.
