According to what many have said here, including @Bill Hart , is that if a record is really dirty you will need some agitation / vacuum cleaning in addition to the US. The US alone does not get out a lot of surface stuff. BTW... I meant to mention in the video above that to me one HUGE thing about the iSonic tank that Kirmuss uses is that for DIY the bloody thing is 13" long! All of the generic, metal tanks you see on Amazon are only usually 11.8" long, just BARELY fitting the records. What is nice about using this tank above is that there is plenty of room for the records, and also since the tank is quite a bit longer, the curves at the ends are more gradual, so you have a slightly wider field to place the albums too. With the generic tank that died on me, I was always fussing to get the records to sit just right. Not this one!
If you have anything that is extremely dirty, I would suggest precleaning the record, mostly on the surface. Ultrasonic cleaning is an excellent way to get and grit, oils and foreign matter dislodged from within the grooves. There is no compelling reason to use anyone's exotic cleaning fluid. Buy yourself a gallon on Triton X-100 and make a 10% stock solution to keep handy. Dilute this to a final concentration of between 0.1 and 0.5 percent in distilled water. Add some isopropyl alcohol if you wish, it is an excellent solvent.
I still hang on to my Okki Nokki and Audio Intelligent solutions, just in case I do need to presoak/preclean badly soiled used records before using my Kirmuss and/or Audio Desk. Sometimes records just have ultrasonic-resistant record boogers.
New with the Kirmuss. While cleaning a couple of records yesterday (both 80s very thin type), I noticed that the records were deforming. The heat sensor was high at this point, but not yet at the max position (I measured the water just under the surface at 37C (99F)). I removed the records and they rapidly returned to shape as they cooled. Anybody else seen this? I guess I will need to keep an eye on these types of records during cleaning...
When you compare US record cleaners (or, for that matter, any record cleaner), you need to separate the inherent mechanical capabilities of each unit from the associated process and chemical recommendations. Most ultrasonic systems have similar transducers generating the cavitation bubbles. Many customized systems actually start with the same off-the-shelf components. The units differ in their degree of automation, in what (if any) ancillary processes they incorporate (like drying), and in the way they handle records (size, quantity, etc.). There is a fairly narrow range of excitation frequencies, with none (hopefully) operating below 25 kHz and none operating above ~ 100 kHz. It is true that higher frequencies can be gentler. But gentler can mean longer cleaning cycles, more heat exposure, and in some cases, failure to completely clean. Each cleaner typically comes with process and bath chemistry recommendations. Some of the processes are implicit (a process that is fully automated and you just push a button). Others are simply guidelines for manual operations (i.e. don't let the bath temp get above 50 C). Many of the bath recommendations are designed to provide the company with a highly profitable revenue stream after the initial sale. These can include components (like microfiber brushes, filters, and the like) or some secret sauce bath additive that is produced for pennies and is sold at $20, $50 or even $100 per bottle. The trick with cleaning solutions is to convince the user that the product is really special while using chemicals that are so common and "safe" that they can be shipped through the mail without special warnings, packaging or extra cost. Some recommendations are designed simply to shield against possible product issues at the expense of optimizing record cleaning. And some recommendations are all marketing and PR, to differentiate a product from the competition. Put another way, I can use most any bath chemistry and process conditions with most any other cleaner. I may get different results than with the "recommended" options, and those results may be worse. But they also may be better.
I've seen this happen too. Vinyl records will start deform at temperatures beyond human body temp. Safer to use cold water.
I have not read all of the pages of this thread, but is there someone here using the Kirmuss Ultrasonic machine with just distilled water and with great results?
Thanks for the confirmation. Even starting with cold water, it doesn’t take long for the Kirmuss to heat it up. Further observations show that I need to start paying attention when I hit the second temp light. Best practice will be to wash thin vinyl first.
My temp indicator indicated the machine was getting too warm. The final red segment was lit, but wasn't flashing. This was only after two degassing cycles an two wash cycles. I took the lid off and waited 15 minutes. The last red segment turned off after about 10 minutes, but after 15 minutes the first red segment was still lit. So I waited another 5 minutes. Then another 5, and the first red segment never turned off. So out of curiosity I got my digital thermometer and put it into the water. It just read "L", indicating it was too low to get a reading. I stuck my finger into the bath and the water was cold! So obviously my them gauge is not working. I'm OK with using a thermometer to check the temp after each record. How hot is too hot?
By a lot of the research that has been done and mentioned here, the 'safe' range generally is around 30-35 degrees Celsius. Some don't use heat at all (although research seems to indicate better cleaning with heat) and some push it higher than that. My tank, which is the exact same iSonic tank that Kirmuss uses except with his modifications of course. I also make sure to use a TDS meter to check the temperature too. The heat preset on the tank says 104 F, which would be what I would think the extreme upper range to use (40 degrees Celsius) But, many have said to be on the safe side to keep it under 40, which I do. Even with that lowest setting, it never gets to 40. The heater shuts off at about what my TDS meter shows to be around 33.5 or so, which is fine. I hope that helps.
Thanks, that's very helpful! My water never got warm enough to get anything but a "L" indication on my thermometer, so I guess I'm OK. I did take a 10 minute break every 35 minutes like it says in the manual. The temp gauge on the cleaner had all segments lit just about all the time, but the last segment never flashed.
Well, not to oversimplify (although that is what I do best) basically if you feel the water and it feels like mildly warm bathwater, that should be about right. Warm, but not aggressive (kind of like how I like my women...)
OK, right now I feel a bit dimwitted. Only while I was breaking the machine down at the end of my first cleaning session did I notice that my machine came with the top assembly that has 3 12" slots! I could have been cleaning 3 at a time! I had no idea! I ordered this machine from Elusive Disc, and their website makes no mention of the machine coming with that assembly. Not that I'm complaining mind you. Tomorrow's cleaning session will be more efficient...
I am seriously considering a Kirmuss machine as my next RCM. I currently use a Record Doctor V and would certainly keep it around to supplement/compliment the Kirmuss. Most of the negativity I see around the Kirmuss is due to the intensive process, which I am OK with if it produces truly exceptional results. Do the owners in this thread believe it lives up to the marketing hype? Have you had records you could not get clean with other systems drastically improve? I am looking to purchase a new RCM in the next couple months, but my #1 priority is not ease, looks, etc. Just which will do the absolute best job of cleaning the records.
I am really convinced that this is the best record cleaning system that I've ever used. The results I've achieved have been very satisfactory for me, well beyond my expectations. And it's an especially good buy when you consider that it's a lot less expensive than the systems it's competing against.
From a post Mr. Kirmuss made on this thread earlier: 5) Record Spacing: using the 19 cameras underwater, critical the spacing of records led to our design as to washing only 4 records. In our tank of 6 liters, we cannot space records closer, we would like to, but the law of physics limits us. Microbubbles in a bath generated by the ultrasonic rise from the bottom, and as they rise, they explode. If the records are on a skewer and spaced by 1/2" as we see in many systems, these bubbles prematurely explode and never rise to clean the 2/3 of the record or so closest to the wax mark. Many think they had good results as "one hears the difference"... but in study, most of the unwanted crackles and pops come from the first few tracks closest to where one handles the record. This a false sense of cleaning accomplished. Lots of science and engineering study
Yep, that's about right, especially using his proprietary lid with its preset positions. 1/2" is indeed too close. With the way I have them spaced across the open tank, with no prefabricated lid to restrict the room, the records are at least 1" apart. It looks like with the way I have it set up with this motor and where it is placed, about 7 records across the almost 10" width is just about right. This is an excellent tank too, BTW. Like I had mentioned above, what I really like about it, especially for DIY'ers, is that it is 13" long which gives you plenty of room for the records as opposed to the mass produced generic ones, even the 10L tanks, which only BARELY fit the records at 11.8" I'm REALLY liking this iSonic tank!
Any one have any idea how long Elusive Disc has had the "limited time" sale for the Kirmuss package? Seems like quite a good deal and I really like supporting Elusive. I wanted to wait another month or so to buy this, but I also don't want to miss out on the deal.
