Relatively low cost + effective in my estimation would be DIY ultrasonic combined with some form of more conventional fluid cleaning using an applicator pad. Plus a pure water rinse.
I’m pretty brand and method agnostic, have owned the ’made for LP’ ultrasonic cleaners like the original Audio Desk and later model KL (both expensive) as well as conventional vacuum record cleaning machines.
I think the US machines do a good job, with minimal effort, on new or pristine records. However, if you collect or buy older pressings, you may also find that a conventional cleaning method, using a fluid like AIVS No. 15, will do what the US cleaning cannot. At least that has been my experience on older, rare pressings that are not easy to find and are costly to replace. (Some of these records are virtually impossible to find in pristine condition at any price, but a lot of times, the distortion, even after an initial cleaning, is not the result of groove damage; it’s just that the contaminants are really glued into the record after 50 years and need more work. That’s where the conventional cleaning comes in, as a complement to the US cleaning, with synergistic effect).
Going DIY on ultrasonic will save you a bundle, and you can get the best feature set-- the ability to use surfactants in the ultrasonic bath, control heat, degas (on some units), alternating frequencies (on some units), the ability to add an external DIY filter to remove contaminants from the bath water.
There are a few less expensive US units now being marketed that are in the lower price range of DIY, but don’t really offer anything better than DIY.
There’s quite a bit written about DIY US on the web. But, in my estimation, not a complete solution for those who buy old records. A good starting point is Rush Paul’s piece, posted here and elsewhere (Positive Feedback?) on DIY US, which extracts the learning from a monster thread on DIY Audio on the subject.
Many people abhor vacuum cleaning, but I find it very effective using a point nozzle type vacuum RCM. Those aren’t cheap, unless you can find a Loricraft or Monks at a good price used that hasn’t been abused. You can get away with a wand type vacuum machine using ’best practices’ to minimize static and cross contamination. Easy, effective and cheap--pick two.
In terms of price, you can buy a very cheap Chinese ultrasonic bath for little money -several hundred dollars- but chances are it will fail at a certain point and in terms of build quality, transducer frequency, may be variable. The spinners can be as cheap as made from scratch for well under a hundred bucks to the Vinyl Stack which I think is around 300 to more elaborate mechanisms. Filtering units should be well under 100 DIY. If you add a vacuum machine, you could go for an inexpensive one that would only set you back a few hundred dollars, e.g. The Record Doctor. Fluids- not terribly expensive, particularly if you are home brewing the surfactant in the US bath. AIVS No. 15 is probably around 30-50 US a bottle but should last you a while. Brushes- MoFi is under 20 dollars. Factor in cost of aftermarket inner sleeves as well. Better ultrasonic machines are suggested, not only for feature set but robustness, though all are likely to have transducer failures at some point.
I’m pretty brand and method agnostic, have owned the ’made for LP’ ultrasonic cleaners like the original Audio Desk and later model KL (both expensive) as well as conventional vacuum record cleaning machines.
I think the US machines do a good job, with minimal effort, on new or pristine records. However, if you collect or buy older pressings, you may also find that a conventional cleaning method, using a fluid like AIVS No. 15, will do what the US cleaning cannot. At least that has been my experience on older, rare pressings that are not easy to find and are costly to replace. (Some of these records are virtually impossible to find in pristine condition at any price, but a lot of times, the distortion, even after an initial cleaning, is not the result of groove damage; it’s just that the contaminants are really glued into the record after 50 years and need more work. That’s where the conventional cleaning comes in, as a complement to the US cleaning, with synergistic effect).
Going DIY on ultrasonic will save you a bundle, and you can get the best feature set-- the ability to use surfactants in the ultrasonic bath, control heat, degas (on some units), alternating frequencies (on some units), the ability to add an external DIY filter to remove contaminants from the bath water.
There are a few less expensive US units now being marketed that are in the lower price range of DIY, but don’t really offer anything better than DIY.
There’s quite a bit written about DIY US on the web. But, in my estimation, not a complete solution for those who buy old records. A good starting point is Rush Paul’s piece, posted here and elsewhere (Positive Feedback?) on DIY US, which extracts the learning from a monster thread on DIY Audio on the subject.
Many people abhor vacuum cleaning, but I find it very effective using a point nozzle type vacuum RCM. Those aren’t cheap, unless you can find a Loricraft or Monks at a good price used that hasn’t been abused. You can get away with a wand type vacuum machine using ’best practices’ to minimize static and cross contamination. Easy, effective and cheap--pick two.
In terms of price, you can buy a very cheap Chinese ultrasonic bath for little money -several hundred dollars- but chances are it will fail at a certain point and in terms of build quality, transducer frequency, may be variable. The spinners can be as cheap as made from scratch for well under a hundred bucks to the Vinyl Stack which I think is around 300 to more elaborate mechanisms. Filtering units should be well under 100 DIY. If you add a vacuum machine, you could go for an inexpensive one that would only set you back a few hundred dollars, e.g. The Record Doctor. Fluids- not terribly expensive, particularly if you are home brewing the surfactant in the US bath. AIVS No. 15 is probably around 30-50 US a bottle but should last you a while. Brushes- MoFi is under 20 dollars. Factor in cost of aftermarket inner sleeves as well. Better ultrasonic machines are suggested, not only for feature set but robustness, though all are likely to have transducer failures at some point.
