Rushton's DIY approach to ultrasonic record cleaning published by Positive Feedback

@astro58go

I, for one, have found Rushton's postings on this very useful, and his very detailed and thorough instructions on the process spurred me on to set up an ultrasonic system of my own.  I'm very appreciative of his efforts and his generosity and time spent sharing this with the community.  I simply commented (and hopefully contributed a little) in another forum where he also posted, as it's a forum I post on more frequently.

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/114/1140139.html

I do agree with your general comments on the sharing of info though.  Even in the forum linked above, there's not a lot of activity on this subject.  Probably due mostly to the general apathy you point to, but I think on this particular topic there's a number of people that just don't care about cleaning their LP's.  I've known 3 different guys with expensive and meticulously set up analog front ends that never did anything beyond running a carbon fiber brush over the LP surface before each play.  My comments to them about the benefits of wet cleaning/vacuuming (before US cleaning ever surfaced) did nothing to change their minds.  To each their own.

@rushton

Glad I could contribute just a fraction of a percent to your body of work. :) 

@terry9

Thanks for that info.  1 and 2 were an unknown to me, so appreciate the information.  I'm a bit leery with the 50c temperature.  Seems a bit on the high side?  I'm assuming you've run at that temp without damage or warping?  I'm running 15 minute cycles myself...10 minutes didn't work as well, which I chalked up to a less powerful machine on my end than what Rushton is using.  I haven't noticed any ill effects from that length of time, and it seems to do the best job of cleaning with my tank.  Agreed for sure on the rinsing, although I'm using distilled for a first rinse/vacuum, followed by a pure water ** and 5% ethanol second rinse/vacuum, and finally a straight pure water rinse/vacuum.  Probably a bit on the overkill side, but I tend to be anal about a lot of things. :)

**The "pure" water I get from one of my suppliers at work for $6 a gallon....it's deionized water that's UV sterilized and filtered at .05 microns.  Not quite reagent grade, but close enough for me. 

@moonglum

Moon, one little experience to relate from my end. One of my favorite "go to" pieces (for when the uninitiated come over to visit, look at all the tubes glowing, and invariably ask why I don't get something "new") is Roberta Flack's "First Time Ever I saw Your Face."  Incredibly good recording, very quiet parts that go to very loud parts, and one of those "she's in the room" kind of reproductions.  I have 3 copies -- one bought new, and 2 bought at used record stores.  Both the used copies were very noisy -- pops, clicks, pow's, and a lot of surface noise, and all that noise destroys the whole emotional grip of the piece.  No distortion, so I figured it was mostly crud and not groove damage.  But after several cleanings of both on the VPI 16.5 including a couple rounds of enzyme, the noise was significantly reduced but still intrusive.  So I bought the new one (paying a lot more than I wanted to) hoping to get a nice quiet copy.  Well, the new one was absent most of the pops and clicks except for the lead in area, but there was background hiss that was worse than either of the used copies.  Fast forward to the US setup, and amazingly the worst of the used copies is now the quietest and best sounding.  The hiss is greatly reduced on the new copy, but still audible during the quiet parts and the clicks at the lead-in are better but still there.  The used copy that cleaned up the best has one noticeable click towards the end of the song, but is otherwise completely quiet -- no hiss, no pops/clicks other than that one. Took me a couple tries to get it that way, but part of it was just learning the US process and figuring out what works best with my tank and cleaning formula (which is a blatant copy of Rushton's).  And reducing or eliminating noise is only one of the positives the US brings to the table.  There's more harmonic information, low level detail that in some cases was inaudible before, more pristine high treble notes, etc.  More music, quite simply.  I'm sold on the US, and as Rushton and Terry both point out it won't redeem a screwed up record, but it can work a miracle on some that you thought were screwed up.  No real way of knowing which is which until you clean one with the US process and listen to the result.

@ochremoon

I'm using a 40kHz machine and getting very good results.  But in line with Terry's comments, I'm doing 2 records at a time at most, and more often just 1 even though the Vinyl Stack will hold 3 and there's room in the tank for 3.  As well, I'm doing a 15 minute cycle instead of the more commonly noted 10 minutes, as I feel I get better results that way....with my tank. 

However, if I had to do it all over again, I would probably buy a better tank at the outset.  Being cheap gets you, well, cheap.  :)  The $120, 6 liter tank I have now is working and providing good results, but I don't think it will last long due to the cheap construction, and it takes forever to heat up from room temperature into the mid-30C range (like 30 minutes).  That in itself is pretty aggravating, and as has been mentioned many times here, the warmer temperature is a critical element of the process.

@ochremoon

Let us know how it goes if you decide to jump into it.  I think you'll be quite pleased with the results if you do.  And since you already have a vacuum machine, I highly recommend you use it to do a couple rinse/vacuum steps after the US cycle.  If the LP is just allowed to air dry, there will be residue of the cleaning solution left on the record. The rinse/vacuum helps remove that and get the LP in as pristine a condition as possible.

@cedar

Thanks for sharing your experience! 

I've looked at the Vibrato tanks, and while much more expensive than the generic 40kHz machines like mine, they look to be designed and constructed at a significantly higher level.  And for an 80kHz machine, $675 is actually a very reasonable price based on other machines at that frequency.  Have you used the Vibrato for the whole 2 years since you started, and if so, how is it holding up?  Any issues or problems with it?

http://vibratollc.com/new-products.html

Thanks,
Bill

I'm using the elegant and highly engineered dustcover from my Nottingham 'table, which consists of a grooveless LP with a Nott' logo on it  :)  Place that on the VPI platter with the wet side of the just cleaned record on it, and remove it when I flip the LP over.  One swipe with a cloth dries it off and it's ready for the next one.  And when I'm done cleaning, it goes back on the Nottingham. The extra thickness doesn't seem to hinder the vacuum action on the VPI.

@sbank

A submersible pump may not be the best option, as you'll constantly be putting it in the tank and pulling it out which will get rather messy and probably become a hassle.  Just my opinion, but the pump type that Rushton recommended above would be a better route, as you can plumb it outside the tank and let it sit, just turning it on between cleaning cycles when you want to filter the solution.  I purchased the (similar) pump below, and it works perfectly -- plenty of power to get nice flow through the 1-micron filter. It's only been in use for around a month, so hard to predict how long it will last but so far no signs of any trouble.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01G305PK0/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Agreed.  Pretty clever, Spencer!  If I didn't have a 16.5, I'd be blatantly copying your system for myself. :)