Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning

alf, doing a cost comparison between a US system VS replacing your bad records assumes you will then stop buying LPs.  In addition to all the reasons posted here, it sounds like you may continue shopping for records in bargain bins, so a US will soon put you ahead cost wise.

terry9, how could you judge the sonics of a record if it was sealed? ;^)  (Just pulling your chain, I expect you meant previously sealed.)

Sorry slaw, you missed my apparently bad attempt at humor.  My question was how terry could evaluate a record if it was still sealed?  Obviously that was not his intent, but that's the way it read.

On subject, I still utilize a VPI machine, although I intended to set up a US cleaner.  I will say that I too have sometimes noted LPs which appear quite beat up but play cleanly, while I also have some which look "pristine" but do have pops or crackles.  I'm hoping the US will eliminate those.

slaw, no need to apologize.  I thought my little teasing would be obvious to everyone but apparently it was not.

Anyway, not to detract from a serious subject (yes, I'd like to optimize the performance of my records too) but I can't resist a bit of fun from time to time.

stringreen, did you buy all or most of your records new?  I believe that can make a big difference, particularly if one is careful about how they treat/handle their records, which I suspect you may be.

But I've become a believer in US even without yet owning one, simply based upon the overwhelming positive comments I've read on line.

My first record cleaner was a Nitty Gritty but it had the manual record rotation.  I soon grew tired of that and bought a VPI 16.5.  That changed my whole attitude about record cleaning.  Now I plan to get an US device but will keep my 16.5 for rinsing and drying. 

fsonicsmith, "When a reviewer automatically dismisses analogue as a faulty medium or insists upon truthful reproduction of the lowest octave of pipe-organ or double-bass, I know to steer clear."

I share your skepticism with commercial reviewers, while appreciating Dudley.  But I'm confused by your statement quoted above.  The pipe-organ has the potential for a 16 Hz note which a cartridge may not track.  But the double-bass (4-string string bass) low reach is 42 Hz.  Any decent cartridge should reproduce that.

And yes, I prefer analog for sonic enjoyment.

prof, not your doing but it looks like they designed the Degritter filtering system backwards.  It seems the water should be drained from the bottom where released particles would fall, pass through the filter, then be pumped back in at the top.

I'm not an engineer but this doesn't look logical to me.