Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning

On Kirmuss - he seems to go pretty much against all the usual US considerations. Perhaps he is right, I’m not judging. But its seems that in semiconductor industry, where they are most preoccupied with damage, they go not for 80kHz but for 800kHz to eliminate cavitation altogether and rely on acoustical streaming as the main cleaning mechanism. If I’m to buy another tank, I think I’d give 80khz a try, given that I pre-clean with vac anyway so no need for the stronger cavitation power.

@bdp24 

On the DIY thread there is a link to Kirmuss at Axpona by Fremer. Most instructive on several counts.

BTW, those using Tergitol - what are your rinsing procedures? After  my PhotoFlo disaster I'm quite obsessed with rinsing: I first use high purity water. Distribute it with a rinse brush, rotate 3x with the brush on in one direction then 3x in the other, then vacuum. As the last step, I use 3% ethanol with the same 3x + 3x rotation. Perhaps so many revolutions (6 altogether per liquid) are a waste of time?

terry9  The Kirmuss interview of his US is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKT5fvJ_otk starting at 45:25  Maybe the larger cavitation bubbles are necessary for 78s as is the lower temperature and greater distance between discs mentioned to be further apart for lower frequency agitation?  I have 7,000 78s and intend to someday clean them, record them through the SimplyVinyl Sugarcube declicker machine.  This would be ideal for a two-step noise reduction, US cleaning and then declicking.  

I use running water, twice filtered down to 1 micron, mounted on a special order high speed Vinyl Stack. Then thrice filtered running water, filtered down to 0.5 microns. Then a bath in distilled water. It takes 50 or 75 records to show any hint of detergent contamination, which is when I change it (use the discarded rinse for cleaning).

This would not work, except that my tap water is almost indistinguishable from distilled.