2. analog
  3. 168889-145141

Record Cleaning Machines

Has anyone out there done an A/B comparison of the cleaning results or efficacy using the Degritter ultra sonic record cleaning machine which operates at 120 kHz/300 watts and an ultrasonic cleaner that operates at 40 kHz/300 or 380 watts (e.g. Audio Desk; CleanerVinyl; the Kirmuss machine; etc.)?  I have a system I put together using CleanerVinyl equipment, a standard 40 kHz ultrasonic tank and a Knosti Disco-Antistat for final rinse.  I clean 3 records at a time and get great results.  Surface noise on well cared for records (only kind I have) is virtually totally eliminated, sound comes from a totally black background and audio performance is noticeably improved in every way.  Even though the Degritter only cleans 1 record at a time, it seems significantly easier to use, more compact and relatively quick, compared to the system I have now.  I'm wondering if the Degritter's 120 kHz is all that much more effective, if at all, in rendering better audio performance than the standard 40 kHz frequency.  I don't mind, at all, spending a little extra time cleaning my records if the audio results using the Degritter are not going to be any different.  I'm not inclined to spend three grand for a little more ease & convenience and to save a few minutes.  However, if I could be assured the Degritter would render better audio performance results, even relatively small improvements, that would be a whole other story.
oldaudiophile
antinn
369 posts
 
@mijostyn,

Tergitol 15-S-9 as shown in Chapter IX, Table VII the CMC is 52 ppm.

WRT to the Degritter - per XIV.7.d Dow™ Tergitol™ 15-S-9 at a solution concentration of about 150 ppm (0.0150%) and 2.5% IPA did not initially produce foam, but after successive cleaning cycles began producing foam. Reducing the Dow™ Tergitol™ 15-S-9 to a concentration of about 80 ppm (0.008%) and 2.5% IPA significantly reduced foaming and still showed excellent wetting.

Also, per XIV.7 Degritter™ UCM: The following summarizes some results of various chemistries with the Degritter™ UCM that were addressed at the Steve Hoffman Forum™ Degritter Users | Steve Hoffman Music Forums. The Degritter™ because of how it pumps-down the tank for drying; pumps-down the reservoir for cleaning; and primes on start-up is sensitive to pump cavitation and producing foam so nonionic surfactants that can foam are used at very low concentrations mostly just for ‘wetting’.

All is in the book.
antinn
369 posts
 
@bigtwin,

+1 Amen.  My thoughts completely.  Once cleaned, the only thing that belongs in the groove is the stylus.  If you are curious I expanded upon this thought here - https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/timas-diy-rcm.26013/post-740686.
oldaudiophile OP
277 posts
 
But, but, but, but...blowing or gently exhaling on a record before play? Wouldn't it be better to use one of those small personal fans, instead? I would think a person exhaling, even gently so, on a record would have the propensity for depositing, sooner or later, fine atomized droplets of saliva, vapor, CO2, O2, Nitrogen and whatever else comes out of one's lungs... no? I understand and respect the zeal to achieve and maintain pristine grooves but blowing on a records seems counterproductive.
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
Right. Do not even so much as breathe near your precious vinyl. This will raise humidity levels unconscionably high, possibly even getting moisture on the vinyl, necessitating another year of slow gradual careful drying. For this reason records must be stored in a cabinet outside the listening room where no people ever enter. There should be a small slot in the wall close to the turntable through which only the selected record is removed WHILE SLOWLY INHALING so as not to risk contaminating with your breath.

The thought of anything less, no I cannot even go there. https://youtu.be/VKcAYMb5uk4?t=8
antinn
369 posts
 
@oldaudiophile,

I use the Orbit HEPA Blower https://photosol.com/products/orbit-hepa-blower/, which has a suction-side HEPA filter and a silicone air-bulb, to blow lint off the stylus. Not enough air flow to remove dust/lint from the record.  However, some people use the Amazon.com : Giottos AA1900 Rocket Air Blaster Large - Black : Camera Cleaning Kits : Electronics to remove dust - its moves more air.  

Otherwise, as I wrote in the book "VI.11.c" I use the Kinetronics™ Tiger anti-static lint-free microfiber cloth Anti-Static Tiger Cloth | kinetronics as a swipe (just lightly touching the record surface) to essentially brush/dust the record to  remove surface lint and particulate without penetrating the groove. Also, the orange color of the cloth allows easy observation of any fibers that may be deposited from the cloth.  The  Kinetronics™ Tiger Cloth can pickup dust/lint but being anti-static it does not tightly hold the dust/lint - so a quick shake (arm reach away from the record) and the dust/particulate is dislodged from the cloth (as verified with UV light).  This keeps the cloth clean for next use.  
More to discover