Thank you!
How cool is it that you could easily upgrade to the Mk II? Here’s to Estonian innovation!
KLaudio or Degritter Mark II
Just curious to know if anyone out there has used both the KLaudio ultrasonic record cleaning machine and the Degritter Mark II (or the original Degritter) and which you thought achieved the best or better results.
I've got a lash-up ultrasonic cleaning system that I've put together which costs significantly less than the original Degritter. The end result I get with my lash-up system is, at least, as effective as the original Degritter but significantly more labor intensive. The Degritter is much more eloquent in this regard, which is its allure. I know the KLaudio is twice the price, but I'm much more interested in optimum results.
Thanks!
| Post removed |
@antinn Thanks ... I think ... for turning me on to that post by Wizzard. I suffered through nearly all of it. That man is in need of help! The Arizona Mike tip, however, was considerably more helpful! The video afforded a good real-life look and sense of the operational footprint the KLAudio requires, much more informative than photos of the machine on the web. I tend to do record cleaning in spurts. My modus operandi has involved setting up the Knosti on the kitchen counter and shuttling records to & from my US machine, set-up on a work bench in the basement. After an afternoon's activity, generally 15 records worth, I break down, clean and put everything away until the next foray. I don't save or re-use cleaning fluids or leave same in the respective vessels. The KLAudio certainly seems like a fantastic bespoke US record cleaning machine. However, given its size and operational footprint, seems like it's better suited to a more industrial approach (i.e. more sustained, lengthier cleaning sessions). It's easy to see how critical such a machine would be for an operation like Arizona Mike's record shop and record cleaning service. I continue to struggle with more practical, cost-effective alternatives for my purposes and am considering the following, which would involve purchasing an Elma Sonic P60H, another Knosti, a vacuum machine or combination thereof. As always, your comments & suggestions would be most welcome.
|
Please do not get creative with the Tergitol and Liquinox - there is no need. Just use the Liquinox which is a combination of anionic and nonionic surfactants for pre-clean. However, only use 0.5% Liquinox - less carryover to the US machine. The 1% is good for manual clean with tap-water rinse. Otherwise, only use the Knosti for really gross records.
Adjust the Tergitol concentration to 0.0135 to 0.0150%. When you clean records with the Elmasonic recalling what I said previous here is a procedure: Heat the water to about 28C and then secure the heaters. Then spin at 0.5 rpm (2-min for 1-revolution), and wash with two phases. The first phase is run at 80% power for 6, 8 or 10 minutes (3, 4 or 5 complete revolutions) using the P60's auto frequency change mode where the tank runs at 37kHz for 30 seconds then it switches to 80kHz for 30 seconds, back and forth. The second phase runs for 6, 8 or 10 minutes at 80kHz at 100% power. The ultrasonics will heat the water and after 12, 16 or 20-min total, the bath may be 35C, but stay less than about 38C (100F). With spin speed at 0.5 rpm, adjusting time in 2-min increments gets whole numbers (no fractions) of evolutions.
Use the 40kHz US machine for rinsing similar to what @tima does here: tima's DIY RCM | What's Best Audio and Video Forum. The Best High End Audio Forum on the planet! (whatsbestforum.com). The rinse cycle at 0.5-rpm would be 6 or 8-min with no heat other than what the US provide. Then allow the records to air dry in a clean area - placing a HEPA filter (does not need to be a large unit) in the 'clean area' will limit the amount of incidental lint that drops on the records while drying. To speed up drying, you can try adding 0.003% Tergitol to the rinse tank. This reduces the surface tension of the water enough to wet the record, and when you remove the records, the amount of water that is on the record should be less, ergo they dry faster. Take care, |
That is remarkably charitable, Neil. And as for help being needed, I recognise a fellow autistic, and would help but it is not wanted in any shape or form: indeed, it is repulsed. All I can do (maybe any of us) is to ensure I enjoy several hours of clean vinyl for every minute spent on that thread. |