1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 195018-7477

Kirmuss users, what do you find?

I bought a nearly new Kirmuss record "restoration" system from a widow of an audiophile. 


I mostly wanted it for the machine, but had to try his method just out of curiosity. 
I followed the instructions, apart from the "Aftercare" section, which was influenced by the AudioPhile Man review (pt 2)


I got YUGE globs of stuff on my stylus after playing just 1 side of a "restored" record. OK, maybe I’ve not cleaned it enough? The record went back in for 2 more cleanings with the surfactant and ultrasonic bath for 5 min each time. Still ended up with a ball of something on my stylus. 

I next used my other method, which was to scrub up a different record with some Audio Intelligent #6, 5 min ultrasonic bath, then dried with the Record Doctor. 
Just a touch of lint (probably airborne that landed on the record) after 1 side. 

I will say the sound of the record was noticeably improved with the Kirmuss chemicals, but I feel that this substance is NOT being completely removed with the ultrasonic bath. 

Any users out there that can share their experience?  

traudio
lubachl
124 posts
 

Traudio, you cannot quote people on this platform in the conventional way that most forums are set up.  I agree that is a bit of a nuisance.

What I have trouble understanding is, if you are just cleaning a record with an ultrasonic cleaner, whether it is the Kirmuss unit or whatever, there is no way the unit can add gunk to your record.  Water and alcohol cannot physically deposit anything on your record.  I am not sure what is going on with the cleaning process in your case but I would be hesitant to blame the machine.  Just saying... 

dwette
560 posts
 

@lubachl 

whether it is the Kirmuss unit or whatever, there is no way the unit can add gunk to your record.  Water and alcohol cannot physically deposit anything on your record.  I am not sure what is going on with the cleaning process in your case but I would be hesitant to blame the machine.  Just saying... 

No, @traudio  is not mistaken or wrong. The "official" Kirmusss process really does cause that problem. I noticed it to, and I’m a very experienced user of cleaning machines and processes. I think the issue is that the Kirmuss system leaves residue on the records. There is no plain water rinse in the process. It even calls for spraying the record with a Kirmuss provided spritz bottle after cleaning, and that’s the problem. That is why I called out the Kirmuss process upstream as B.S. and said I abandoned it. For the very reason it leaves something on the record.

In my opinion, a proper record cleaning regimen only takes away dirt. It should never add anything that isn’t removed before the end of the cleaning process. Kirmuss isn’t that. This is why I always end my record cleaning with a run through a Degritter II with nothing but DW in the tank.

noromance's avatar
noromance
10,498 posts
 

@traudio  Type in your text as usual, then click the quote symbol and paste the quote you want into the space.

BTW, how do you quote people here? Never could figure it out.

traudio OP
184 posts
 

Ok let's test this 

Type in your text as usual, then click the quote symbol and paste the quote you want into the space.

 
traudio OP
184 posts
 

Lol,

My wife, the science teacher just got home from her trip. Showed her the new machine, which she's is excited to clean her jewelry with.

Told her about the gunk built up on the needle when using the Kirmuss fluid. She said, "there's too much Propylene Glycol in your surfactant solution then".

Dammmmm. Jaw on the floor moment.:-)

More to discover