We Vinyl Ultrasonic or Vacuum Cleaner?

I changed my technique around a little bit this weekend, and trialed a couple of previously cleaned albums that were marginal. 

I start with the US bath with a 9 minute clean at 31C. Then i take it to the Okki Nokki for a two revolution pass to remove the fluid. I then do a cleaning on the Okki Nokki with their fluid(at this time) and a scrub and leave the fluid sit for 1 minute. Then a dry with 4 revs in each direction. 

Results have shown improvement in several records, with some being excellent, and those with inherent damage are better but still going to be replaced. 

Next step is to add a distilled water rinse but need another brush to distribute the water. Either that or have a small dish of water that I can rinse my brush in.

The positive point is that it appears the current ultrasonic tank can remain in use. At least that is my perspective so far. That can always change.  

A few months ago I got a Vevor US. Run a full batch of 9 records for 30 minutes at 40–45C, using RO water from home tap (TDS ~40) with a drop of dishwashing liquid. Then vacuum off excess water, a bit of airdry while I load up the next batch.

I noticed drop to zero random small clicks (= small dirt particles) and background noise compared to vacuum only. I don't think the esoteric vinyl cleaning solutions make any audible difference, particularly, as 99% is vacuumed off. I used up some of that stuff I had from before, no difference to dishwashing soap. Noise floor cannot drop below zero. Those recipes with all sorts of alcohols (plus additives in what you get at the store), photographic wetting agents etc. is a needless complication, as far as I can tell. That also suggests that rinse in DI is not necessary given concentrations of chemicals in the washing solution. Residual is of <Å "thickness", meaning there are scattered molecules on the record surface, a few orders of magnitude below what a stylus can detect. Additionally, our listening environments are not ISO certified clean-rooms. Surgical cleanliness is pointless.

And FYI, I have done plenty of PCR/DNA sequencing and SEM, where chemical concentrations and small scale cleanliness matter. That has also taught me to put things into perspective. Just enjoy the music, that's what all this is about, allegedly.

Yes and no. I have long believed that obsession about water used to clean LPs is pointless, for reasons you state. But I’ve heard no difference between LPs cleaned on a good US machine vs VPI HW17. And both alcohol and nonionic detergent help provided you rinse thoroughly before vacuum dry. And I’ve done some molecular biology too.

@lewm 

"And I’ve done some molecular biology too."

And What, no molecular chemistry?

@dmk_calgary 

"BTW, check the bottom of your water tank after you have cleaned 10-20 of your new, sealed records."

Hmm, 10 - 20 huh? I can do half a dozen dirty used records from one of my B&Ms and all I see at the bottom of the Spin Clean is a few swarf particles, a little of the aforementioned paper chaff from the decaying inner sleeves and the occasional body hair that was airborne long enough to be captured by the vinyl's electrical attraction at one time or another.

I posted a response to the OP’s query when he raised the same on the SH forum, but since this discussion has taken a different turn, I’ll add my thoughts. We have very hard water where I live--high minerality--and using at least distilled water for a rinse step makes sense to me. (I have Reagent Grade I here as well, and understand that as soon as the 5 gallon carboy is opened, it is no longer pure--that labs which rely on it, make it on an as needed basis). 

I used to use Dawn as a finish stripper when detailing exotic cars. It did a good job in removing car wax, but was itself not easy to remove. I suppose it depends on the concentration used. I’ve largely depended on AIVS #15, which mandates a rinse, for LPs. 

I combine methods-- I use a Monks Omni, which is a great point nozzle vacuum, similar to the Loricraft, and the KL ultrasonic (pre-Chad, with integrated tank). If I don’t preclean a new record and go straight into the ultrasonic, I can find some dark gray powder like substance in the bath reservoir of the KL, which I wipe out with some non-shedding, non-impregnated lab wipes. Typically, I manually clean any challenged record (I buy mostly older pressings), do a vacuum and rinse/vacuum on the Monks, then into the KL. To get that last iota, I can pull the record from the KL after the wash cycle (though KL warns about damage to the machine from dripping water into its electronics), and rather than forced air drying, vacuum dry the "wet" record on the Monks, using two mats to avoid wet platter. This does a better job in my experience than forced air drying. The goal, for me, is to remove as much residue of the cleaning agent/contaminant and the vacuum dry rather than forced air dry gives me another shot at that. I think most dishwashing detergents have color, fragrance and other stuff that is unnecessary to record cleaning, and as mentioned, is harder to remove from a flat surface (car body) than the made for LP solutions (grooved surface); for car detailing, I use water under pressure, which you can do with records too, as long as you rinse in something without the minerality. (For the vehicle detailing, I have a Vevor D/I car wash system with two resin tanks--and a TDS meter-- it does a good job at relatively low cost). As an object lesson, a painted car surface with high mineral content water will show spotting--a build up of the solids in the water. I don't want that on my records. 

PS: With respect to older copies I buy, I think a lot of the contamination is previous questionable cleanings with whatever residue is left on the record by previous owners/dealers in an effort to make the record look more salable.