Vacuum Record Cleaner Rreplacement

I see an experiment on the horizon.  Prepare a microscopic slide of the distilled water prior to using in the ultrasonic machine to determine the amount of particulate per square millimeter  or whatever unit is most suitable).  Clean five records, draw another water sample and check under the microscope.  Repeat after every five records until you reach saturation or you get bored.  That would settle the question of how much particulate is suspended in the ultrasonic bath water, not to mention how often you should change the water.  Would require pretty good microscope

@jrcotner Re microscope, light microscope has a theoretical resolution limit of around 250 nm = 0.25 µm under ideal condition, which never obtains due to various aberrations. Taking numerical aperture into account, it becomes (1.22 x lambda)/2 NA. And then you need to assume your microscope slide and coverslip are REALLY clean. Good luck with that at home!

For smaller particles, you need to go to electron microscopes. Scanning has resolution limit of ~2–5 nm, a good transmission can go to Angstrom level. Starter desktop SEM can be had for about $100K, decent about $250–500K, top of the line SEM/TEM $XM. And you also need some other gear to make the preps, plus serious vibration isolation (oil pan, bungie cord suspension).

One more thing to consider is that we play our records in our homes, not in an ISO cleanroom. So colorimetric approach is sufficient to show that there is some stuff coming off. What it is specifically is idle musing.

@lewm maybe there is something else going on in your set-up, possibly with static charge? I don't hear a thing after needle drop. Adding steps to get to less than nothing is pointless. 

Oberon, You apparently use a US machine.  I use only a VPI HW17 vacuum machine.  My wash fluid is a combination of alcohol, nonionic detergent, and water.  Most likely you use plain or distilled water in your US machine.  Or if you don't, what do you use?  In any case, in my experience with my wash fluid and my machine, the extra rinse with clean water followed by a second vacuuming makes an audible difference and adds about 30 seconds per side to the cleaning ritual.  Well worth it. But because you don't hear a benefit in your very different method, does not mean that there is no difference using my methods. If you do use plain water in your US machine, there is no wonder that a rinse with plain water would not make much if any audible difference.

I had a Nessie-two different machines actually, but both had problems which was a shame because, when working, the Nessie is effective. So, I bit the bullet and bought a Degritter II-too much money but a great machine. I think The Audiophile Man is a very reliable reviewer and touts the sonic benefits of thorough cleaning, particularly with this machine. I was doubtful, but he was right-I certainly hear an improvement-maybe its real, maybe its expectation bias, which is also real, but I perceive an improvement.

I have a repeatable process-I first apply a Tergikleen solution with a Kubuki brush and then do two cleaning cycles. I have an extra tank that I use for a rinse cycle with distilled water only. It works and the machine is really easy to use. I like it.

I try not to buy used records that are in dodgy shape. I want M- in most cases, unless its something I really am interested in. When I got my Huminguru Nova I cleaned what remained of my collection, which has been through an Okki Nokki, or a CleanVinyl 132 kHz tank, or both. So with those records I use straight distilled water and a longer clean time. 

If I buy vinyl that is used and not cleaned. I will run it through the Nova with a drop of their cleaning solution. If necessary, I run it through a second time. Finally, if a stubborn issue remains I clean it one last time on the Okki Nokki. This process has given me quiet sounding vinyl, and excellent sound. The process works well enough for me. I will cycle distilled water through the Nova from time to time to rinse the pump and lines.