Vacuum Record Cleaner Rreplacement

@oberoniaomnia 

Re higher temp, in general grease (fingerprints) dissolves easier at higher temperatures, very simple kitchen experiment with a frying pan will show that. Same with salts. Concentrations of those are so low when cleaning records that temperature-dependent solubility products are of no concern.

What you state is true. However in an ultrasonic bath, the bath temperature, (within the range suitable for vinyl records) has little effect on the overall cleaning efficiency. In a water only ultrasonic bath, the effect of cavitation will remove most contaminants and the addition of a suitable surfactant will improve the efficiency of the process even at room temperature. The cavitation process itself produces high localized temperatures. So there is no need to run the ultrasonic bath at excessive temperatures when cleaning records. At elevated temperatures, the chance of inducing damage to the record is greater than any improved contaminant removal.

Don't know what "CMC minimum" is.

CMC stands for Critical Micelle Concentration. For many surfactants, a plot of CMC vs solution temperature results in a U shaped curve. The CMC decreases as the solution temperature increases, reaches a minimum and then begins to increase. For some surfactants, this minimum occurs between 40 and 50 degrees C. So operating at the minimum CMC temperature requires using less surfactant.

richardbrand

1,292 posts

05-16-2026 at 08:45pm 

@oberoniaomnia 

No surface noise, no pops, no clicks, just nothing

Wow!  What records meet this standard?  And what are you playing them on?
 

 

oberoniaomnia

331 posts

05-16-2026 at 09:16pm 

@richardbrand To be sure, there is music when playing my records.  And in the breaks between tracks, nothing. If I would turn it up silly loud, I would likely get some tube noise. So nothing above tube noise floor.
 

what SPL do you register at your listening position at normal volume levels? There’s absolutely zero chance that you hear nothing between tracks, just tube rush and that’s only if you turn it up silly loud. Are you saying that your E glow petite filters out surface noise? Or you eradicated surface noise by filtering it out in a digital domain?

@ljgerens 

My partner had a CD that was smeared with fingerprints or similar and was unreadable.  She cleaned it in her ultrasonic jewelry cleaner to no avail.

At that point, I read the instructions.  Using warm water and a drop of dishwashing detergent did the trick.  The CD came out like new.

I think the surfactant was more important than the temperature.

By the way, I follow Neil Antin's recommendations for washing and rinsing agents, which are Polysorbate20 and Ilfoton respectively in Australia.  About A$20 per litre each.  A litre will likely see me out at about a teaspoon per batch of records 

I treat my polycarbonate reading glasses for maybe 30 seconds through the same process, making sure the lenses don't touch anything.

@ljgerens  "The cavitation process itself produces high localized temperatures."

Reference? Amount of delta T? Duration? Pressure yes, and that leads to bubble formation. Bubbles are NOT due to heat, but due to pressure change. Easy to demonstrate by taking room temperature water, start pulling vacuum. Soon enough it "boils" but not because of temperature but pressure. Particularly with water's high heat capacity, I'm skeptical about any temperature effect due to US. Not a physicist for sure. I have run US for half an hour at room temperature (for SEM specimen preps), and there is no perceptible temperature change after that amount of time.

Interesting re that U-shape curve. Reference? Scale? Whether U shape has maximum at 100 and minimum at 99 or 10 makes a difference, and determines whether it matters in practical applications. And, it will also depend on the specific compound, so assessment of a variety of them to see common pattern and variance will be important for proper consideration.

@audphile1 re SPL typically around 70. Actually, doing gainstaging with Zesto SUT, PS, and preamp, I have been able to cut down on tube noise. I am so glad that you dismiss my own observations out of hand. So refreshing! And, no, there is no digital interface anywhere, except when I play digital music, of course. It is what it is. That is my listening experience. 

@oberoniaomnia 

Refreshing? Well I aim to please.
 

First of all make up your mind. Is it the tube noise that you don’t hear between tracks or is it the surface noise that you don’t hear. Two different things entirely. 
You stated earlier you don’t have surface noise but you still have tube noise between tracks if you crank the volume up.
Now you’re saying you eliminated tube noise. 

I 100% believe tube noise in phono stage can be eliminated using SUT if the tubes in your phono manage the gain for LOMC and you bypass them with external SUT. I had no tube noise with low output MC into Lab12 Melto2 tube phono. Gain is achieved by using lundahl internal SUTs in that phono amp - tubes have nothing to do with gain in some circuits.
So now back to record surface noise between tracks. No bueno there convincing me it ceased to exist on top of your turntable platter. Do I believe you can’t hear it? Sure. If you have volume too low you won’t hear it. But raise it to around 70-80db and there’s no going around the noise that stylus makes traveling the space between tracks.