Record Cleaning Machine - Loricraft PRC-3 vs. 4?


The Loricraft record cleaning machines look very promising, using a small point vacuum as opposed to a vacuum slot.

The PRC-4 has a stronger vacuum pump compared to the PRC-3, but is it really a significantly better choice in practice? (the difference in price, amortized over years of use and 1000's of cleanings, is less of a concern).

toronto416
I have a Nitty Gritty Mini-Pro and a VPI 16.5. My Loricraft PRC4 Deluxe arrived yesterday, and the couriers had bashed it around between the UK, the dealer in Vancouver and me in eastern Canada. The pump had come off its mount and its hoses had detached. Ignoring the 'no user serviceable parts' warning as I wasn't willing to courier it back to Vancouver for a simple fix (and possibly more damage in transit), I took it apart. The pump was easily reattached to its base, and the hoses plugged back on their spigots.This machine does a much better job of cleaning than the NG and VPI machines. The other thing that occurred to me as I figured out how to disassemble it and repair the damage was that I could understand why it costs as much as it does. It is complicated inside, and well built. Lots of screws, bolts, sound damping insulation and custom machining, not to mention the pretty brasswork on the 'tonearm'. I'm rather glad it came as it did, as I would have wondered whether the price was just based on small sales, but now I know it is entirely justified given the work inside, never mind the performance for which I and others have bought it. To call it a cheap copy of the Monks machine is either an enormous tribute to the Monks machine or a downright slander, and since I don't have a Monks I can't say which.
I have recently purchased a Loricraft PRC4dlx and a friend has the latest Keith Monks MkVII Omni.

Both have their own pros and cons.

In terms of build quality, the Loricraft has more of a handmade feel to it while the KM machine has more of a factory manufactured feel (for wont of a better description).

The Loricraft has real wood verneer sides while the KM has faux wood laminate covering. Both have chassis made of MDF.

The KM has a solid cover included with the machine while the Loricraft has an optional perspex cover.

The KM machine has automatic fluid application while the Loricraft is done using a handheld squirt bottle.

The KM machine uses a brush/fluid applicator arm - brush is removable for cleaning. You have to hold brush the record on the Loricraft.

The KM has automatic thread advancement and take up while this is done manually on the Loricraft.

The Loricraft has forward and reverse for the platter while the KM only spins in one direction. Easier to scrub records with the Loricraft.

Where the KM falls down IMO is with it's platter which appears to be off the ones off those cheap Numark DJ TTs. The Loricraft platter is much nicer being neoprene covered, thin and flat.

Both units seem to have the same performance cleaning wise with the KM having the edge up over the Loricraft only in terms of automation.
Hey Dan, congrats! Now you can take 45 minutes to clean an LP like the rest of us audio-nuts.

Just joshin' folks. Dan has seen my PRC3 in action and knows what he's getting. I re-cleaned an LP of his once during dinner and the improvement was startling. We all wish there was a faster way but as Syntax just pointed out on the Audio Desk thread, there's fast and there's effective...
Thanks, Doug. I'm already putting in the time so I may as well get much better results and, most importantly, save my hearing. That Hoover motor probably runs 100 dB. :-)