Record Cleaning - part 5: Halloween Horror The Gruesome Truth! Ultrasonic Cavitation killed my vinyl
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 10. 2023
- Following up on my previous videos (linked below) I wanted to establish whether a sonic trend or trait of the HumminGuru's 40kHz ultrasonic cleaning was indicative of possible damage being caused. Plus, the famous 'aluminium foil test' certainly filled me with concern. So, in this video I push the HumminGuru cavitation to the limit, attempting to verify that the reasons for NOT using 40kHz are valid. Please watch the video to find out the results.
In addition I revisit the subject of cleaning chemicals, in particular with regard ultrasonic cleaning: are they necessary, do they help, and how important is it to rinse them off?
Finally, I try Tergikleen, a variant of Tergitol, and investigate it's cleaning ability and discuss some real concerns.
If you've not already seen them, do please take a look at the previous videos in this series:
Record Cleaning - part 1: the myths, the theory, the practise unravelled:
• Record Cleaning - part...
Record Cleaning - part 2: Ultrasonic machines: The HumminGuru intro and demonstration: • Record Cleaning - part...
Record Cleaning - part 3: Ultrasonic machines: The HumminGuru - should you buy one? My verdict: • Record Cleaning - part...
FOUR your aMUSEment: Ultrasonic Record Cleaning Machines - TEASER: • FOUR your aMUSEment: U...
Record Cleaning - part 4: Ultrasonic machines: The Degritter Mk2 - full in-depth review & verdict: • Record Cleaning - part...
Hi, Dave. Just found your channel, and subscribed. I've just invested in a huge ultrasonic cleaner for cleaning the 16" transcription records I collect. (I only use it on vinyl records, not the occasional lacquer ones.) I found your video interesting not only because my machine is a 40kHz unit, but because some of the records I clean are quite rare. Of course, 16" transcription records are rare to begin with - most people have never seen one in person. I will re-watch your video and perhaps comment again later.
Hi Scott, I can't be certain about whether the HumminGuru has caused permanent damage, but it certainly warrants further investigation. It could have been heat build-up (a by=product of cavitation) combined with the 40kHz cavitation... Therefore I can't accuse every 40kHz ultrasonic machine of the same effect. My advice is just be cautious...
Incidentally, I have seen a 16" record, however it was a 78rpm record, and I think it was shellac.
This has been such a thorough look into the concept of ultrasonic record cleaning, as well as the various solutions and techniques used. I am saving up for a Degritter, and now I think it makes sense to use the second tank as well. This series of videos has solidified my thinking around the Degritter, so thank you for all the work and effort that went into creating this invaluable content! It's really well appreciated.
Thanks so much for your fabulous feedback!
Hi Dave, great video once again. I did a lot of studying into record cleaning before I took the plunge. I ended up buying the Degritter MK 2 and use distilled water only. No cleaning solution. I took the advise of Michael Fremer and Mike Esposito of Ingroove Records, who uses his cleaning service as a business. If a record is new or looks perfectly clean, I'll clean it once. If it looks slightly dirty, I'll wash it twice. If a record looks horribly dirty I'll prewash it with a 50/50 mix of distilled water and isopropyl alcohol. I spray this solution into a cotton make up whip and apply that to the record. From there it goes into the Degritter for up to three washings. I have found any more washings than what I've mentioned seems pointless. These are my findings. Take it for what it's worth.
Thanks for your support and the feedback Lawrence.
a wholeheartedly thank you dave!! for this tremendous effort, you gone through!! a lot of precious info here for the vc community!! very appreciated!!
Glad to be of service Frank. Thanks for the feedback.
Dave, love your Rave from the Grave t-shirt. Very nice!
Sorry that your record was fatally wounded. In 2024, I hope you find the PERFECT cleaning combination for all your vinyl. Happy New Year!
Thanks, the Raves T-shirt seemed most appropriate for this video (although the guys in there probably think I'm a bit mad with my attitude towards cleaning & sonic perfection). I'm definitely happy with my new cleaning process, even though it is quite long-winded, but I am always open to new thinking / research... Happy New Year!
Another great and very informative video Dave.
Thank you very much for making it for us to watch and learn from.
Glad you found it interesting Mark. Thanks for the support.
Eagerly waiting for your next video about the topic.
Working on it
Just an observation as a HumminGuru owner: I wouldn't dream of putting an already cleaned record through ultrasound cleaning numerous times in succession for exactly the reasons you have stated. You are basically directing those cavitation bubbles at the clean vinyl surface where they will ultimately start wearing it down. For this reason, I intend to only do one 5 minute clean on new records (to get rid of release agent and dust from manufacturing) and at most two on really old, dirty records. I'll then put them in new anti-static sleeve liners and will not put them back into an ultrasonic cleaner unless they start to have persistent pops, crackles or surface noise. Even then, I would probably revert to a 2 minute clean. Cavitation is a pretty brutal force and should be used sparingly rather than being seen as something you would do to an LP repeatedly on a regular basis.
Hi Andy, this is really why I did this 'clean to destruction' test. Just to see what the situation is. The interesting thing is that I don't seem to get into any negative effects using the Degritter, no matter how many times I clean an LP, which does make me suspect it is the 40kHz that is "too" harsh... It ought to be said that I'm still experimenting and learning...
Thanks for another great & very detailed video. I have watched this series with interest Dave. I have had various cleaners, with the last being the Audio Desk System Pro, before I bought a Degritter MKII. It has been by far the best I’ve had, in that I’ve had the best results by far with it. I opted for the rinse tank on purchase & I use Degritter’s solution, but in a lower volume than recommended & I discard & replace the water quicker than recommended. As I buy mostly original 1st pressings that are 50 years old plus, I incorporate a Disco Antistat as my first cleaning stage with distilled water & IPA. This helps to get rid of the previous owner’s crud & homebrew cleaning residue, before I get it to the Degritter. It all works a treat for me.
Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you've found the videos interesting and it's good to hear you're getting similar results, and have tried various cleaners that I haven't had the chance (the Audiodesk, for example).
Thanks for your effort Dave.
Thanks for watching Chris!
Thanks for all the hard work and multiple copies of Muse. The bottm line is to aim high to save money by getting the Degritter for the ultimate in cleaning performance and safety and passing on the HumminGuru.
It’s certainly the best ultrasonic RCM I’ve tried.
Great work Dave.
Thanks aplenty!
Thanks for watching!
I have had a KLaudio for 10 years. In that time I have cleaned more than 4,000 records. Distilled water - period. Ultra reliable - replaced a pump and expertly done service
Don’t get hung up on the 40hz vs 140hz cavitation frequency. Klaudio tested an orange record over 100 times - no colored residue in the tank, don’t recall any sonic degradation
I only clean my records once, except rare occasions. Don’t have too. It removed all the dust, mint shiny surface outside of fingerprints and eliminates static. Smooth sound, open not brittleness. One and done unless I find a record getting noisy. You can’t get every last bit of noise out every time but it brings out the sonic detail, low level information, beauty. I invested in a very high priced cleaning brush by Ragmar in Berlin.That gets newly introduced dust off the record extremely effectively
I have a Loricraft I never use now and if I had to buy a new less expensive machine I have been very impressed with the Degritter
Nice topic and some scary results
Thanks for your feedback Audiotomb. It's really good to get some feedback from a long-term KL user.
Out of interest, how many minutes do you give an LP in the KL Audio?
5 minute ultrasonic 4 minutes dry - it is dry by 2 minutes
My klaudio is an all in one - built like a tank. I don’t like the new external tank design. If I had to buy something now I think the Degritter - price/performance would be my choice
A sound comparison of the ruined record vs an uncleaned record would have been nice.
An image under a microscope of an uncleaned vs damaged record would be better, so we can actually see the damage
In regards to your listening notes, it also would be interesting if someone else was loading the records into the machine so you had no idea what record came from what machine when you listened back.
So it seems we need ultrasonic cleaners with adjustable frequencies.
You'd think these companies would have done tests to determine the optimum frequency before they launched their products.
With regard the listening, I did do ‘blind’ comparisons with my wife and a couple of friends. The benefit of doing it the way I did it means it is repeatable, I can still go back and play each of the LPs. Of course it mattered which LP went in which cleaning machine: I put small labels on the LP label to identify which was which, but this was not on the side we played for this test, so listening could be done ‘blind’.
Hope that helps explain my process.
Realy can not wait for you next video about the cleaning fluids and rinsing. As I already wrote in a comment I have the Keith Monk Prodigy and unfortunately the cleaning fluid makes surface noise worse. I am speaking about two new LPs which is even more frustrating. I have now ordered the Clearaudio Record cleaning fluid but unfortunately it did not help. So now I was back on using two Knosti Disco Antistat and it got better. Maybe a few more of those using the Knosti liquid and rinsing it off with distilled water. Thank you for your videos!
Thanks for the feedback.
Hi Dave thank you for a very revealing set of videos with very interesting results. I’ve used a clear audio matrix for years now with l art du son cleaner then done a distilled water clean and vacuum off with great results. However from your findings I think I’m going to invest in the degritter for the after clean and rinse , definitely purchase the extra rinsing tank though.
Thanks for your feedback Richard. I have used a Clearaudio Matrix: it was (at the time) the best vacuum machine I'd tried but chose Loricraft mainly due the lack of need to clamp the LP, which I wouldn't want to do with shellac 78s (which I don't often use tbh)...
I have yet to try the latest version: the Matrix Professional Sonic...
Hi Dave, thank you for this informative Video.
Glad it was helpful!
@@DaveDenyer I was amazed that the two US devices “imprinted” their own sound signature on the vinyl
@@matzeflamingos I can only guess this is why Degritter chose 120kHz over the more commonly used 40kHz...
@@DaveDenyer ähnlich wie Perfect Vinyl forever
Thanks for taking the time to do this. On the 40kHz vs 120kHz question, I understand that you ran the record in a 40kHz Humminguru around 25 times and the record was ruined at the end of the process. Did you run a record in the 120kHz Degritter for 25 cycles as well? I got the impression that you stopped with the Degritter after 4 or 5 cycles. I am curious to know if the problem is with the cycle or maybe extended ultrasonic cleaning is problematic regardless of frequency.
Hi Tony, you're right, I did run the record through the HumminGuru 25 times: the reason being that after the initial 12 cleaning cycles the one cleaned in the HumminGuru was, I was fairly sure, getting worse whereas the Degritter cleaned LP was still clearly getting better and better (albeit in small increments with each successive clean). In fact after just four cleans I had some concerns about the HumminGuru. At no time did I get any hint of that effect from the Degritter cleaned copy.
This is why I decided to find out for sure if the HumminGuru was in fact actually degrading the record and so did this by continuing the cleaning to magnify any negative traits.
It was not so much to prove that you shouldn't do 25 cleans, but to verify what I suspected after only 4 cleans and strongly suspected after the initial 12 cleans.
I hope this helps explain my thinking and process.
Thanks for the information. Good to know
Happy to help!
I used a disc washer brush back in the 70s when no body cleaned there records. I still do.But you really did a deep testing, nice job....
LOL. You’re one up on me, I didn’t get a Discwasher brush until the early eighties… 👍
Another interesting video Dave. Thank you. I have mentioned in another of your videos that l am using a Loricraft PRC6i One day l may purchase the Degritter, but for now l am more than pleased with the Loricraft and really pleased with the results.
Glad you found the video interesting Leonardo. Much as I like what the Degritter does, I’m not about to get rid of my PRC6!
And l wouldn’t either. I reached out to you on messenger, wondering if you had seen it?
Hi Leonardo, I just saw your message. I use 99.9% isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol to dilute the Pure Groove. I've read the differences between IPA and Ethanol (2 vs 3 carbon atoms) but am not so sure what that means in the real world: what the the effective differences between the two. In fact I've looked 'deep' into this because some people are dead against using alcohol (I assume usually IPA) on records, some recommended ethanol as a wetting agent / degreaser / etc. I'm trying to find out more about the real world differences and if I can find anything that makes sense to me (rather than just repeating parrot-fashion what someone else says) I will share it for sure.
@@DaveDenyer Thank you for getting back to me on this.
FYI. I contacted Clearaudio and they said that either Ethanol or Isopropyl would be fine (although make sure at least 70% concentration: I use 99.9% IPA)@@leonardosullivan963
This series of films about your experiences and exploring US machines has been excellent, I’m torn at present as my finances would only allow me to stretch as far as to a Humminguru as US or get a Pro-Ject EC-V2 about £100 less than HG and much more in my budget … I currently use a Knosti Antistat and have 2 baths so I wash with fluid (vinyl solution) then rinse with de-ionised then air dry but I thought I could do better hence looking at a vacuum RCM and then looking at US … I do tend to batch clean 10 to 20 at a time .. I’ve got about 1000 LPs to get through.. can you over vaccum RCM and damage records like with US ? your thoughts would be much appreciated in terms of my self imposed constraints of either an RCM or US ?
Good question: seeing as you already have two Knosti Disco Antistats I’d go for the Humminguru and just use it as a final ‘deep rinse’ after your normal process.
Impressively thorough research Dave, and not great news for those of us who have recently purchased the Humminguru! When rinsing vinyl is there likely to be any issues with using the machine in ultrasonic mode without any cleaning agent?
Thanks Jason, I wouldn't be put off using the HumminGuru as a 'quick' ultrasonic clean, just I'd be wary of giving an LP more than, say, 3 heavy (5 minute) cleans. It certainly made improvements. I don't think there's any problem from using just distilled water for a rinse. I guess that's pretty much what I'm doing: ultrasonically removing any previously cleaned LP's residual muck.
Hi Dave, Another great video!
I have been using Tergitol and am getting nothing in the way of suds. I find it rinses off easily and have no problems with it whatsoever. I added 6 drops to a gallon. What was your mix?
Hi, thanks for this feedback: I used 3 drops in 1 litre, so about twice the concentration you use. I'll maybe give that a go, but still feel it's wisest to do this on the Loricraft, before t goes into the Degritter.
It's no surprise that ultrasonic cleaning will damage vinyl, especially when you consider that it can take corrosion off of metal surfaces and damage some metals, aluminium for example. It's a great example of the tendency in the audio industry for products ot be designed and released by makers who don't understand the physics behind the products they make, especially those who simply fit some kind of record spinning device to a standard ultrasonic tank. Even a 120 to 135kHz cavitation frequency would cause irreparable damage given enough time. To clean a vinyl record optimally, you have to take a cleaning agent that is safe for the plastic yet strong enough to dissolve the contaminants likely to be on the vinyl surface, and find a method ot get that solution into the bottom of the microscopic groove. You then have to either remove that cleaning fluid or formulate it in such a way that the solvent within it leaves no trace either of itself or the carrier fluid. I've designed a machine that uses a system of air jets to cause bubbles in cleaning fluid that vary in intensity, thereby removing contaminants from the record while giving contaminants time to flow into filters or to the bottom of the cleaning bath. The system then uses a constant vacuum pressure to dry the record without touching it, thereby removing every trace of the fluid. It works better than any machine I have ever used, ultrasonic or otherwise, but the benefit is that there is no cavitation so the bubbles don't harm the vinyl. I need to do some more testing to demonstrate its efficacy but so far I believe it is the best solution possible for cleaning records. Ultimately you cannot achieve anything better than a microscopically clean, unharmed record. Sonic changes might be brought about by residue left on the disc, or physical damage to the disc, but if a machine or method can clean a record properly there should be no change after a single cleaning cycle.
I’d be interested in seeing your machine Ashley. Regarding sound quality, I think every LP needs cleaning for precisely that reason - otherwise you’re listening to the groove through a layer of gunk.
However once thoroughly cleaned, further cleaning cycles should make no difference: the state I got to after around 3-8 Degritter cycles, obviously depending on the tenacity of the contaminant in the grooves.
I have a degritter and have used it for more than 6,000 heavy cycles and have not had a problem. I also use ilfotol but I also use isopropyl alcohol to remove traces of residue. I use 0.025% Ilfotol and 0.001% isopropyl alcohol in distilled water. I use the degritter on heavy cycle (3 * 10 min cycle takes 30 mins) and after experimentation have found that 3 cycles was the optimum with my fluid mix. I change the fluid every 50 cycles (as the degritter advises to change the filters). I have a second tank and tested rinsing with pure distilled water but found no improvement. However I have found the used fluid to be brown at the end of use on occasion and can stink of nicotine. The other issue is the position of the ultra sonic generators, many including the Humming guru to the best of my knowledge place the generators at the side of the unit i.e facing the surface of the record. The Degritter generators are in the base not at the side of the unit I believe this makes it gentler
Thanks for this feedback, I will give your solution a try. I certainly am not against adding a small amount of IPA to the mix. I think that generally, three heavy cycles did the trick (on my Degritter mark II the heavy cycle is only 6 mins actual ultrasonic cleaning), I only extended cleaning on this test to find out what happened when I did.
I do change my fluid more regularly than the filters but am not sure it is necessary, especially as all records have been pre-cleaned on the Loricraft. I might give that a go too.
The only other thing I'd mention is that according to the Degritter website, the transducers are on the side, two on each side in fact. I'm quite convinced he real difference is the frequency, which does of course bring into question all the other 40kHz machines on the market...
Ah I may have got the transducers mixed up, what impressed me originally was that they were not where the "generic" tans placed them, so thanks. I Collect and buy a lot of UK 1st pressings so many have had a beer bath and smoking experience and are flithy. @@DaveDenyer
The damage you have noted is to one record and you attribute it to 40khz cavitation. Can you reproduce this damage to other records? Are you sure the dull sound wasn’t already there on that one copy, regardless of how it compares to the other copies of the Muse album? I’ve cleaned hundreds of vinyl at 40khz with Tergikleen at or just above the amount recommended in the instructions and have never noticed a dulling in the sound, even on prized records I’m pretty familiar with, but have only ever noticed sonic improvements. My observations are over years of care taken ultrasonic cleaning records, with an appropriate post clean rinse stage with pure distilled water.
Hi @@VinylAus, thanks for your feedback. It's good to know you've cleaned hundreds of LPs with 40kHz cavitation and Tergikleen with no adverse effects. I do note that you specify an "appropriate post clean rinse" which I agree, is vital.
I did notice the faintest trait of 'harshness / brittleness' on most records cleaned on the HumminGuru. It was because of this that I chose to clean one of the six identical copies 'to destruction'.
I collected a lot of reggae 7" 30 years ago and used a small ultrasonic cleaner made for jewelry with fantastic results. Super dirty records. A few drops of dish soap in room temp water, slowly rotate up to label, rinse by spinning in bowl of distilled water, shake excess water, let dry on cup.
Records play like new today.
Thanks for sharing
Wow! Great observation with the brittleness for records cleaned at ~40Khz for too long. I noticed brittleness after cleaning records with my Kirmuss "vinyl record restoration" system and thought it was just super clean records exposing other shortcomings in my system, which let to a new stylus and speakers.
After I had the process down and experimented with different surfactants I landed on using the Kirmuss surfactant with distilled water (no alcohol) for older / used records, and fresh distilled water only for brand new / sealed records. When I followed the Kirmuss process, so anywhere from 10~30 minutes of ultrasonic, which was always a gamble because the toothpaste effect is an illusion. Even things like using gloves to help with handling I sorted out, fingernail scuffs are annoying!
Once I had the process down I cleaned... wait... restored some of my more expensive vinyl, including a Led Zeppelin I (turquoise) and it sounded much worse than when I played it with just a vacuum clean. I have come to the sad conclusion that I have damaged some of my collection. Some of my prized records.
I also noticed the Kirmuss took the shine off and left some interesting marks on certain types of vinyl. ERC records (I only cleaned a few) has this affect. So I have STOPPED cleaning my expensive vinyl with the Kirmuss solution.
I have been looking for a more automated solution with drying as to reduce the amount of handling / parts coming in contact with the vinyl, like a drying cloth.
Ordering a Degritter Mark II this week. Sounds like the perfect solution, for me, and I wish I found it sooner. Thanks again of the series.
Thanks for this feedback Jason. It's particularly interesting to read that you experienced "brittleness" with the Kirmuss.
Hi Dave, Thank you so much for this as it might confirm what I’ve been suspicious about. Is it possible you can show us the record close up or play a piece? I ask because I have the Humminguru and 90% of records i buy new all have horrible clicks and i can see parts of the records have sort of short hairline scratches that are about 1/4 inch long and it might be like 5 in a row next to each other and I’ve been wondering if its the Humminguru doing this? I also recently started using the Mofi Plus Enzyme Cleaner so I’m not sure what’s causing this.
Hi, thanks for your comment. To be honest I hadn't noticed any visible evidence of damage, but maybe under a microscope (I don't have one) this could be revealed...
Do you play your records before you clean them? It might be worth doing just to make sure that the HumminGuru isn't adding this noise.
Wow, I wasn't expecting this. That was very interesting indeed and in some ways not too surprising given the lower frequency devices are intended for cleaning of metal items or jewellery. Vinyl records are significantly less robust and so perhaps the biggest surprise is that no-one has done this kind of study before (or maybe they have and I just haven't seen it).
I think it would be interesting if you had the time to get yet another new copy of the Muse album and send it to the "Perfect Vinyl" guy and see how that sounds when it comes back in comparison to your other cleaned copies.
Just an idea!!!
I would like to chat to the Perfect Vinyl guy and maybe then send him a copy of the Muse album to clean (amongst others)...
That's an even better idea.
You might consider the GEM Dandy Record Cleaner, especially in regard to rinsing off the Tergikleen. High powered tap water is the way to go and then follow with the ultrasonic with distilled water.
Thanks for the advice @washline.
Fascinating stuff.
This still seems to be a technology in it's infancy, with regards to records.
The KLAudio does seem to be "the king" of cleaners but... maybe not...and I get the impression that people do not use wetting agents with it, which is a difference with the other cleaners where people do.
Thank you for the effort and conclusions.
I'm glad you found it interesting. Thanks for the feedback.
I know, you said it again, and again, to rinse the records after cleaning. Somehow, I still believed the manufacturer of my vacuum machine, in this case, the keith monk prodigy, and only used the liquid they provided. Now I cleaned two new LPs without prior listening to them without cleaning, and was surprised that they had incredible surface noise. I ordered the clear audio liquid I saw in your videos and cleaned them once more with the new liquid, but again terrible surface noise. I then ordered Ilfotol and bought some distilled water and did a solution of 0.03% as you suggested. I did one cleaning with the 0.03% Ilfotol solution on the Keith Monk using a new kind of cheap 15 EUR Kabuki Brush with the Ilfotol solution and one afterwards with another Kabuki Brush with distilled water only. What should I say. The results are really impressive. First of all the surface noises is almost gone, secondly the overall sound quality has improved a lot. Can’t wait until my Degritter MK2 is delivered here in Germany. Hopefully it will be before Christmas.
Thank you so much to be an independent voice in this cleaning jungle.
Thanks for the feedback Reiner.
Most interesting, thank you for all your research and work mate! I am such a DIY kind of guy that after a LOT of reading and research and also communication with some of these fellows that are well known for extensive research into ultrasonic record cleaning and various solutions, I decided to make my own based upon the iSonic tank that Kirmuss uses.
If you ever have a day where you have absolutely NOTHING better to do, please feel free to check out my 4 part video here where I show how I made mine and I link to the different sources I've researched such as the exhaustive paper on 'The Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records' which goes HUGELY in depth as to temperatures and what various fluids actually do. I wrote to this fellow quite a bit and received back a lot of very helpful information which I incorporated into my ultrasonic chemistry/temperature/rotation speed/duration, etc.
Just be warned that I do not usually do videos, so they are *NOT* in any way shape or form polished like yours are. I only wanted to present what I had learned from all these people and how I ended up building mine (in many of these commercial ultrasonic RCM you cannot control all these variables) Parts 2 and onward really show updates and improvements in the system. Part 4 shows how I set up a two filter system to filter the cleaning solution using a 1 micron filter in series with a .35 micron filter which do an excellent job. Also adding a rinse tank in part 2 I think really made a huge difference. Basically, and somewhat similar to what you said, the concept is to use heat and a fairly aggressive chemistry, but then to be very thorough in rinsing afterward. As a matter of fact, after doing around 1000+ of my records, almost all came out really clean and quiet. About maybe 30 or so needed a bit more loving care which then progressed to the vacuum/rinse RCM, again using aggressive fluids, some gentle agitation, and a final rinse in this case with Laboratory Regrade Purified Water #2 with just a dash of Ethanol 😊
Thanks for this feedback, and I will certainly check out your videos! :-)
Wow, thanks for all this information. I just watched your videos and am very impressed with your set up.
@@DaveDenyerHeh, well, I am quite sure that you are just being very nice and polite, but thank you kindly 😊 I do not have the practice and finesse that you do and my equipment compared to yours is quite a ways back in the Proterozoic period. But, if you can grind through my extremely amateurish babble, there are some good references to others who are really top experts on this kind of stuff. Basically, like you said, you find a good combination of chemistry that is aggressive enough to do the job, and then you always make sure to give a good, thorough rinse with at least distilled water if not Lab Regrade purified water #2 (#1 is a bit overkill)
No seriously @@latheofheaven , I spent a good hour last night debating with my wife (the poor thing, she's incredibly patient and understanding) about why using Methanol vs Isopropyl in the final rinse: your expert claimed on that point he was not sure but just taking someone's word for it, (it was something about methanol having one less Carbon atom so being more 'clingy' to dirt particles...).., anyway, if that's the case, then why not use methanol in the main cleaning mix instead of isopropyl?
This is my problem, my brain won't let go, so ultimately I end up doing mad experiments for myself, because as you know the world is full of people just repeating 'parrot fashion' stuff they've been told without actually considering whether it's true or not.
BTW. My wife thinks my Loricraft & Degritter is more domestically acceptable than yours, whereas I think you're set up is almost certainly more effective than mine. ;-)
@@DaveDenyer Well... I don't know about that, but thank you for the nice comments 😊 Whatever I came up with is all based upon the knowledge of all these well known guys who have *REALLY* deeply researched this stuff. I can see that you are extremely thorough and like you say your 'brain just won't let go' Clearly, based upon your superlative equipment, you are a person who truly is always pursuing perfection, or as close as one can get to it.
TBH, my motivation other than just wanting to have an ultrasonic RCM due to its effectiveness, was that I do not have the means to spend $3000 - $4000 for an Audiodesk or whatever. And, driven to do the research, I began to understand that many of these still excellent commercial ultrasonic record cleaners do not allow one to 'dial in' many of the different variables. For example, many of the commercial ultrasonic RCM's have a rotation speed that is way to fast. The actual iSonic spindle for record cleaning which you can also buy is a very good example of that. It turns at 5 RPM, which is WAY too fast for effective cavitation. Even the little motorized spindle that I bought for mine came with a 12 volt adapter, but the speed still was a little fast at about 2 RPM. So, I bought a 3 volt adapter which turns the spindle at a much better .5 RPM or so.
I could see that with the proper information primarily and the right tank (the iSonic Kirmuss uses is very good - I think it has been updated since I bought mine) I could have total control over the chemistry, the heat, the rotation speed, not to mention the ability to properly clean 6 records at a time as opposed to just one. There were just SO dang many advantages to making your own, that I decided to do so. And, FWIW, after doing well over 1000 of mine, they all, both new and used, came out beautifully clean and quiet. Of course, this is taking into consideration the level of my playback equipment. And again, like I had mentioned, there were perhaps 30 or so that needed a bit more aggressive attention on my also DIY vacuum/rinse RCM with a variety of DIY solutions, a bit of gentle scrubbing, and of course, always a final rinse with Lab Regrade Purified Water #2 😁
hi Dave, great video. A few points: the Kirmuss runs at 35khz and the tank units are mostly 40khz as is the Humminguru. The Kirmuss is manufactured by Codyson in China and they have just made a new unit which runs at 49khz. I was going to use the original Codyson for my unit but after reading a number of articles by Rushton Paul and Neil Antin who both recommend at least 60khz with a preference to 120khz. the smaller khz number gives bigger more violent, cavitation whilst the higher khz gives a softer, smaller cavitation. i run a 132khz 10 litre tank unit which runs well and get records super clean. i have run a new LP through 50, 10 minute cleaning cycles at 132khz and have not had and problems with the records changing sound, even weighed the record after every 10 cycles and had no weight loss. Might try the same test with a 40khz tank unit. As for flids, I do use Tergikleen at .03 dilution as per Neil Antin's direction in his Record cleaning guide. i also use tub unit similar to Perfect Vinyl with an enzyme cleaner. After every cleaning process the records get rinsed in a custom modified motorized VinylStyl deep clean tank unit then vacuumed with a Po-Ject VC.S alu. The water in the VinylStyl units get filtered to 1 micron and reused a few times then replaced. Mine is a process but it gets everything clean and dry. I have cleaned a number of extremely dirty and unplayable records for some collector friends with great results, and have also set up a system for a friend of mine.
The Degritter is great but super expensive, the KLaudio is the best 40khz unit available but I would not use it for that reason. the Audiodesk is 40khz as well but has proven unreliable. the Humminguru I can;t make a comment on as I have not used it, I steer clear of anything that runs at 60khz or less.
I am also in process of setting up a brush unit on the 132khz tank unit to clean better. Norman no contact ultrasonics do not remove oil residues from fingerprints on records.
As for fluids in the ultrasonic I have found the Groovewasher ultrasonic fluid to work well along with Tergiclean. But the fluid that surprised me is the SpinClean fluid because it has a flocculant agent in the fluid with encapsulates the grit/dirt and sinks it to the bottom of the tank.
Sorry for the long replies but I have been testing the viability of ultrasonics for a while and reading all I can and have made ny conclusions as stated above.
Thanks for all this information Peter. Very interesting indeed!
Do you think it is b/c you cleaned it so many times? I do no more than 10 minutes on the humminguru and then dry it and put it in an innersleeve. Unless I really get it dirty, which is seriously doubtful I wouldn't wash it again.
Hi, yes, I am sure it's because I washed it so many times, but that was the purpose of my experimentation: to establish whether the process is / can be damaging... I wanted to know this for myself, because I don't want to even slightly damage my records when I clean them.
Now i go back to my trusted Project VC II and the bliss of L´art and MOFI solutions. That has worked perfectly for me in years and years. No ultrasonic cleaner for me, this time. With L´art i DO use the MOFI Rinse as "water" for the mix. No dem or dist water here, only the real thing (MOFI´s are destilled up to 7 times).
Thanks for commenting Thomas. I do think a final ultrasonic 'rinse' (maybe just one cycle on the HumminGuru) is beneficial.
Very interesting video and findings. You put so much work in to answer these questions for yourself (and ultimately all of us) I’d love you to take the testing a bit further. Might I suggest:
1) run a Muse record in the degritter 25 times… that’s the only way to compare apples to apples and compare 40 vs 120htz as being the contributing factor. Until then it’s still (well conceived) speculation.
2) run the records 25 times but without any cleaning solution. That would help determine if the solution was a factor or not.
You’re conclusions are well reasons but I just don’t think the testing has been thorough enough
Hi, not sure if you've seen video number 4 on this subject, I did run 12 cleans side by side, to compare 'apples with apples' as it were... It was only then did I discover the possible hardening / harshness revealing itself in the HumminGuru cleaned copy. It was a signature that perhaps was apparent from the start albeit a very very feint one (that was not objectionable at all). The Degritter cleaned LP exhibited absolutely none of this.
Most of the cleanings were with just 0.03% Ilfotol solution. That is extremely weak and I really don't feel would adversely affect the results. My video number 3 I experiment far more with cleaning fluids (chemicals), rinses etc. and concluded that in this type of machine they are best avoided due to the difficulty in effectively rinsing thereafter.
I hope that helps. I am of course continuing to experiment (and no doubt always will as I'm always open to new ideas / research). However FYI the method I'm currently settled on after all this is to do a thorough clean on my Loricraft vacuum machine (perhaps two cycles using cleaning solutions followed by a rinse) and then ultrasonic 'cleaning' / rinsing on the Degritter, anything from 1 to 3 full cleaning cycles (6 mins cavitation each cycle).
@@DaveDenyer appreciate the reply and explanation! I also have a vacuum cleaner that I anticipated using in conjunction with an ultrasonic. Figuring out the proper routine is part of the fun. Of course the notion that I could actually be doing some harm to the records is very scary. So I appreciate the effort you’re putting into this.
Just came across your channel this evening so I’ll have to check out your other videos as well. Thanks and keep up the great work!
Hey Dave. What cleaning solution do u think works best? I have the Degritter and would love to hear you opinion.
Hi Joshua, very good question. I am now using a two-stage process. I do a ‘chemical’ pre-wash on the Loricraft (still experimenting with fluids) then wash / rinse in the Degritter.
A Discoantistat or Spinclean would provide a cost-effective prewash alternative to the Loricraft. In this method I use Clearaudio Pure Groove and L’art du Son (one after the other, not mixed together), then a rinse before going in the Degritter.
In the Degritter I’m currently using 80% distilled water 20% Ethanol, 0.05% Ilfotol. You can omit the Ethanol, or use IPA.
Have you looked at the Glass Audio Desk? I recently posted a video questioning whether it is truly ultrasonic? It is effective for me over thousands of records but now I am thinking there may be better alternatives?
Hi Dr. Robert! I haven't tried an Audio Desk and like you, am not totally sure it's actually ultrasonic. I did just watch your video on that subject btw.
I've no doubt it works well enough: I have tried the Clearaudio 'sonic' machines which uses high frequency 'vibration' but not ultrasonic cavitation. It works...
If you check my previous videos you'll see I'm an advocate of record cleaning, even if 'just' using a Discoantistat or Spin Clean. Both are better than nothing in my view.
So, my recent experimentation has been to see which ultrasonic machine works best for me. In this and the previous video you'll see I got extremely positive results from the Degritter. What I'm not sure about, but do strongly suspect, is that it's the 120kHz that's the key element that makes the difference.
Thanks for your reply and glad you saw my video also. I am leaning toward a degritter if my glass goes out! More to follow!
Cool. FYI. my current method is a thorough chemical clean followed by a rinse on the Loricraft, then to finish an ultrasonic rinse in the Degritter.
Happy to chat about this anytime, or maybe we could even do a video!
I use the VPI cyclone with the audio intelligent fluid and it does a good job for most. I also own a Kirmuss and will try it in combination with Ilfotal. I am leaning toward sending all my records to Steve because for the cost of a degrittter I could in theory send over 400 records to him and never spend any time ever cleaning them. I don’t think I can bring myself to do the full Kirmuss process even 1 more time. Life is too short. Perhaps one day, I’ll spring for the degritter though because it seems actually to be strangely alluring and it looks to work.
LOL, I know what you mean about 'the full Kirmuss process' although I do think it gives great results, albeit with a slight reservation which I referred to in the video: I felt the HumminGuru had a smilier sonic signature: verging on "brittleness". Thanks for the feedback.
Hi Dave, I use a Loricraft and use tergikleen with distilled water (with one brush both directions) followed by distilled water only using a different brush again in both directions. I don’t buy used records but have records I’ve had for 40+ years cleaned on this machine or my old VPI. I have two friends with the KLaudio and two friends with degritters mki and all four have had no issues. I use Furutech sk-iii brush and Furutech destat 3 prior to listening on my turn tables.
I was considering on using this humminguru for only a clean with no surfactant if I don’t want to do a full clean on my loricraft, if I get extra dust on the record. Question, maybe I missed it in your review; did you try the solution humminguru sells for your tests?
Hey Joe, I didn't try HumminGuru's own cleaning fluid, but did try the Degritter fluid as well as various 'home made' recipes...
My issue with all these fluids was the rinsing afterwards. I feel that if you used a HumminGuru purely as a post-wash rinsing stage after your normal Loricraft washing and rinsing process I'm sure it would provide benefits.
My current regime having done all this research is an even more intensive 3-cycle clean on the Loricraft followed by an ultrasonic rinse on the Degritter. Subsequent cleanings are just a quick brush with my Furutech SK-III, and only if necessary a quick rinse on the Degritter.
So, I think this is pretty much what you're suggesting doing with a HumminGuru, and I'm sure this would be a worthwhile process.
@@DaveDenyer thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate it!
Hi Dave, I received the Humminguru today and tested on two new records (craft and verve analog productions) without cleaning on my loricraft and played on my main system but one thing I forgot to mention I also use a SK-EX (used to demag) and it was great. Furutech makes a newer version of my; highly recommended.
Now, I used a record (Ella, lost Berlin tapes) that I cleaned on the loricraft a while ago and also demagnetized. It had dust on it as I played on my secondary system with my Rega p8 and I heard pops even after I brushed and zapped it. Well it’s much better after I used the Humminguru. Super quiet but I’m using a $6k cartridge, so I really should play it upstairs for a fair comparison. Anyhow, no surfactant, 2 minute cycle and 5 minute dry. I don’t understand why people say that you need 10 minutes drying.
Anyhow, all the best to you!
By the way, 40 mhz of ultrasonic is the same as is used on the KLaudio. So when you damaged the record it can’t be the frequency. Maybe it’s because it’s has only 2 units versus the 4 of the KLaudio.
OMG. Why hasn´t this been tested properly by those manufacturers who makes 40HZ machines, if it´s true what u claim here? (i belive in u). I just cleaned a collection for a friend, as he´s records got damaged by a flood. Cleaned about 1000 records now on the Humminguru, but stayed with the 2 min cleaning cycles and 5 min drying. I occasionally hear some click/pops, but i´m not sure they wasn´t there in the first place? Otherwise, i´m pretty satisfied with the results so far. I only use dem. water, with a little (1-2 drops) of sulfate for the tension of the water (best way for me to describe). Thanks for doing this and share. Cheers from Denmark.
Don't worry: I don't think one 2-minute cycle on the HumminGuru will have done any harm Thomas: I'm sure the ticks you heard were already there, maybe made clearer by the lessening of 'fog'.
I will have more videos on this subject soon, as I continue to try and unravel the best way to get the very best sound from your records.
hi Dave.
have you taken into consideration that the new pressings of vinyl use a different plastic pellet than a few years ago.plus the vinyl you damaged was a coloured vinyl,again possibly adding to the problem??
Hi Paul, these are very worthwhile considerations. I'm not saying that the Humminguru / 40kHz will damage all vinyl, but that it can seems worth knowing...
It’s really just a postulation that it is the specific frequency of the Ultrasonic that caused the damage, unless you perform 25 cleaning cycles at alternative frequencies…it seems it’s like a record cleaning equivalent of an LD50 test, this ?
Another parameter might be the power draw of the u/s transducers….(which you touched upon) and the position of the transducers in relation to the record surface.
Having said that, I have audibly and visually damaged a few records , notably 7” 45’s , where a white grittiness has exudates to the surface of the disc and further cleaning just makes it worse.
I now only U/S for 4 mins in distilled water with ~1% isopropyl alcohol after a pre-scrub (with surfactant) and rinse on a VPI. Then a final dry and rinse on the VPI after U/S bath.
Hi Andy, I did the 13th -25th cleans on the HumminGuru really to confirm what I was hearing after 'just' 12 cleans. I wasn't hearing this at all on the Degritter cleaned LP. I absolutely agree it doesn't necessarily indicate that it's the 40kHz that's the issue, but it certainly suggests the subject deserves more investigation, or concern, depending on how look at it.
What machine were you using when you damaged those 7" 45s?
@@DaveDenyer it was a d.i.y style 40kHz 180w 5 litre tank. 70s island records 45s were particularly prone. And a Pete Wylie/wah 45 from the 80s and my xtc making plans for Nigel were particular victims ... reprocessed vinyl was particularly vulnerable (where you can see the vinyl 'mix' before hand)
@@andylittlewood8331 thanks, that’s really interesting info. Shame about those Islands… damn!
Two questions:
1). Was the Muse record on colored vinyl?
2). Did you run the cleaning cycles immediately one after another or was there any break in between?
Hi, thanks for these questions:
1. Yes, it is a cream coloured vinyl. Whether that makes any difference I honestly don't know. For some time I took comfort from Michael Fremer's experiment with a pink vinyl Lp, in which he sated he hadn't seen any evidence of pink residue in his ultrasonic tank... However it occurred to me that you can certainly hear groove damage before you can see it.
2. For the first 12 cleanings as is clearly detailed in my previous video(s) I listened & compared the LPs after each cleaning cycle, so the cleaning cycles would have been an absolute minimum of perhaps an hour apart, most were several hours / days apart. For the final 13 cycles to see if the damage I suspected after 12 cleaning cycles was 'real' I didn't bother listening in between so maybe did one or two cycles, then came back an hour or so later and did another few: I didn't stand there for an hour + immediately repeating the cleaning cycles. In retrospect there's a chance the bath would've heated up beyond a safe (for vinyl) level, however two things to consider here; the vinyl is still perfectly flat, there is no signs of warping whatsoever. Also, the initial suspicion and trait of 'harshness' was apparent very much earlier on in the experiment.
Thanks for the interesting review on the US machines. Do you rate Art Du Son cleaning liquid Dave. I have been using for some years.
Hi Chris, I do rate L'Art Du Son and did also use it myself for several years. However I now prefer other fluids (although I still keep L'Art du Son in my arsenal). If I do use L'Art du Son now, I strongly recommend very thorough rinsing otherwise to avoid the resultant sound from being a bit "scratchy".
@@DaveDenyer OK thanks Dave. I still use an old Moth vacuum RCM but saving up for a Degritter after your video.
@@chriswills9437 cool, thanks for the feedback.
Oof, I just ordered a Humminguru and was all excited... I was under the impression that their big drawback was that they were not as powerful as "serious" ultrasonic cleaners, and I would need to pre-clean the records. (I also ordered a Disc Doctor kit for that purpose.) The Humminguru was going to mainly be for rinsing and drying. It was supposed to be a big upgrade over my Spin Clean (which has served me well, but it's time to take the next step).
I have no doubt that your conclusions are correct. However, my own theory is that excessive cleaning of any type can cause some kind of wear over time. However, we also know that playing them dirty is bad for them, so it's the lesser of two evils (and they sound much better clean). It just seems like over-cleaning with the Humminguru is much worse than over-cleaning with the Degritter. I guess it is not powerful enough to make smaller bubbles, which sounds like a contradiction at first.
I have some thinking to do. I have been logging my collection on Discogs, and I did not realize how filthy so many of my records are (stuff I haven't touched in years). I need something more automated than the Spin Clean (plus drying with cloths seems to leave lint and static). Perhaps I will start with giving the low-value stuff one (and only one) run each in the Humminguru and then see if I like what I hear. I really despise distortion, so if I hear it, my guard will be up. My plan was to clean them, put them in new sleeves, and then handle them with gloves so I wouldn't have to clean them again for decades. Let's see if I can pull it off.
Hi John, I want to point out that all I have done is to report my findings and hypothesise about 'why'. I am not a scientist...
I did not find that 1,2 or 3 cleans on the HumminGuru gave undesirable results. I'd need to recheck my notes to find out when I first became concerned.
I still would recommend record cleaning and the spin clean followed by a thorough rinse would seem like a great starting place. I'd definitely avoid excessively repetitive HumminGuru cleans though, just going on my personal experience.
@@DaveDenyer Yes, I will definitely try to stick to one run per record for now. I appreciate the research! I feel like I can use it more safely now.
Wow Dave!! I can’t believe you destroyed a record with the humming guru!! Crazy. I’ve been experiment with your tips as well as the audiophile man. I will say that ive had similar observations with tergitol, and have decided I’ll probably abandon it for routine cleaning. I have a VPI 16.5 (probably a surrogate for your loricrafth) and a Humminguru. My advanced process is:
I have a VPI 16.5 I’ve used for years. I’m using it in lieu of a spin clean with a goats hair brush. I’m obsessed… my current process is
Terigtol with 10% Alcohol on VPI
Enzylme “one step” on VPI
Humminguru with “Small bottle surfactant. 2 wash cycles one dry
Distilled with nothing else final rinse on VPI.
I’m not sure each step is necessary
Hi Jefferson, thanks for the feedback: out of interest have you tried making the final rinse in the HumminGuru? obviously with pure water and making sure the machine is thoroughly cleaned out too? It's just that with the Loricraft / HumminGuru I felt that the ultrasonic rinse was more effective than a clean water and vacuum rinse (well, more effective I don't know: it just sounded better).
@@DaveDenyerThanks! TBH I’ve been going back and forth on where to do the rinse. I actually bought a second reservoir for the Humminguru for a straight Distilled rinse. What I found was that the long wash/ dry cycle still left the record damp, so I needed a second drying cycle. This would be fine I guess, but I thought intellectually it would be “better” to do the rinse on the VPI. Also it seemed in some cases I had more noise with the HG rinse, so I thought I was leaving some kind of residue behind. As I think of that now, I was also using a tergikleen wash step in the HG then. (I know, too many variables!)
So my reasoning was that the VPI would get anything potentially left behind.
Obviously my process is evolving!
@@JeffersonDD my expectation was that I'd do an Ultrasonic clean then rinse / dry on the Loricraft. I have a friend who uses a Kirmuss bath in that way with a VPI to do the final rinse / dry. However, much to my surprise I felt that the rinse / drying process added a very feint veil (compered to using the HumminGuru to dry the record (using 2 long dry cycles)). It didn't make sense to me either, but I heard it on the three or four times I tried it so am now using the Degritter's fan drying; although the vacuum is unquestionably the best way of removing harsh chemicals.
@@DaveDenyer well that works then, I’ll definitely go back and revisit rinsing on the Hummingguru. I found some original (but filthy) LPs at a shop today and they’re perfect foder for nailing down a final (ish) process😜. Thanks again for your meticulous results and time:)
I have the same experience as you with Tergikleen . But what is the alternative for the Degritter ? Perhaps Triton x 100 ?
I’ve not tried Triton x 100. My feeling is if you want to use cleaning chemicals in the Degritter, just make sure they’re easily rinsed, and not too concentrated.
Thank you Dave, compliments for your excellent channel ! I never archieved such good results as with Tergikleen in the Degritter. The records sounds very open after 3 x heavy clean and 1 x dry with 3 drops / liter Tergikleen. As a rinse I gave the records a final heavy clean with dry in a second Degritter with only distilled water. But after about 5 records some foam is visible. The conclusion is that Tergikleen is extremely powerful and frustratingly difficult to remove. The dose may be too high. I will test lower dose and start with 1 x drop / liter Tergikleen . Let you know the results.
I love these videos. They have helped me to decide on which machine to purchase. Have you read Neil Antins' work? It's available to download as a pdf for free. Precision Aqueus Cleaning of Vinyl Records is the name. There's some great knowledge in there.
Not yet! I have downloaded it now and will read it when I get the time.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Hi Dave, do you think there would be any degrading of a record if you did 25 chemical cleans on your vacuum machine?
I don't think so. If I buy a very old record I may give it many cleans, over a period of time.
It would be interesting if you were to compare your preferred ‘home’ regime to the ‘professional’ paid for system you showed with the pre-clean and 120/250kHz baths aswell.
Thanks Andy, this is in progress and will be reported upon soon.
Ive read that extended continuous use of the humminguru can cause a temperature rise. Did you leave gaps between each cycle or check the water temperature?
Good question Sam: my process was clean the record (including the drying cycle), then 'air' it on a drying rack for maybe 15-20 minutes, then listen to it. So, I'd say mostly the fluid had half an hour or more to cool down between cleanings. However on some occasions (particularly towards the end of the testing) I did clean one after another. However this last phase of testing was as a result of having noticed the sonic trait developing during the 'one clean at a time' phase.
@@DaveDenyer are you tempted to see if what you report is repeatable? You would think the manufacturer would have tested extended use of the machine. Either way I definitely agree about residue on the record as when I used the Humminguru fluid as suggested without a rinse there seemed to be a dulling of things. When using Ilfotol I don't really notice this.
Cheers
@@samsmith2206 I have now sold on the HumminGuru, having established that (IMO) the Degritter was clearly superior in it's cleaning and seems to be complete safe for my vinyl. I'd be tempted to do similar with a KL Audio but would need to borrow one because I certainly can't afford to buy one just to find out...
Very interesting. I think the challenge for many vinyl lovers is to find a machine that will clean their records safely and effectively for a more modest cost :-)
Good point. I do appreciate that hence why I often refer to the Disco-Antistat, which is less than £100 here in the UK. I believe the Spin Clean is very similar but uses felt pads instead of what appear to be 'goat hair' brushes... Above that, I'd suggest the Project or Okki Nokki vacuums machines, above those VPIs or Clearaudio and so on...
@@DaveDenyer do you recommend Okki Nokki over the Humminguru?
@@ekjellgren If I had to choose between one or the other, then yes, I'd go for cleaning solution & vacuuming off.
I appreciate your in-depth look at this topic but would like more a objective take on the results. You could simply do a digital capture and compare frequency charts. If the record has been destroyed as you state, it should be obvious in a recording. KL Audio did multiple 9 hour continuous 40khz on colored discs and found zero evidence of loss of vinyl. They have a powerful 200w machine and tested it to make sure it would not damage records.
I would like to try a KL Audio.
I have damaged about two records with a generic ultrasonic. I cut my time to no more than 5-7 mins and I put no chemicals in the distilled water. I have had no problems since.
Also if your records have raised surfaces divots in them, don't use ultrasonic cleanic because it can seriously damage your records due to the caviation process.
Cool, thanks for the feedback Sid
Just out of curiosity, how damaged was it? You said even worse than the uncleaned copy, but most people people would probably consider the uncleaned copy perfectly fine. Was it ruined in the sense of being completely unlistenable and distorted or ruined in the sense of being slightly degraded to the trained ear?
OK, good question: I would imagine if I gave that copy to someone with a budget set up they might not think it was damaged, just not a very good-sounding record. In contrast if I gave them the degritter cleaned copy, or the Loricraft cleaned copy, or any of the others I do think they'd hear differences and prefer them.
The Degritter cleaned copy (number 4) is, on my system, which is very much tailored for hearing fine differences, probably as much improved over the uncleaned record as a good audiophile pressing pressed at QRP is over a standard pressing.
@@DaveDenyerThanks, great answer! I have a somewhat high end system - though nothing like yours - and I have to admit that with most new records I can’t hear a difference after cleaning them on my Pro-ject vacuum or Humminguru. It’s a different story with used records of course.
It looks like in your video with Steve Evans it wassuggested that the ultrasonic (HG) didn't damage the record? I appeared that is what he was saying to you? He uses 40khz too? Do you believe that? Keep up the vids!
Well spotted Mark (I think you're the first to notice this).
I decided to test Steve's notion : ie. to clean the 'damaged' Muse LP: I gave it a very thorough chemical clean (on the Loricraft) followed by multiple cycles on the Degritter. My thinking: if the 'damage' was 'just' the uneven removal of a 'plasticiser layer' this should remove the remnants and reveal a great sounding LP beneath (the 'as cut groove') as Steve calls it. However, the result: it still sounds damaged - slightly worse than the never-cleaned copy. Therefore I am fairly convinced the damage is to the vinyl rather than any 'plasticiser layer'.
I have spoken to Steve about this and next we'll try to 'restore it' using his process. So, I will be sending it to him in the US. We're planning a whole bunch of follow-up record cleaning experiments so do watch this space!
I did note that his new 4.0 process involves some time at 40kHz amongst various other ultrasonic frequencies. Personally, I'm not at all sure this is a step forward but remain open-minded.
I'd like to add where I am currently with all this: the Degritter cleaned Muse LP simply sounds clearly better than any of the others. So, my regime is: thorough chemical / vacuum clean (up to three cycles: Clearaudio Pure Groove, Tergikleen, distilled water / ethanol / 0.03% Ilfotol) then around 2 or 3 x 6-minute cycles in the Degritter. I doubt this is as effective as Steve's process but is achievable for me at home and follows a similar basic principle.
Awesome response. I'm hooked on your content and can't wait to see if Steve can possibly do anything to restore the album Your dedication to this topic is remarkable and like a cliff hanger movie, waiting for the sequel LOL. Just love it. Happy 2024
Haha thanks for your great support Mark.
Hi Dave, thank you for your videos, will be great if you will use a better mic, it is hard sometimes to listen what you are saying. There is some very small mic which can be attached to a t shirt. Thanks!
Thanks for your feedback. I will look into that.
Very scary 🤔
Question: Do you have the exact name / link to the Ilford? solution that you use?
Ilford ilfotol wetting agent.
This is Ilfotol. I've used it since the 1970s, for photographic work. I dilute it to approximately 0.03% solution for record cleaning, ie. 0.3ml in 1l (1000ml) of distilled water. www.ilfordphoto.com/1905162
Thank you :-) @@DaveDenyer
@@DaveDenyerI’m not sure I follow your conversion can you give it to me in layman terms?
nice commercial, keep it up
Your video is causing a lot of chatter in Discord channel!
Thanks for the heads-up. To Be honest I've never looked at Discord...
Could you share the channel please?
I have tried many cleaning solutions over the last 15 years and distlled water works just as good. Like Lawerence said if it looks horribly dirty I do a 50/50 mix with isopropyl alcohol for a prewash. I also think these Ultrasonic cleaners are a waste of alot of money. I use a wet vac $30, Vinyl Vac $30, Brush $2.00 Distilled Water $ 1.25. And I get my records to play just as quiet as my friend with his exspensive Ultrasonic cleaner. For a mere $62.25 they sound just as good as cleaned on a Ultrasonic cleaner. Not sure why people in the vinyl community are pushing these things. I feel they are a total waste of money.
Thanks for your feedback.
As a Disc Doctor brush cleaning regimen devotee, I welcomed a cheap ultrasonic device into my life and suddenly cleaned all the records (8 at a time) that were waiting for me to find the time. Results about the same as the excellent Disc Doctor. Have stacked up some still-noisy records for a manual re-clean... they are still stacked there.
Well, I mean how should a "small and very specific" topic like ultrasonic record-cleaning be any less controversial like any other thing vinyl or hifi in general where everything is fiercely debated and nothing is agreed upon, not even the correct height of a cable-raiser. I just hope you do understand the - how do I say this best - "girth" of your conclusion. So, according to you ultrasonic-cleaning machines that operate at around 40kHz do kill vinyl, some sooner, some later - but kill they will! You must be aware that there are some very prominent vinyl-evangelists out there saying that 20-40kHz is in fact the only way to go and that they came to this conclusion after cleaning millions and gazillions of records. I'm not criticizing you - firstly because I can't , secondly because I think that muse record had it coming. But in all seriousness - don't you think there could be more variables at play here? Type of vinyl etc. etc. In the end I'm just so frustrated because I'm planing to buy an ultrasonic record cleaner and again - I do not know what to look for, what to avoid and so on and so forth. In the eternal words of the Virgin Mary - Vinyl is hard. Kind regards form Cologne, Uli
Hi Uli, I did this experiment peimarily to satisfy my own curiosity: because I had enough experience of ultrasonic record cleaning to know I wanted to include one in my record cleaning arsenal. And because there are such conflicting opinions on this subject, I wanted to hear the results with my own ears…
I do not know why the HumminGuru cleaned record sounds as it does. Nor why the Degritter cleaned version does. There are a few design differences: the frequency, the temperature control, the filtering… I can only guess as to the full reasons for the results I experienced.