he's a slave to fashion...love that jacket and tie combo.
I'm good with my Spin Clean until I can afford an Audio Desk.
I'm good with my Spin Clean until I can afford an Audio Desk.
Don't waste money on ultrasonic RCMs
37 responses Add your response
Every RCM that I've used made the record's sound worse. Those ultrasonic machines are Chinese garbage. They don't even work as they're suppose to. And the real industrial machines are incredibly expensive. Cleaning by hand is the only way. Cotton ball heavily soaked in 91% alcohol. Clean in the direction of the grooves and apply decent pressure. Keep doing it until the cotton ball remains clean. Usually 2-3 per side. |
invictus005 Every RCM that I’ve used made the record’s sound worse.Really? That’s remarkable, given that so many have had different experiences. Which ones have you used? Cleaning by hand is the only way. Cotton ball heavily soaked in 91% alcohol.Alcohol? Why use a solvent to clean an LP when you can use a good ultrasonic RCM and avoid solvents completely? Or, you can use other methods and substantially reduce your use of solvents. |
Fremer has an article on ultrasound-based RCMs and a new one, here--> https://www.analogplanet.com/content/if-charles-kirmusss-record-cleaning-machine-and-regimen-correct... The claim to fame for this new model is alteration of the ultrasound incident angle relative to the record surface and use of a lower frequency. As I remember this aspect of physics, that's hooey. Here are the salient claims: "...he's set the frequency to 35kHz, which he claims is significantly lower than most of the others....Kirmuss says the "direct hit" and higher frequency of the other machines
damages record grooves and "shaves off" high frequency information." |
I see tons of people that claim alcohol has no effect on vinyl. I've tried lab grade 99.8% pure IPA and I can see the vinyl change when it hits the surface. The color changes from a deep black shiny color to dull gray- black. Has anyone else observed this? I've tried two brands of IPA. And it made the LP sound worse- more background hiss than before use. I must be using the wrong stuff?? I use an inexpensive RCM instead. Record Doctor V. It does a really good job if you clean and then rinse with distilled water. |
Those of us who bought LPs in the 60s knew (or found out) that even if you only use isopropyl to clean your stylus with an artist's brush you wait 15 minutes (and blow on the stylus a lot) before playing anything. Otherwise, sounds great once. After that.. irreparable hiss. I was taken aback years later to hear that you use alky on CDs, but it works fine on them. Never on a vinyl record. |
Laboratory grade isopropyl alcohol (also known as isopropanol) is fine, so long as it is highly diluted in water. I cannot imagine using it undiluted directly on an LP surface. Furthermore, I wouldn’t use cotton; it’s fibrous and will leave tiny fragments on and in the LP surface, or at least that’s possible. A standard recipe is 25% isopropanol and a few drops of non-ionic detergent (Triton X100 or Tween20) to reduce the surface tension of the water. That’s what I use in my VPI HW17. There are HUGE threads on this subject. When it comes to ultrasonics, I am convinced it works, but I am not yet convinced about optimal ways to do it and so have not yet adopted the method. But for you (Invictus) to poo-poo the whole idea is rather silly, unless you were being funny. If the latter, you were successful. Cleeds, It’s simple. Alcohol will remove that which is soluble in alcohol. Oily deposits from fingertips, etc, are not so soluble in water alone, but they are more easily removed with dilute alcohol. Can you imagine that there might be fingerprints on second-hand LPs? That’s not too difficult to imagine. |
Anyway...no solvents on records. Solvents bleach out the plasticizers. They wick it right out. This is bad news for the record. Eg, to make sure that the stickers on a Teo cable case will actually stick, I do a quick wipe of the surface of the case with a 99.99% isopropanol. For some plastics to be ’glueable’, for a polypropylene to be glueable, you can buy a combination of high grade superglue and a companion container or marker (rub on mating surface with marker) of a high volatile type solvent. It cleans the surface of the polypropylene so that the glue will adhere. These two part systems seem to have an additional bonding aspect but one part of the system is definitely surface prep for removal of plasticizers. http://www.loctiteproducts.com/p/sg_plstc/overview/Loctite-Plastics-Bonding-System.htm The polypropylene will then bond with use of this product but the mating surfaces are afterward different than they were originally, regarding strength and flexibility. If the record’s vynil material did not have the plasticizer in it, it would be nearly as hard as a rock. And likely fragile. ~~~~~~~~~~ Additionally, this can be a problem when running a blow moulding operation, where you can use what is known as ’regrind’. Where you take the scraps, grind them down and add them to the new pellets that feed into the injection moulding machine. If the level of regrind vs virgin pellets (of the given plastic material) is too high a ratio, your moulds (preforms) will fail. All the heat involved in injection moulding and then blow moulding the preform that is made in the injection moulding process, this leaches out the plasticizers. The stench in Chinese rubber products (you can smell it when you walk in some hardware stores) is this plasticizer product. The Chinese tend to use a lot of it to cover up the fact that they can’t quite yet make a perfect plastic like the western countries have learned to make, over the years. They over soften to prevent the opposite, and some issues of a degradation that would be unacceptably fast, in various ways. It still causes the plastics to fail differently than the western produced ones, and too soon, regardless. Give it another decade and the Chinese will finally have the plastics built right. Which is all about the lore involved in the actual process, which is learned over time, via experience and feedback. Part of the essential meaning of the line: ’the map is not the territory’. ~~~~~~~~~~ Since a record is all about the surface quality, and the volatiles will attack the surface, then no volatiles in the mix. If volatiles are in the mix, reduced in amount/level, is probably the best way to go. Specific formulas that have been found to be gentle enough, is the way to go. The release compound is probably the real problem and the situation is made worse by the fact that what you use to get rid of release compound also poses some danger to the record. Easy does it. I have not personally had time to play with an ultrasonic RCM, but have played a bit with buying, installing, using, and tuning/tear down/calibrating/etc various ultrasonic sealing hardware in the industrial end of things. I am familiar with how they work and how they deal with surfaces, frequencies, etc... and water based mediums. In such analysis, a properly executed untrasonic RCM is probably the best device you can buy for cleaning records. Again, not just a willy-nilly produced bit of ultrasonic RCM (the map is not the territory!-be sure your machine of choice was not made by people who know as little as the average dude!). But..look to buy a well researched and well engineered one, that has some proper lore of how ultrasonics and water might deal with a record - being part of the engineering fundamentals in it's design and build. Then distinguishing between who is producing original inventions vs who is copying and pasting (parroting/mirroring/mimicking) the engineering and calling it the same, with zero lore, knowledge and skill behind the effort. IE, the problem with Chinese purchases for the past 20 years. You almost have to investigate at the level that Elon Musk hires via. By asking the solutions to problems encountered by prospective employees. The real professional will be able to detail evrey aspect, where as the non principle parrot, will fail. The vast bulk of customers have no time for that, nor the skill set required to evaluate what is in in front of them.... thus the parrot-mimics end up with a considerable amount of sales. Sometimes the original inventor can go under, due to onslaught of thieving parrots/mimics/copycats, who steal their thunder. Happens all the time and we've seen it in high end audio. |
lewm Cleeds, It’s simple. Alcohol will remove that which is soluble in alcohol. Oily deposits from fingertips, etc, are not so soluble in water alone, but they are more easily removed with dilute alcohol. Can you imagine that there might be fingerprints on second-hand LPs? That’s not too difficult to imagine.Of course. But since I've gone the ultrasonic cleaning route, I've found no need for solvents. |
There are some record cleaning fluids on the market that contain some percentage of alcohol. People that insist on using undiluted alcohol on their vinyl records do so at the risk of damaging them over time. DO NOT use alcohol on older 78's. You will ruin them. The RCM generally isn't the issue. It's the cleaning fluid used and the failure to adequately remove the fluid and contaminants from the record surface. A few sources that should be reviewed and contemplated: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/a-very-long-primer-on-record-cleaning-fluids The above is VERY long - but worth the time to read. This one is from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_and_restoration_of_vinyl_discs Library of Congress: http://www.loc.gov/preservation/care/record.html People wanna always take shortcuts. Methinks Mr. Tang's method of applying WD40 is just another shortcut along the lines of using wood glue. At the very least, get yourself a Spin Clean if you can't afford a RCM ultrasonic or otherwise. I personally use a Okki Nokki along with Audio Intelligent Vinyl Solutions products and I'm very happy with it and the results I obtain. Bottomline: It's your choice. It's your record collection. It's your money. |
Maybe I should feed the records cod liver oil. Then they'll have a nice shiny coat. https://www.analogplanet.com/content/if-charles-kirmusss-record-cleaning-machine-and-regimen-correct... an article from fremer's website. The ultrasonic devices used in sealing containers or doing welding, work at 41.2-41.5khz, approximately. This is due to this particular frequency being perfect for penetrating water, as most of the fluids sealed in a tube or whatnot, are water based. Fremer mentions the frequency of one unit being chosen to be at 35khz, and this is probably tied to the water penetration issue and cavitation and this micro porosity being introduced to the record surface via the easy to find ultrasonic devices that work at 41.2-41.5khz. |
I haven't bought a US cleaner yet, but I've had records cleaned on some where I believe it was done right. The results justify getting my own machine. The Kirmuss model video sounds like the testing and camera work done in the tank backs up their approach to design. I much prefer design based on testing rather than "this should work great" if you use these parts together. I also totally buy into using distilled water only for the cleaning. I use just a touch of isopropol today in my final wash on my Okki Nokki. I'll continue to use that machine for drying. |
KLaudio ran tests with yellow colored vinyl where they ran records through the system for very extended periods of time with no yellow colored residue in the tank. You are looking at the record residue gunk taken out. I've had the Klaudio ultrasonic since 2013. Previously a Loricraft which I use only for extremely soiled records. The KLaudio sound quality is incredible with lower noise floor, nearly all pops and ticks gone, enhanced low level details, better separation of instruments and more refined tonality. Many used "first pressings etc" that I buy typically are brought up a "play grade" or two and the cleaning of new records makes a big difference too. I know my records well and have never heard any degridation in sound or high frequencies from The ultrasonic. My cleaning area gets late afternoon sunlight where you can clearly see dust on what looks like a good record going in and a perfect record with no dust going out. Also with the KLaudio there is almost never any static associated with records The best thing? Load an lp, go about your business, sleeve it, load next lp It's not labor intensive. Spend your time listening Read more at https://www.analogplanet.com/content/if-charles-kirmusss-record-cleaning-machine-and-regimen-correct... |
Everyone is wasting their time/money.I’ve been using this stuff since 1976 https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/shimmer-floor-wax/n8625 |
Is this guy a dealer ? I would hate to purchase anything from him after the application of WD40..... Post water cleaning static is just that....static electricity from the way he cleans and drys an LP. Had he used an antistatic brush or a Zerostat he likely would have eliminated static without having to use WD40. Simple basin clean and dry with a clean cloth will remove about 85% of surface dirt. Remaining 15% requires aggressive cleaning with a deep scrub using more effective fluids and a vac dry. At this time US cleaning is the best way to clean a record. If you can not afford a US setup, then a Spin Clean followed by vac dry will remove most dirt etc. My experience is US cleaning is the most effective way to clean an LP. I use a Spin Clean to pre-clean and remove surface dirt. Then US clean using Rushton's formula, followed by a vac dry. My results mirror those of other US users.....darker deeper background, often totally silent, and many times under the noise floor of my system. Much better transient response, and definition of very subtle details buried in the mix and in the ambient field of the soundstage. Like a lot of things, once you experience the difference it is hard to go back. |
All I know is Audio desk Vinyl Cleaner Pro has made my collection look and sound new again and removes debris that can make playback sound like a bowl of Rice Krispies with literally zero effort. Clean as clean can be. If you can afford it, there's tremendous value there if vinyl is your thing. Mine is coming up on 2 years young with zero problems encountered as of today. Highly recommend. |
Just so you know, Ultrasonic cleaner do works. I’m getting ready to pull the trigger on the KIRMUSS Vinyl Restoration System Ultrasonic to replace my VPI HW-17. I was at the T.H.E Show last Saturday and Dr. Eric Watson developed an Ultrasonic vinyl cleaner that really works, they demoed the system and showed us the proof of the before and after results. Here’s their link that shows the grooves under high powered microscope: https://www.kirmussaudio.com/ultrasonic-vinyl-restoration-system-.html |
@chayro Brilliant! lMAO! Also like to add what I’ve discovered for my vinyl cleaning needs: Recent changes in the practice of primary care clinical medicine have made a ton of these used machines available at bargain prices. https://www.cambridgescientific.com/used-lab-equipment/search/Autoclaves |
