Record Cleaning Machine ~ Ultrasonic vs. Rest

It's a question of how clean, isn't it? I use a cleaning solution with surfactant on the Loricraft, followed by a DW rinse. Then the Degritter with just DW, relying on cavitation for any further cleaning. Since Degritter recommends changing water every 20-30 disks, I'd rather remove the majority of crud with the vacuum machine and not contaminate the Degritter's tank with any more of it than necessary. If I changed the water after every disk, which might seem the counsel of perfection, I'd be running my water distiller every day to provide enough. Just a matter of finding a trade-off that one can be comfortable with.

The compact ’keep on a shelf’ design appeals to me, anyone tried it or one like it/

HummingGuru 40hz clean/dry

Dogberry, so far as I have been able to learn by reading the many threads on US RCMs, you are correct not to use a surfactant or detergent with your US machine.  As far as I can determine, most manufacturers of US RCMs don't recommend adding anything but water to the bath, except maybe Kirmuss with all its pre-cleaning rituals. But I think that using detergents/surfactants, as I do in my lowly VPI 16.5 or 17 (not sure what I have; the platter rotates in both directions, and it has a stainless steel waste tank) is a decided advantage in favor of the vacuum type cleaner.  My neighbor had a Loricraft for a while, but he kept having problems with the string thing.

I bought a first generation Nitty Gritty back in the late '70s. It's a very effective machine, but rather noisy and messy in operation. It still works, although I only use it on the rare occasion that I need to play a dirty used record.

I bought a Klaudio US machine about 7 years ago, and it does pretty much everything I need of a record cleaner. It washes, it dries, and it does it with one-button convenience. It is amazingly effective and so easy to use that there's just no excuse for ever playing an unclean record.

Most new records are not truly clean, btw, and there's no way to get the best from an LP if you're relying solely on dry brushes to remove dust.

Whatever you choose, I think the best record cleaning protocol is the one you'll actually follow.

@lewm: The HW-16.5 does NOT have a bidirectional motor, the HW-17 does. The 16.5 is roughly square in shape (width and depth being about equal), the 17 rectangular (the width considerably greater than the depth). Assuming you have the 17, you can find the model number on the back of the machine.