Ultrasonic LP Cleaning vs. “Thread Type” Cleaning (Keith Monks/Loricraft/etc.)

@whart 

Thanks. I saw an earlier draft, but this is quite encyclopedic.

Congratulations to all involved!

I have to second whart's thoughts on Neil Antin's ebook on vinyl cleaning.  It is incredibly detailed and covers all aspects of obtaining cleaner vinyl. Highly recommended.   The takeaway for me is that no one singular system is complete in terms of ultimate cleanliness. For those who want a one step one and done, ultrasonics are likely the best bet.  I have a VPI 16.5, V-8 40 khz  US tank, Clearaudio double matrix, and a Degritter (just purchased). I have used them singly and in combination. Each addition hasn't necessarily removed pops and ticks, but has improved the "texture" of the sound.  I have not used a Monks type cleaner because when I started cleaning records, it was an older (not necessarily outdated) technology.  For completists and those who have very revealing systems, a 2 or 3 step process will give the best results.  So to me it's not so much an either/or situation.  Mechanical cleaning with detergents/enzymes followed by ultrasonics is superior to either alone. If you are using any form of detergent, a final rinse will improve sonic quality and can remove any "veil" that remains.  There is an excellent discussion on the Hoffman forum on this as well under "degritter".  It is not limited to that device.

@orthomead- I just want Neil to see your kind words by including him in this thread @antinn. I published the piece so I'm hardly neutral (in the interest of full disclosure) in viewing Neil's work as the most comprehensive single source of information for cleaning records. And, also for what it's worth, there is no single method or piece of equipment that I (or Neil as far as I know) advocates as a magic bullet. 
I'm glad you like the "cross-cleaning" of using both mechanical and ultrasonic. I came to that conclusion several years ago with some high value records that needed more than a pass through the ultrasonic. Ditto on final rinse step.  I treat this as a learning process, rather than claiming expertise. Neil has real expertise, and we are lucky he's also an audiophile!
best,
Bill Hart

Learning process vs claiming expertise, lot’s of wisdom in that statement 

I use enzyme / Walker 4 step in a nitty Gritty with Aerospace grade clean wiper over slot so can be changed each disc., ditto with wipes for brushes. U Sonic on my additional tool wishlist.

for the new records are clean crowd buy the Antin recommended black light…. And see the truth 

To the compliments provided - a humble thank-you.  But @whart and @orthomead summarize it well - there is no best; only the best for you which is based on your own threshold for effort, cost, process throughput and just how clean do you want that record.  

As I wrote in the book," XII.13 The final chapters of this document will discuss machine assisted cleaning methods: vacuum record cleaning machines (RCM) and ultrasonic cleaning machines (UCM). It’s important to consider that machines are generally developed for two primary reasons – reduce labor and improve process efficiency. Process efficiency can mean faster (higher throughput) and/or higher probability of achieving quality or achieving a quality that manual labor cannot produce. Manual cleaning in the appropriate environment with appropriate controls can achieve impressive levels of cleanliness, but the labor, skill, time and probability of success generally make it impractical for manufacturing environments. But for the home audio enthusiast; depending on your attention to details, adopting machine assisted cleaning may or may not yield a cleaner record. However, the ease of use and convenience provided by machines can be very enticing and cannot be denied."

But, make no mistake, regardless of whatever process you use, the "Devil is in the Details".