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


Many dealers now tout ultrasonic record cleaners as the ultimate, yet companies like Loricraft and Keith Monks continue to introduce new “thread type” (or “string”) record cleaners.

There was a recent discussion in one of Michael Fremer’s on-line columns (https://www.analogplanet.com/content/sme-loricraft-introduces-upgraded-thread-type-vacuum-record-cle...) announcing a new thread type record cleaner from Loricraft. In the comments section, several owners of thread type cleaners praised them and one person stated a “thread type”was better than their own ultrasonic cleaner.

I’m interested in hearing from those of you who have experience with BOTH types of record cleaners, and what you perceive to be the pluses and minuses of each.

As for myself, I’ve been plodding along for years with a VPI 16, and I would like something that is faster to use and that will run for more than an hour without overheating. 😎
128x128vinyl_rules
@bdp24 Having started where you are currently at, I would offer some unsolicited advice.  Unless you have a plans for high end water filtration on your ultrasonic unit, I would clean the records first with the VPI to remove the major crud, then ultrasonically clean, then rinse and dry on VPI.  Without an initial step, your ultrasonic bath with be polluted very quickly.  I am currently addressing some LPs that I have previously cleaned and am stunned at the amount of detritus present in the ultrasonic bath despite prior cleanings.  Without the initial clean you will just need to change your ultrasonic bath more frequently.  I currently exchange the bath every 15-20 lps, once I see stuff on the bottom of the tank.  I would also highly recommend you read Neil's chapter on fluids.  From experience, you will do better with adding Triton x-100 or Tergitol 15-s-9 to the distilled water.  For me it was quite apparent, and this is why I am readressing the previously cleaned lps. It is worth the time.
1+ thumbs up @orthomead. I would also add that for something that may be long or more heavily contaminated, I prefer the manual or mechanical clean first anyway to get the heavy grunge out; after vacuum and rinse vacuum, then into ultrasonic for what I find is a more fine cleaning. Sometimes, on a few challenged records, it was repeating this process, with a final rinse of pure water and vacuum after ultrasonic. 
I brought a couple early UK Vertigo Swirls from send 'em back to go to copies simply by this process. And several other records that had wispy tracing distortion that I was able to eliminate through combined cleaning methods. 
Anyone hear about the newest KM Prodigy "Blue" that is being released soon? From a dealer heard it's supposed to be a few big steps ahead of the original. 
@Orthomead: I first learned about Swirl due to Sabbath and have them as UK Swirls, but then descended into the vortex:
Gracious!, the Cressida albums, Patto, May Blitz, etc.

I think I have roughly 50, some duplicates, not all the super rare ones but not all of the catalog was equal in terms of music quality. Pressing quality in the era was good though and the engineering was straightforward.
Interestingly, the guy who was really responsible for launching the imprint-- Olav Wyper-- left Philips after a year or so to go to RCA. That is why I recommend the 1970 Annual as a Vertigo starter kit- 2 LPs from some of the more recherché acts. Affinity and a few others, the names of which escape me right now, were part of the catalog. And it doesn't command the price of some of the Swirls, it's almost reasonable!
One curiosity is that King Crimson’s In the Court was released as a Swirl back in the day in NZ or AUS. Never saw one in the wild. (UK release was Island Pink Label).