CleanerVinyl-Ultrasonic record cleaner
Mofi I use this one - mine does not have the cool drain valve :-) https://www.ebay.com/itm/6L-Digital-Stainless-Steel-Ultra-Sonic-Bath-Cleaning-Tank-Cleaner-Timer-Hea... Good Listening Peter |
Peter, So you place the LPs on the apparatus that you cited in your first post into the bath that you have cited just above? What frequency is best (anyone)? This one is 42kHz. I have heard that 80kHz is perhaps better. But the most important thing to me would be to make sure the LPs are not damaged. Rumors of high frequency loss are disturbing. My hearing is bad enough already without damaging the source material a priori. |
I have been using ultrasonic plus point nozzle for a number of years now- had the AD, and still have the KL, which I use along with a big Monks (Omni). I think the combination is synergistic - and the results of using both methods - US and vacuum-- in combination are particularly evident with older/used records. DIY US offers more flexibility than the "commercial" US machines meant for LPs- you can control heat, degas, power, and frequency as well as use different surfactants. If you are going the DIY route, be mindful of the relationship between surface area, tank size and the power of the transducers-- there is a formula on page 5 of the long diyAudio thread that discusses this--where the author points out that 12 inch records act like a baffle and reduce cavitation effect. I think the Elma is the way I’ll go when my KL gives up the ghost, though it (the KL) has been reliable, it suffers from some limitations. The transducers on all these things eventually burn out, which may make buying a cheap unit seem more sensible. PS: Rush Paul’s seminal article (published here on the ’Gon and in Positive Feedback Online) which takes the collective wisdom from the long diyAudio thread and applies it, along with some of the tweaks, including an external pump and filter, is well worth reading, as is a similar piece Tim Ackerman wrote with a follow up (and published on my blog, TheVinylPress.com). |
Lewm, The apparatus as you call it has magnet that hold the fixture that holds the 3 (or 4) LP's, you then lower the up's into the tank, the pillar that holds the motor with the magnetic fixture has a telescoping feature and a clamp lock. The 6 L tank with one gallon distilled water has the perfect fill level i.e all the grooves are submerged in water just before the horizontal arm touches the edge of the tub. I typically do batches of LP's so running 3 or 4 batches of LPs and you've cleaned 9-12 albums. After two or three batches I dump the water and wipe out the tank, then fill with a fresh gallon. I run them for 10 minutes, which is 2 clicks on the US bath which has a timed shutoff in 5 min intervals. I only use distilled water, no additives, the LP's come out super clean. I let them air dry. I have not heard any rumors of high-frequency loss using US cleaning - saw a video once, I think posted by KLAudio, where they ran an album for hours upon hours then filtered the water through a coffee filter to prove that the machines do not damage the LP's. I have detected ZERO damage to albums using this method - and if you think about it dragging a diamond stylus through the groove certainly must be a LOT more damaging to the LP than pulsating water. Good Listening Peter |
