Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning

@terry9,

I was thinking about your multi-stage filtering system/rinsing efforts...

Did you gradually work up to this? If so, could you ascribe a % of improvement, say on something like I'm currently utilizing compared to a more comprehensive approach like you are using? I realize these things are somewhat subjective but I assume you have valid reasons for your way. Thanks.

Heads up on temperature / thermometer readings.
As mentioned previously the temperature gauges on my USD units or incorrect - off by 5c - 10c - on the low side. So actual temp may be 45c but the temp gauge on the US unit will read 35c.

I previously recommended a digital thermometer from Risepro. $7 from Amazon and seems accurate. HOWEVER. When the US tank is running these thermometers (I’ve got 2) can read 5c - 10c higher than actual temp. It is dramatic. You turn on the tank and the indicated temp on the thermometer will jump up almost immediately. Turn off the tank and the indicated temp will fall back down to actual.  Also note that the behavior is more muted when you have albums in the tank - the temp will jump up less dramatically - which seems to speak to the issue of the albums actually dampening the US action and why you should consider cleaning only a  few records at a time. I'm actually cleaning only 3 records at a time, down from my original 6.

So...
If you use a digital thermometer be sure to test it with the tank on and off to observe any potential differences.

Consider a non-digital thermometer? I don’t have one to test, but guessing it may not be susceptible to the same interference.

@slaw 

I began with a two stage rinse, spinning the cleaned records in a bath of Brita-purified water, then a bath of distilled water. But I could see bubbles forming in the rinse after only a few records, so changed the rinses more often. Then I tried pouring purified water over the records first, and things improved. Including the sound. I tried pouring purified water over the records both before and after the first bath. More improvement.

At the same time, I was increasing temperature from 35C to 45C (80KHz commercial machine). Cumulative of all of the above refinements was a further improvement of at least as much as US over VPI. I re-cleaned everything already done, 2000 records.

As you can see, labour intensive. But I dislike the noise of the VPI 16.5, so I sold mine as soon as I confirmed the superiority of US, and have never used the two methods in combination. My current method of filtered running water is just so much more convenient, that convenience alone makes it worthwhile. But I also note that after 50 records cleaned, the distilled water bath is still bubble-free at all times, so there is probably a further improvement in cleanliness, stylus friction, and sound.

That said, I've now got about 2500 records cleaned to 4-rinse standards, and don't think I'll start again. There are limits to madness, even mine.

I am giving you all of this information so that you can judge for yourself how reliable my impressions are (or are not!).

My impression, which is very crude, is that you would hear a clear difference between my method and yours, perhaps as much as half the difference between VPI and US. Bear in mind that this is more of a guess than an estimate.

If you try it, please let us know if I'm right. Or not. I hate persisting in error. 

@phil0618 

Thanks for the warning. That would never have occurred to me.

@terry9 ,

Thank you so much!

I'm reminded by your responses... of the designer of my phono-preamplifier who is a scientists by training...

There is a common logic behind all of this madness.

Cheers!