Ultrasonic cleaning with kirmuss and loss of high frequency details.


I just purchased the kirmuss US machine and diligently followed their instructions to cycle through minimum 3 cleanings of 5 min each with their surfactant applied each time. Upon testing my favorite vinyl and critically listening through my headphones I am convinced I’ve lost high frequency details. My background is completely silent and ticks and pops have been reduced by 95% or more. So cleaning wise it did the job. Anyone here ever experience loss of high frequency detail after repeated US cleaning? Now I’m worried I permanently damaged my favorite vinyl somehow. Please let me know, thx.
tubelvr1
My experience with US cleaning leads me to conclude with @bdp24 on the frequency aspect. I own a Audio Desk and a DIY machine as @rushton proposed w/the filtering system. I recently saw a US machine with a frequency sweep mode, although it still operates at 40khz, seems to make sense. I’ve noticed from experience with my 6 liter tank and the Vinyl Stack spinner, that even with a 4 lp ability, I find the best cleaning is done with two lp at a time @ 45C, on the slowest rotation, for 40 minutes.

Kirmuss notes his positioning of his four devices as critical to the cleaning performance. That makes perfect sense in a way but as a layman, I’d question that somewhat, as these frequencies are being transmitted through water. It seems to me that water would break up the flow of these frequencies? So, this machine I saw on Amazon w/ the "sweep" mode @ under $300 makes sense.

Kirmuss makes a lot to do about the application of his fluid (with the same brush, over & over) yet says not one word about using the same fluid/water over & over without a filtering system. Very surprising!
Yes, wondered about his using that same brush multiple times in succession and then being surprised that he kept revealing that whitish deposit, which might well have come from the brush that was dirty from previous use.  But I gave him the benefit of the doubt in that I assumed he cleaned the brush between uses without mentioning it.  At least I hope so. 

What I do with my VPI HW17 is to clean (using the built-in brush) in both directions with a mixture of distilled, deionized water + 10% propanol + a drop of Triton X100.  Then dry with vacuum.  Then squirt some pure distilled deionized water on the surface of the LP and use the HW17 brush and vacuum to get rid of the excess cleaning fluid that may have lodged in grooves.  That last bit with unadulterated deionized water makes a difference. Takes me 2-3 minutes to do both sides of one LP.  I compared my method to one particular US machine, cleaned by the owner of the company, at the Capitol Audio Fest.  I chose one LP that had really good sonics but was stubbornly still a bit noisy after VPI cleaning.  All I could say was that the US cleaning made no significant improvement, and I could guess (not prove) that the noise on this particular LP was due to previous groove damage with a bad stylus, not to "dirt".  We sometimes forget that some LPs are not salvageable by any cleaning method.  By no means, however, do I claim that my little experiment proves anything about what is the "best" way to clean.  It only made me feel that I have little to gain by adopting the US method, which would add some aggravation that I don't need (until I am able to hire that butler).
Hey @lewm, that would make a great name for a cleaner---The Record Butler ;-) . "I say, Sir. What shall I clean for thee this morning?"
Personally, I hope I never get to @lewm ’s feeling. I feel that the cleaning process brings me even closer to "the connection" I feel with any particular artist’ music.

Truth in advertising.... I struggle with this all of the time. This ONE thing that really keeps me from coming close to bringing any product to the public (in my dreams). It seems the norm is to exaggerate your products strengths, all the while knowing those so-called strengths are maybe 1% of anyone's (end user) best experience. I HATE thinking about it!