Thumbs up for ultrasonic record cleaning

@rexc,

Let me also expand the problem.  Verifying absence of particles from the groove that can cause ticks and pops is only part of the problem.  The other problem is how clean are the groove wall ridges.  If these ridges that at 20 kHz can be spaced at 15 to 10 microns are filled with oil/grease/debris then while there may be no pop or tick, there will be loss of high frequency detail/resolution that maybe noted as distortion or just reduced signal as the stylus fails to fully read the record.  In this case, the audio file unless it is compared to the perfect file, may not detect this type of contamination.

Neil

@antinn,
What I showed was only an example. Use of the Groove Probe is limited only by your imagination. It offers you a complete, quantitative record of the groove, including high-frequency information. You can analyze the data any way you want. Before and after cleaning would be a great way to use it.
I have used it to diagnose tracking problems in monaural records. I was able to watch and trace every little spot where the needle lost contact. Monaural records are a great way to detect minute problems that you might not otherwise find.

Hgh-frequency noise is a also a suitable subject for analysis. Analysis of quiet sections might be especially revealing. For example, the lead-out groove is usually not supposed to have any signal recorded on it, so any noise you detect there is either surface noise or noise in your system. The lead-in bands (or whatever they’re called) also often have some signal-free regions.

What kinds of things might you analyze? You might look at the amplitude and frequency distribution before and after cleaning. If you really want to kill some time, you could look at the time structure of the noise before and after cleaning. Does it look like embedded particles or something else? Micro-clicks? Or maybe defects in the plastic? Of course, there’s probably a floor of noise that we’ll never eliminate -- even the freshly cut master had some surface roughness. And here’s a question that some people might want answered: Did US make the problem worse by damaging the plastic?

Good idea about the UV light. I have a 395 nm light and a 365 nm light. The 365 nm light is especially good at revealing practically EVERYTHING. I’ll try it next time I digitize an LP.

I bow down to the scientists here.....

Here's my update:

What I've found with the carbon filter is that it works well, I don't notice yellowing anymore...( the Versa-Clean has a dark piss color to it). After 5 weeks from a water change, the water is getting cloudy. So, I wonder if the carbon filter is removing more than the yellow color? Hmmmm?

Records still sound great!

The Vibrato is working well. After my experience with the Audiodesk (4 years). the Chinese tank (two years), now the Vibrato.....it's lack of noise has you wondering at first if it's really cleaning. (Remember, I'm going from two different 40 khz machines to an 80 khz machine here). The answer is yes!

That said, I also have a sealed Chopin which is unlistenable,

I can understand that. :-)

@slaw,

The activated carbon filter 'may' remove the surfactant that is in the Versa Clean, and that 'could' be the reason for the water clarity.  As far as the cloudy water, that could be the build-up/accumulation of very small (invisible) particles that are smaller than the carbon filter rating.  Note that filters are rated either nominal which can pass particles as much as 5X the nominal micron rating, or absolute which will pass no particle larger than the absolute micron rating.  The 80 kHz frequency is very good for removing very small invisible particulate, but not as good at removing visible crud which is better accomplished with a 40 kHz machine or a vacuum record cleaning machine or manual cleaning with a record label protector such as the VinylStack.