Record Cleaning Machines

Careful, some of the power figures include the heater.  The Kirmuss is essentially the iSonic P4875(II)  P4875(II)-4T-NH (isonicinc.com) which is only 165 W ultrasonic power via three 60W transducers pointing upward.  The Degritter has four 75W transducers - two on either side pointing directly at the record.

The difference in ultrasonic frequency alters the size of the cavitation bubble formed and 120-khz produces a smaller bubble which is good for very fine particles while the 40 kHz produce a larger bubble and is better for more generic type soils and particles.

Antinn2, thanks for the info! Very much appreciated!

I did know that stuff about the Kirmuss machine and some of what you mentioned about the Degritter. When I use my system, I don't use any heat because the cavitation process actually causes or produces a little heat, anyway. That's one of the things that concerns me about the Degritter.  When I clean my records I set-up in the cellar, which is always cooler than the house.  Even after hours of cleaning, the US tank water never gets even lukewarm. My records have always been in great shape. They go in looking shiny new and come out looking the same way. The only thing I care about is sonic or audible improvement(s) and I'm getting that with the system I have now. I don't want to pay 3 grand for something I won't be able to hear, if you know what I mean.

I've been reading and researching this stuff for, at least, 3 or 4 years now. I've written to several world leading manufacturers of ultrasonic cleaning systems and machines for hospitals and clean rooms for microchip makers, asking all sorts of questions about cleaning frequencies, etc. I've actually had a couple of bona fide scientists write back and both said 40 kHz should be very safe and effective on PVC or vinyl products. Of course, as bona fide scientists, both very careful to stipulate their opinions were based on the Physics involved, potential short term and long term damage to PVC products and things of this nature; not specifically oriented to how this would or might affect audio performance. What I didn't know and found fascinating was that the size of the bubbles generated in the cavitation process isn't what does the cleaning. It's the force produced when they implode. So, 40 kHz actually produces a more aggressive cleaning effect than 120 kHz . Degritter states their machine is more gentle and, if I recall correctly, effective enough at cleaning mold release compounds from new and, presumably, older records, as well. If that is, indeed, so, from a scientific perspective, that would be an interesting bit of knowledge.

Several articles I've read stated the best approach to cleaning just about anything and everything a record might pick up along the years (e.g. smoke; fingerprints; skin oil; etc.) is to use a variety of sweeping frequencies during the cleaning process (e.g. 40 kHz - 80 kHz - 120 kHz and even a little higher). CleanerVinyl has started selling US cleaning tanks like that, now. Expensive but not 3 grand expensive.

A few other articles I've read indicated it really doesn't matter where the transducers are located in the machine because the bubbles are created all over the bath and permeate the entire liquid medium, anyway.

It would be nice to find a handful of bona fide scientists who are also bona fide audiophiles and would put all of this to the test. Sort of an A/B shout-out of the various RCM on the market. The before & after electron microscope photos on he Degritter website are all very well and good but I've seen similar before & after pics on other websites with similar results. I think Last had or maybe still does have something like that on their site or maybe it was in some review I read.

Another question I would hope could be resolved is what US waves do to records or PVC on a short-term and long-term basis. One person I had an email back & forth with questioned whether overuse of any frequency, particularly lower frequencies, could potentially alter the structural integrity of the PVC canals in the tiny grooves of a record and eventually negatively effect audio performance. That kind of makes sense, to me,  considering that is where the thickness of the PVC material is the thinnest. I've never used my US machine more than once on any record. Never felt I had to. I've always been of the opinion that this is a one & done type of thing. However, it would be good to know if repeated US cleanings could potentially be detrimental in any way.

Anyway, as you can, no doubt, see, I can get a little crazy about this kind of stuff! My records are and always have been my babies!

Sorry for the long post but inquiring minds what to know.  And, no, I wasn't that little kid in school who always had his hand up when the teacher asked:  "Any questions?" I should have been a scientist!      

@oldaudiophile,

If you read this article  Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-2nd Edition - The Vinyl Press - at the end you can download the 145-page book for free; Chapter XIV is exclusive to UCM.  There is a lot of information describing the variables associated with UCM.  

The position of the transducers does make a difference, firing directly at the record will get the best cleaning performance.  Fundamentally during what is called the ultrasonic rarefaction phase, the pressure drops below the fluid vapor pressure and essentially the fluid boils creating a bubble and over a period of rarefaction/compression cycles the bubble that is formed grows until the surrounding hydraulic pressure violently collapses it. The cavitation bubble duration is very short - about 4 milliseconds - check this video starting at about time 6:20 https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ul ... %3DHDRSC3;.  The collapsing toroid jet in an UCM is some what direction. 

The KL Audio at 200W and the Degritter at 300W with their limited bath volume are very powerful and can be very effective with just DI-Water.  The low power units such as the Kirmuss need some chemistry such as a surfactant to help with cleaning, but add too much chemistry (or spin the records too fast) and the 'cavitation intensity' decreases.  I know of people who use the Kirmuss with some chemistry as a preclean and then final clean/dry with the Degritter.  The Kirmuss with its spinner makes it very convenient to use with the Degritter.   The Kirmuss unit can also be easily modified to add a good pump/filter system.

Otherwise, people have been using UCM to clean records and similar type plastics for >50 yrs.  The biggest issue is over-extended operation and subsequent over-heating.  If you read the Degritter manual Degritter-manual-v2.2-ENG.pdf - it has a cool-down process which will kick in after two Heavy cleanings.  The nice option for the Degritter is spare tanks that can be used for rinsing (if using chemistry) or to improve process time when using the Heavy cycle.

I have both a generic 40 kHz tank and 135(?) kHz sweeping US tank from Vibratto.  I use both, and noticed an improvement when I added the 135.  I spin the records in the 40 first after applying disc doctor cleaner, and then in the 135 that also serves as a rinse tank.  I use the basic first generation cleanervinyl rotisserie and filter the second tank.  Air dry with a small fan.  Definitely worth the price.

As an alternate thought, I believe that if you are gentle with the records, follow the directions and proceed carefully, all of the machines do a good job.  From the most simple (spin clean, etc.) to the most expensive.  What you pay for is how much time and effort you want to put in.  In general, if you spend less money, you spend more time.  And visa versa.

I haven't owned the Kirmuss but i did consider it seriously.  I watched the manufacturers videos and read Michael Fremer's review.  I believe it works well.  But, the effort involved is quite significant.  I own a Hannl Mera ELB.  Very high end vacuum machine.  It cleaned records very well.  But to me it was too fiddlely (sp?) and time consuming.  Set the hight of the brushes, apply the solution, wait while cleaning, manage the vacuum cycle to avoid static electricity, turn it over and repeat.  In the end it worked well.  The record was wet cleaned and static free.  But cleaning several records waisted an entire morning.

The Kirmuss was a great price but the process seemed even more labor intensive.  In the end I bought a Degritter and could not be happier.  Set it up, turn it on, insert the record, push the button and do other things.  When the chime sounds the record is clean, dry and static free.  I actually like cleaning records now.  Is it better than the other systems? I don't know.  Does it clean the records effectively and efficiently?  Most definitely.  Is it easier and more enjoyable, absolutely.