Record Cleaning Machines

@terry9, ...you are too kind.

@oldaudiophile, a few quotes from the book:

Chapter XII.6.a - "...The paper Adhesion and Removal of Fine Particles on Surfaces, Aerosol Science and Technology, M. B. Ranade, 1987 (38) shows for aluminum oxide particles, the force (acceleration) required to remove a 10-micron particle is 4.5 x 10^4 g’s, a 1-micron particle is 4.5 x 10^6 g’s and a 0.1-micron particle is 4.5 x 10^8 g’s. A simple brush or wipe is not going to get the smallest particles/debris that can ‘hide’ in the valleys between the groove side wall ridges.|"

But this is where UT has an advantage:  

XIV.1....For ultrasonics there is a minimum power (wattage) necessary to produce cavitation. The higher the frequency, the more power is required. The minimum power required at 40 kHz is reported between 0.3 and 0.5 W/cm² (per transducer radiating surface). As the UCM tank volume increases, less power, measured as W/gal or W/cm³ is required to maintain cavitation throughout the tank. A very small 0.5-gal/1.9-L 40-kHz tank may require 125 W/gal while a 12.75-L/3.4-gal 40-kHz tank may only require 80 W/gal; noting that as the ultrasonic kHz increases so does the power required. There is a limit to increasing power above which no additional benefit (cavitation intensity)  is obtained.

XIV.1.b The lower the ultrasonic frequency, the larger the bubble that is created. A 40 kHz UCM will produce bubbles about 75 microns diameter. These are not going to get into the record groove. A 120 kHz UCM will produce bubbles about 20 microns and these can get into the groove. But the larger bubble can produce more energy when it collapses/implodes (cavitation) so there is fluid agitation around the collapsing event that can provide cleaning. How violently the bubbles collapse is determined by the amount of power provided by the ultrasonic transducers. A low power 40 kHz unit may be safe for soft metal such as jewelry, while a 40 kHz high power unit may not. The smaller bubble by its size is limited to how violent it can collapse. A high powered 120 kHz unit has less potential for damage than a high powered 40 kHz.  

XIV.1.c Further complicating the effectiveness of ultrasonics is the fluid boundary layer. The fluid flow at the record (or any) surface develops a static layer that is separate from the bulk fluid that is moving. The boundary layer thickness is dependent on the ultrasonic frequency (high kHz = thinner boundary layer), acoustic energy, and fluid properties (viscosity & density). To get the most effective cleaning, the cleaning process has to penetrate the boundary layer to remove the soil and particles that are contained within it. ...At 40-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thick as 5 microns, while at 120-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thick as 2 microns.".

I’ll just say, I had a Kirmuss and liked the end result, but I started getting royally pissed at it for constantly overheating and continuously sitting around for 20 minutes while it cooled off! I have an Audio Desk system now and glad I paid the extra for quality cleaning. I did start off my cleaning adventure with an okki nokki but moved up to ultra cleaning....imo.

I’ve maybe got $600 into it, and other than the initial spreading of cleaner and putting on the spindle, it’s pretty much hands off.  I can do 6 at a time but usually do 4 with a little more space between them

I have a Kirmuss on loan right now. The Kirmuss method is as mentioned above, lengthy and involved. Therefore, i decided I wanted to see if the machine worked well with just distilled water and nothing else. At first, I had thought that the lack of drying would be the main issue, but this has proven not to be the case! The LP's don't get that wet, which really surprises me. The application of a good eye glass optic microfibre cloth seems to solve the drying issue. The problem is that the machine is not exactly a precision device, as such the potential for damage to the LP's as you insert and remove them from the spinner is considerable. To that, the results with just plain distilled water are nothing extraordinary. A generally clean record will come out a tad cleaner than before, but as Kirmuss points out, to really clean the grooves, one needs to do a multiple step process with multiple US insertions. This is a royal PITA. I am not even sure if the application of something like Gruv Glide will not give one the same result on a vacuum cleaned LP! 
Then we have the heating issue, which has been touched on above, although I have noticed that the warmer the water, the better the result--to a degree. Clearly at some point the water is too hot and the machine needs to rest. Kirmuss doesn't believe in drying in the machine, which I think is his way of copping out and not figuring out a way for the machine to do this. BUT the bigger issue, as it turns out, is the risk to the LP on insertion and removal, get it slightly wrong and you can easily damage your precious vinyl...which gives me considerable pause and concern in regards to this machine!

I use an inexpensive "Record Doctor" cleaning mchine - but it doesn't do the actual cleaning.I use a mix of dishwashing liquid and 70%  alcohol, and vigorously brush both sides of a record with a fine pure bristle paintbrush, then douse it with a good long spray of tap water.The Record Doctor isn't what cleans the record but does a great job of getting it perfectly dry. Results appear to be excelent. Shiny, spotless records, especially with some terrific used bargains I sometimes find, and considerably quieter surfaces.