Ultrasonic record cleaners

@pindac, 

Thank-you for the compliments.  

FYI - someone did a comparison of the PACVR Manual Method, and results are summarized here:  Do I need to clean my LP's? | Page 2 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum in Post #31. 

However, one better than another to achieve a clean surface is not a fair comparison because ANY precise/rigorous cleaning method can achieve a clean record with the right chemistry, the right process/technique adapted to the machinery specific to the method being employed be it manual, vacuum-RCM, ultrasonic, or combinations thereof but the devil is in the details.  

For manual methods - YOU are the machinery and even with vacuum-RCM (except the few that are fully auto); YOU are the 'cleaning' part of the machinery. It's that manual-technique that with the brush and the chemistry that does the cleaning.

In vacuum-RCM, the blower strength in CFM and Lift are what determines how completely and how fast the fluid is removed from the surface - Vacuum Strength: CFM and Water Lift | Dustless Tools. So, every vacuum-RCM can be different.  So here too, the machinery is important. And, once we get to ultrasonics, the number of technical variables/details increases exponentially.

Every method has its strengths and weaknesses, and after all is said and done, they all 'can' produce excellent results, but again the devil is in the details.   And, what constitutes a clean record is quantifiable by surface cleanliness criteria and I detail this in Chapter XI, but Chapter XI is very technical.  Unfortunately measuring surface cleanliness at the levels that would need to be measured are not readily available.  So, the book compares against established cleanliness levels and probability of achieving the required level with the method in a residential environment in Chapter XI and XII.

Otherwise, the best cleaning method is the one best for you, and there are many factors in-play such how much convenience do you want, how much $$$ do you have to spend, how much space do you have, how much noise will you tolerate, how much are you willing to compromise, is your goal 'best achievable cleanliness", what is your work throughput, etc.

Take care,

Neil

Hi @antinn, I am not looking myself to be persuaded to do something different to the Manual Method, I have produced results that have been very satisfying, as said in previous posts, I don't refer to LPs having been through the PAVCR Manual Method as Cleaned, I much prefer the term 'Purified'.

My earlier report on Cleaning as a comparison exercise is prior to having a PAVCR Textbook to consult and producing a Cleaned LP that when purified, it is difficult to suggest it can be cleaned to the point, by other methods that it can be perceived as cleaner.

My suggestion for a Comparison Cleaning as referred to, is that the PAVCR Solutions/Mixtures are in use across a variety of Cleaning Methods, where ancillaries to support these methods are on other radar of others with an interest and can prove to be quite costly to acquire.

My thoughts were that if a Method was noticed out of all used, to be able to make a very good impression, and was one achievable on a reasonably easy to afford ancillary. The interested individual, with a purchase in mind, will be with a good base knowledge, certainly not having to buy blind, in the same manner I did when I purchased a US Tank. The interested party will have made known a Solution/Mixture, Ancillary and the best practice to be used for the procedure to be carried out, to mimic the result being reported back on.

I can't muster up the desire to use the purchased US Tank, to clean with or the later idea of a final rinse tank, neither seems required. 

Altruistic approaches are even able to be shown when it comes to cleaning a Vinyl LP.    

RE: "lab grade".

I stand corrected by antinn. I had no idea that the term had been hijacked as a marketing tool. I was using the term to mean, "of a quality appropriate to a commercial or scientific laboratory." 

The Humminguru seems bargain priced.

The Kurmiss seems to clean as well as the Degritter and the Audiodesk based on Fremer's assessment, but a lot of steps to accomplish it.

KL is out of the USRCM business

The Degritter is a later design, does a comparable job, and generally has a lower price than the AudioDesk.  Degritter is also working on a Reference model at $7k for sale in May 2023 - very surprised and curious that the current USRCMs sonic results can be improved upon.

I think the main change for the Degritter Pro is that it uses two baths, with one reserved for rinsing. It automates what many people already do by swapping the tank with a second one for a DW rinse.

I can take my cleaned record out of the Degritter and put it back on the Loricraft for a DW rinse and vacuum, but the the thing is, I can't hear any difference if I do that.

I am going to try using the Degritter with plain DW after a wash and vacuum on the Loricraft, hoping the ultrasonic cavitation alone will remove what the Loricraft missed, and at the same time rinsing any detergent residue left after the Loricraft vacuumed it.