Ultrasonic record cleaners

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.

@kennyc said" "KL is out of the USRCM business." They were. But Chad at Acoustic Sounds struck a deal to distribute a version of the smaller unit that has a separate reservoir. It also offers a connection to a household water supply.

I have no details on the effectiveness of the filtering. It is quite expensive.

Neil Antin, upthread, posted a link to What’sBest where a question of mine was answered regarding the use of a second bath. This one is DIY, using high grade hardware, filtering, possibly cooling as well. Not cheap either, but high "throughput" as Neil would say. (@antinn).

I use a Monks Omni for pre-cleaning, have the older, bigger KL (with the tank integrated into the unit) and will rinse the record and vac it on the Monks in some cases rather than "blow dry."

There are many DIY approaches that work well, but not all are money savers. :)