Interesting topic. My take is a little different. I believe I get more static from vacuum drying than air drying. I think a statically charged record is a magnet for airborne debris. I think the goal at the end of cleaning is to have as little non-vinyl material on the record as possible, with the possible exception of a microlayer such as Last or detergent remnant. Its hard to know without an extensive lab set up what is too much remnant. Clearly material on the stylus indicates residue. There is no question that a super clean record on a revealing system can still have noise (yet better overall sound) post cleaning.I have multiple cleaning systems as an evolution in my cleaning process over the last15 years. I started with a VPI 16.5 which did a great job, but then ultrasonic became all the rage. I bit the bullet and bought Dave's (RIP)V-8 ultrasonic cleaner and was rewarded with improved sound and perhaps improvement in noise compared to the VPI. I fiddled with different solutions until reading Neil Antin's online book and have used his fluid recommendations since. Drying was a pain, and Dave developed a dryer which I didn't care for much. So at that time, I started to preclean with the VPI so I didn't have to change the bath so frequently and would vacuum dry the record fresh out of the US bath with a DIW rinse. I used different wands and have 3 separate cork mats to prevent cross contamination. But frequently the cork mat would adhere to the record due to static, perhaps secondary to over drying, but it was no more than 3 revolutions. The static was manageable with a furutech antistat. I live in Florida so dry conditions weren't the cuplrit. I was convinced that after hours of research and experimentation, that I had the "gold"standard of cleaning at my disposal. My good friend, then brought over his new Clear Audio double matrix sonic. I was sure that my records were as clean as possible and looked forward to showing him that my $2000 investment was going to best his, at 1/3 the cost. We both listened to an album that I am extremely experienced with before and after a run through on the Double matrix. I was chagrined. We both heard things, subtle to be sure, that was not apparent on the first listen. 6 months later, I was the proud owner of a double matrix. The VPI was still used as a first step with AIVS 15 and a DIW rinse, but thicker discs would get "bogged" down on the Double Matrix and need manual assistance. Just about every reissue had similar problems. Plus, static was improved, but not eradicated. I also realized that the ClearAudio wasn't ultrasonic, it was "sonic", whatever that really means. So I reintroduced the ultrasonic unit and used the Double matrix as a final step using DIW and a 20% solution of 95% lab grade ETOH. Based on Wizzzard's recommendation, I will try to find a more pure solution at a liquor store. Ever on the quest, once the Degritter came to market -you guessed it-I got one, based on the addition of micro cavitation. Again, I think there is improvement, but with diminishing returns.Neil spent a fair amount of time helping me with the process. I don't use detergent in the Degritter, again DIW and ETOH at a level below flash point. I don't see anything on the disc before I transfer it to a MOFI sleeve. I change the bath about every 20 cycles. The vinyl sounds fantastic and I'm pretty satisfied that there isn't much else to do at this point. Except, I really like the concept of vacuum drying...