2. analog
  3. 1076492606

ultrasound cleaning?

Anyone heard of the US-120A or US-60A ultra-sonic/sound(US) LP cleaners?

DiscUnion(Japan)
http://www.diskunion.co.jp/s_sale/goods/cleaner.html

Lists for Y80K($760), Y60K($570).

the asylum had a fair amt of discussion on the concept but none on commercial products. I have tried twice to get an acct on assylym but failed?

I live in Japan(from U.S.) where Nitty Gritty and VPIs cost 2X+ the U.S., refer to same discunion page.

I am just getting into vinyl so have few records but want to get started. I am going to have to import a VPI or Nitty Gritty which will add $100-$150 for shipping maybe 15% duty not to mention the admin effort(still cheaper than local purchase). I am considering cheapo manual gerry rigged route by manually washing and using vacuum with dedicated/custom brush.
spinitch
dougdeacon
3,338 posts
 
Ogsarg and Mr. Kidknow,

MANY thanks for your input. As one who has been interested in the pending U/S RCM from BentAudio since it was first announced, I'm paying close attention. I'm going to point this thread out to John Chapman so he can consider the issues you've raised. (one hopes he has done so already).

If I got such a machine, I'd clean a junk LP repeatedly, increasing cleaning times and/or intensities to test for possible vinyl damage. IOW I'd *try* to wreck the LP, just to learn the limits for safe use.

As I mentioned, the design does keep the LP moving so that should help, according to Ogsarg. I believe it may also include a rinse tank.

Spinitch, if anything was left behind on the record it would just be some of the solution. If it's safe for vinyl it's hard to imagine it could damage a stylus. No exploding bubbles (imploding actually) once the U/S energy is turned off.
mrkidknow
26 posts
 
Dougdeacon,

No problem in at least trying to contribute on this subject.

Although I have strong reservations about using ultrasonics on vinyl, this doesn't mean that a system cannot be designed that is quite safe. Bent Audio and any other companies that are investigating this must be putting a good amount of time and observation into the concept in order to eventually know if their product will be safe or not.

I just have serious concerns that the number of variables that can be missed in product developement will come back to haunt users. Due to the likely high cost of such equipment, those users will be pissed-off bigtime is something does go wrong.

Personally, I'll stick with brushing and vacuuming since it is an already proven technology.

Mr. Kidknow
ogsarg
59 posts
 
I agree with Mr. Kidnow in that I think an U/S could be made to work given the right setup, solution, and recipe.

I just question the need. The goal is to clean inside the groove of the record and the brush with suitably sized bristle tips to get down inside will do a more uniform job than the random mechanical agitation provided by acoustic cavitation.

Where the advantage of sonics is seen is when the crevice that needs to be cleaned is too small or odd shaped, or in some other way not practical to clean with a tool.

It is also true that the number of variables is greater and that to develop a cleaning process that would be better than the current proven techniques might take quite a while.

Based on what I know about ultrasonics, I don't see them as being able to remove particles any smaller than a good brush so where is the benefit?
4yanx
1,576 posts
 
The contributions of folks like Ogsarg and Mrkidknow who can offer salient and knowledgeable information on a not so well understood process is what makes this site great. Obliged.
ogsarg
59 posts
 
You are correct in that no cavitation will occur without the U/S energy and no bubbles will be left behind to later implode. Once the power is turned off or the lp taken out, the vacuum dry should work just as well as if it were brushed.
More to discover