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?
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?