Aluminum Foil test for Audio Desk Vinyl Cleaner

I too do a version of the Loricraft/AIVS regimen; there's no question it can do a great job and it is time consuming. You can never clean the same record twice so I'm a tad skeptical of listening tests, but I'd be interested to learn your findings. I suppose the bottom line is whether the Audio Desk can replace a vacuum-based machine. Two questions: How many records will the AD do before needing service and when will full service for it be available in the US?

Some general info about those Machines:
Most think that speed/comfort is identical to superior cleaning. That is not true. You can't have all.
Some swear on various cleaning fluids and some think that their removal is key.
The fast ones
For example VPI, Nitty Gritty and all which are based on that design and the "next generation" Ultrasonic Machines.
They all do their job but after a while they reach their limit and it is done. When the lips are wet, the drying process is not able to clean the record in a way that it will be without noise. you have to clean it again later. The AD uses the same fluid again and again, through filters, but from the technical view it is not a final solution. Sooner or later most AD run into Problems, based on its technical Design.
The best ones
There was only one Design which solved all problems, that was the Keith Monks Design. The User can try all kinds of fluid, all he need is something which is able to move into the grooves. The removal is done with a point nozzle and high vacuuming power (it is simple Physics, sucking power per diameter) and the record is cleaned groove by groove and at the end it is always dry and clean (except the user flooded the record with so much fluid that it is too much for the nozzle, then he does it a 2. Time and it is done). But it is logic, that this kind of cleaning needs time. It was made for professionals who cleaned records all day long and needed the same superior result from the first record to the last.
Keith Monks passed away and Loricraft offered a cheaper copy (more or less) from this Design. There is also another one available in Germany, the Odyssey, it is from the former Monks Importer, same Design with a few improvements, but with superior technical parts.
In audiophile discussions there are a few directions (speed, price, cleaning solutions...) and of course, being owner of "the best". Like a car discussion. I think, it is more helpful to show, what is responsible for what and based on that knowledge, every reader can choose the unit which matches his ideas. I hope that my few lines will give some useful information about those units. Every unit is better than doing nothing or using a wet towel.
The Records
This is also important imo, some have problems from the pressing plant (modern Reissues for example), you can clean them 15x and you will still hear an improvement, but they will never run really silent. Based on that we have the endless discussions about cleaning fluids. I found the solution for myself: I trash them.
Older records can have groove damage, based on wrong VTF or defect diamond or bad Arm geometry.... then it is done, no way to improve them. Some have pops like mad, can be based on blisters in vinyl or the owner before used alcohol and that one removed the elastic parts in the groove walls. Then they are more or less defect too.
When you want to experiment, go for a normal, cheap, record, 80/90/100gr, made in the 70/80's, when they were sold in millions, you will find out, they run always quiet, they have a lot of dynamics and when they are dirty, you can use the cheapest fluid and after one run they sound like new again.

Firstly you need to clean the system so that it works and can do any of the job there.

chemdry rapid dry

I compared the Vinyl Cleaner and the VPI with a Delrin vacuum tube. The Delrin tube greatly improved the performance of the VPI with a much quicker and more effective vacuum in one pass. I had purchased it when my Loricraft drove me made taking about 25 minutes to clean one record with the four steps of the Walker Audio vinyl cleaners. I could do these four steps on each side in about seven minutes with better results. I used a USB microscope to view the grooves and what, if anything, was left there.

I used the Audio Desk which took me about one minute to setup and push the button and make sure the record was rotating properly. I then left and listened to music coming back later to inspect the grooves. Both the VPI and the Audio Desk left nothing behind. The Audio Desk was clearly the winner in terms of convenience.

Initially, I cleaned VPI cleaned records listened to them and then cleaned them with the Audio Desk and listened them again. I heard a modest improvement realitive to what I heard after playing new records, cleaning them, and then listened again. I repeatedly did this for a while and concluded it was real although beyond my understanding why. Then I decided to reclean albums that had only been cleaned with the Audio Desk using the VPI. I was glad I tried this as the second cleaning again sounded better???

I gave up on this as it was just too much for me to keep two cleaning machines and to clean everything twice. Since I could see nothing on any record cleaned with either machine, I have no idea why what might explain my findings.

At the last RMAF, I found the KL Audio ultrasonic cleaner. I liked it as it doesn't use a cleaning solution. Only distilled water is used and it has a more powerful ultrasonic source. I haven't done any comparisons but know of one where no substantial difference were noted. I think ultrasonics are here to stay.

Tbg, did you notice any sonic differences between the VPI and the Loricraft?

Peterayer, while I briefly had the VPI with the normal tube, yes, I noticed that the Loricraft cleaned better. But with the greater vacuum with the closer to the surface tube, the VPI was as good at removing ticks, etc. I did not have the USB microscope then. I really don't understand why VPI doesn't use Delrin.