Ultrasonic Vs Glue Clean

[Rustee]

Hi all,

There's lots of info on both these cleaning processes which is great. So far I have only tried the cost effective glue method which has given me some great results and some not so great.

I would love to try the US clean but due to the small size of my collection ( about 100)  haven't been able to justify the outlay. However the other part of me says do it, 100 super clean records would be fantastic.

 

So I'd love to hear from those of you that have tried both methods, and understand if the US cleaning process gives a better result than a glue clean?

 

Thanks in advance,

Russ

 

 

[EV Cali]

As you say there's lots of info on both these cleaning processes, both on this site and the web and a lot of comments comparing both methods.

Depending on where you live ,there may be some one who offers Ultrasonic cleaning professionally or a member with a machine who could clean a couple for you, then you can make up your own mind.

If you are in Brisbane I would be happy to clean half a dozen for you for free  and I have a mate who would clean all of them for a fee.

 

One thing I will say is that cleaning a hundred record with wood glue or record revirginizer  would not be that cheap and would take quite a while.

Edited December 5, 2019 by EV Cali

[GregWormald]

I've tried both and sonically the US won--recordings were more "alive". It is also easier. (I have about 700 albums and I'm working through them one by one.)

 

With only 100, I'd be trying to borrow a machine or pay to have them done.

[Rustee]

2 hours ago, EV Cali said:

Depending on where you live ,there may be some one who offers Ultrasonic cleaning professionally or a member with a machine who could clean a couple for you, then you can make up your own mind.

If you are in Brisbane I would be happy to clean half a dozen for you for free  and I have a mate who would clean all of them for a fee.

Yes did think about paying someone to do them but a search in the Wollongong area was unsuccessful. Would definitely be interested if there's someone on here from the area.

And thanks for your generous offer. Generosity of this forum never ceases to amaze.

2 hours ago, EV Cali said:

One thing I will say is that cleaning a hundred record with wood glue or record revirginizer  would not be that cheap and would take quite a while.

yep good point, and yes the time is a killer. 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Rustee

[Rustee]

15 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

I've tried both and sonically the US won--recordings were more "alive".

Thanks, good to know.  Did you find it reduced noise as well? (crackle and pops)

 

16 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

With only 100, I'd be trying to borrow a machine or pay to have them done.

Yep I think this is a good option, just need to find someone in Wollongong with a US machine and is willing to clean a few, for a fee of course.

[GregWormald]

1 minute ago, Rustee said:

Thanks, good to know.  Did you find it reduced noise as well? (crackle and pops)

The crackles and pops ARE reduced, sometimes drastically--but on some records they don't change much. Although, even if they are still there the increased "aliveness" makes them less significant.

[EV Cali]

1 hour ago, GregWormald said:

The crackles and pops ARE reduced, sometimes drastically--but on some records they don't change much. Although, even if they are still there the increased "aliveness" makes them less significant.

I totally agree. If the crackles and pops are caused by scratches and damage, rather than dirt , cleaning will not remove them but the fact that the sound is a lot louder and a lot clearer, after Ultrasonic cleaning, means the crackles and pops become less of an issue. If the record was not easy to replace you could probably live with it.

[ochremoon]

12 hours ago, EV Cali said:

 

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by ochremoon
Deleted as I misunderstood post. Carry on.

[Rustee]

Thanks for the replies, I think eventually I will end up with an US cleaner. With the DIY info available on here they really aren't that expensive to set up.

Would have been great to try a few as a test but looks like no-one from the Wollongong-ish area on here has one.  All good, thanks again all, much appreciate the advice 

Cheers,

 

 

[captain.j]

I recently bought a Kirmuss US RCM. The results are excellent.  
while watching a YouTube vid featuring the company CEO and inventer of the machine, he mentions DIY machines and the potential to actually damage records if the ultrasonic frequency is not right.  I’m happy to trust a company who have done the R&D and developed a machine that works.  
I’ve put a number of records through the process and had mainly great results.  However, if a record is old and flogged out then no amount of cleaning will save it. At least I know I’ve done everything possible though.

The consumables are a significant expense too. The instructions call for distilled water (6l per session), isopropyl alcohol and then there’s Mr Kirmuss’ secret cleaning fluid.  He seems fairly passionate about his cleaning fluid on his videos so who am I to argue.  But he also says tip the water out after a session, don’t keep it overnight - the instructions are very clear on that. In my busy life I’ve never managed to do more than about ten in a session because each cleaning cycle takes between 10 and 25 minutes depending on how dirty they are, and the machine takes two LP’s at a time. 

[andyr]

1 hour ago, captain.j said:

 

I recently bought a Kirmuss US RCM. The results are excellent.  
while watching a YouTube vid featuring the company CEO and inventer of the machine, he mentions DIY machines and the potential to actually damage records if the ultrasonic frequency is not right.  I’m happy to trust a company who have done the R&D and developed a machine that works.  
 

 

Aah, but what is a 'DIY machine', captain? 

 

Perhaps you should search out other YouTube vids (if YouTube is your goto information source) and see what they  say! 

 

"Damage" caused by us cavitation in the tank depends on the frequency:

• 40kHz is common
• 60 and 80kHz are less common
• there are even <40kHz units out there.

 

The higher the frequency ... the smaller the size of the cavitation bubbles.  The smaller the cavitation bubbles:

• the less aggressive the cleaning capability
• but the less damage they will cause to the grooves.

 

I myself have a 60kHz us tank - I would not use a 40kHz tank for cleaning my LPs.  (The Kirmuss is, I think, 40kHz.)

 

Andy

 

PS:  and unless you incorporate a 1 micron filter loop into your us cleaning regime, for the quietest result - you need to use a vac RCM to dry the LPs after the us clean cycle.  Otherwise, the gunk that is blasted out of the grooves by the us cavitation ... goes into solution and remains at the bottom of the grooves when the liquid evaporates.

 

Edited December 10, 2019 by andyr

[captain.j]

16 hours ago, andyr said:

 

Aah, but what is a 'DIY machine', captain? 

 

Perhaps you should search out other YouTube vids (if YouTube is your goto information source) and see what they  say! 

 

"Damage" caused by us cavitation in the tank depends on the frequency:

• 40kHz is common
• 60 and 80kHz are less common
• there are even <40kHz units out there.

 

The higher the frequency ... the smaller the size of the cavitation bubbles.  The smaller the cavitation bubbles:

• the less aggressive the cleaning capability
• but the less damage they will cause to the grooves.

 

I myself have a 60kHz us tank - I would not use a 40kHz tank for cleaning my LPs.  (The Kirmuss is, I think, 40kHz.)

 

Andy

 

PS:  and unless you incorporate a 1 micron filter loop into your us cleaning regime, for the quietest result - you need to use a vac RCM to dry the LPs after the us clean cycle.  Otherwise, the gunk that is blasted out of the grooves by the us cavitation ... goes into solution and remains at the bottom of the grooves when the liquid evaporates.

 

YouTube is not necessarily my  go-to source of truth, however it’s useful I think.  You certainly get a feel for the type of bloke who invented it when you get to see his enthusiasm for his product and listen to his experience as a vinyl buff since the 60’s.

 

As well as frequency, Kirmuss talks a lot about chemistry and the reaction of vinyl to various fluids and agents. He suggests this is where a lot of the cleaning actually takes place, with the aid of the sonic wave, as opposed to the cavitation of the bubbles.  He also suggests the residues from some fluids and agents can detract from the cleaning process.  I wonder if the glue/revirginizer products leave anything behind?
 

Kirmuss doesn’t mention the exact frequency of his machine in the vid that I watched but he did mention some numbers lower than 40kHz which he suggested were ineffective and some other numbers (over 60kHz) which he suggested were damaging.  
 

I’m happy that such a machine is sold by well respected audio dealers who have reputations to maintain.    Building a machine using tips from online experts is not my thing, but that’s just me.
 

Anyway, in my experience of the machine the results are far better than I’ve been ever able to achieve with a VPI vac machine or any other cleaning process I’ve attempted.

[andyr]

55 minutes ago, captain.j said:

Kirmuss doesn’t mention the exact frequency of his machine in the vid that I watched but he did mention some numbers lower than 40kHz which he suggested were ineffective and some other numbers (over 60kHz) which he suggested were damaging.  
 

 

Then he has the wrong end of the stick!  The higher the cavitation frequency, the smaller the bubbles and the gentler the cleaning action.  This is simple fact. 

 

Andy

 

[stevoz]

On 05/12/2019 at 5:45 PM, EV Cali said:

One thing I will say is that cleaning a hundred record with wood glue or record revirginizer  would not be that cheap and would take quite a while.

Yes you are correct on the time, it would take ages.....but the cost? Still cheap, especially if using the craft glue.

 

100 LP's = 4 bottles (or 2l) of RV = $180 ($140 if on special)

 

100 LP's = 2l of Mont Marte craft glue = >$25

 

An Ultrasonic RCM = no less than $400 (home made) or a LOT more to buy a new complete manufactured example.

 

All methods will do a great job.

 

If the OP has had bad results from glue, he's doing it wrong or the LP is physically degraded and a US cleaner won't do any better.

 

Andy?

[andyr]

1 hour ago, stevoz said:

 

If the OP has had bad results from glue, he's doing it wrong or the LP is physically degraded and a US cleaner won't do any better.

 

Andy?

 

 

You're asking me of all people to advocate for glue, Steve? 

 

1 hour ago, stevoz said:

 

All methods will do a great job.

 

 

A wet/vac RCM - such as the manual Nitty Gritty I used for 20 years - does a great job.

 

I would need to see a high-power magnification of the grooves after a glue (or RV) clean before I can believe they do a 'good job'! 

 

1 hour ago, stevoz said:

 

Yes you are correct on the time, it would take ages.....but the cost? Still cheap, especially if using the craft glue.

 

100 LP's = 4 bottles (or 2l) of RV = $180 ($140 if on special)

 

100 LP's = 2l of Mont Marte craft glue = >$25

 

An Ultrasonic RCM = no less than $400 (home made) or a LOT more to buy a new complete manufactured example.

 

 

I agree with your cost comparisons.  But you'd be lucky to get a working us tank for $400 - so, yes, they are out of reach for some.

 

My view is that a 1 micron filter (minimum!) circuit is required for us cleaning to be optimal - unless you have a vac m/c to dry the LPs.

 

Andy

 

Edited December 11, 2019 by andyr

[Ericcklau]

My experience so far is that, sonic is good for general cleaning, if the vinyl still have a lots of pops and crackso then you can try the ultimate solution glue clean it. 

[Peter-C]

The Kirmuss uses a frequency of 35kHz.

The Degritter uses 120 kHz. 
Which ones better?

[benny]

On 10/12/2019 at 3:51 PM, Rustee said:

Thanks for the replies, I think eventually I will end up with an US cleaner. With the DIY info available on here they really aren't that expensive to set up.

Would have been great to try a few as a test but looks like no-one from the Wollongong-ish area on here has one.  All good, thanks again all, much appreciate the advice 

Cheers,

 

 

If you ever find yourself in Sydney, shoot me a message. I have a vac rcm and an ultrasonic bath. Happy to clean a few records for you!

[andyr]

9 hours ago, Peter-C said:

The Kirmuss uses a frequency of 35kHz.

The Degritter uses 120 kHz. 
Which ones better?

 

That's a very interesting question, Peter. 

 

I've never come across a 120kHz machine before.

 

My view is that I'd prefer to use a 120kHz machine ... but it might not be any good for cleaning extremely gunky records.  OTOH, the 35kHz machine would blast out the gunk ... but I would fear it is damaging the grooves. 

 

Andy

 

[Rustee]

On 11/12/2019 at 5:24 PM, stevoz said:

If the OP has had bad results from glue, he's doing it wrong or the LP is physically degraded and a US cleaner won't do any better.

I guess the only way I'll find out is to US clean those that didn't come out great. Then I'll know if the record was actually worn or if US clean does actually do a better job than a glue clean.

 

On 11/12/2019 at 8:02 PM, Ericcklau said:

My experience so far is that, sonic is good for general cleaning, if the vinyl still have a lots of pops and crackso then you can try the ultimate solution glue clean it. 

Ok that's interesting, you rate the glue clean as better than US. Thanks for the feedback.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Rustee

[Rustee]

10 hours ago, benny said:

If you ever find yourself in Sydney, shoot me a message. I have a vac rcm and an ultrasonic bath. Happy to clean a few records for you!

Thank you for your generous offer, very much appreciated. I'll definitely keep it in mind.

[Rustee]

16 hours ago, andyr said:

I would need to see a high-power magnification of the grooves after a glue (or RV) clean before I can believe they do a 'good job'! 

I too have wondered if any glue or gunk is left in the grooves after a glue clean. Especially when I have seen thin strings of it stuck to the outside edges on occasions.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Rustee