Degritter Mark II

[bluespiano]

Thanks for the update. I believe my error was seeing a price in Euros and thinking those were still in parity with USD. I had not seen the Music Direct price. $3280 seems kinda on the high side - we'll see how the market reacts.

The KLAudio stubbornly continues to deny surfactant while the Degritter keeps its cavitators at 120kHz. Put the two together and one should be able to get a record clean.

I'm thinking the Degritter is using newer ultrasonic units.

And I give Degritter credit for a section in their latest manual that covers cleaning the interior with a toothbrush and IPA and then multiple washes with vinegar (presumably to attack hard water scale - use distilled water to avoid this.) It's the first covered top desktop unit I've seen that discusses cleaning. Open top USC units with metal interiors are simple to clean.

All efforts from vendors to encourage record cleaning are welcome. I believe in keeping your collection clean. It helps promote and extend the viability of the analog hobby!

I would not use the Al foil test. I did once a few years back in an open tank and dealt with small particles of the foil for months.
If you think the transducers have failed, check power usage with a Watt meter. Doing so confirmed my transducers were no longer functioning.

 

[Klaudio/Peter]

Klaudio RCM using 37Khz frequency which is most efficient cavitation frequency as we tested long time.
You can test quickly easy, LP put on and off from the washing basin during the ultrasonic running. You can feel the ultrasonic noise level quite changing and also power current very much changing, too (0.5A-2Amps)
Which means ultrasonic power really clean works inside of the groove. The power is quite drop if ther is no cavitation.
Because the LP groove physical width is resonance to the frequency range between 35K-40KHz.
Other frequency ranges are not changing like that because the ultrasonic power is not really works in the groove.

 

[Klaudio/Peter]

I would not use the Al foil test. I did once a few years back in an open tank and dealt with small particles of the foil for months.
If you think the transducers have failed, check power usage with a Watt meter. Doing so confirmed my transducers were no longer functioning.

The aluminium foil test inevitably damages ultrasonic transducers because without resonance or cavitation, applying power without to transmit the power to groove result in damage. Therefore, by grooving and resonating, power can be transmitted to the components without overloading them, and the power acts a true cleaning agent. Thus, cleaning must be performed at an appropriate frequency to ensure the safety of the tranducers and to allow the input power to be effectively loaded as a resonant groove.

 

[Neil.Antin]

Please understand what UT cavitation is: Ultrasonic tanks 'grow' bubbles Principle-of-ultrasound-cavitation-16-The-initiated-bubbles-grow-due-to-evaporation.png (850×553) (researchgate.net) until the bubble collapses. Watch this video between 6:19 and 8:30 Cavitation - Easily explained! - Bing video to see how the bubble collapses. This is going to happen whether the tank has objects in it or not. However, for side firing transducers in a very small tank, like the KLAudio, the Degritter, or the Humminguru, I could see how operating without a record or sometime between the transducer's could be a problem.

These are some of the basic rules for UT tanks.
-The power to produce cavitation is proportional to the kHz, so a 120kHz UT needs more power than a 40kHz.
-For ultrasonic tanks, the bubble diameter is inversely proportional to the kHz, so a 40 kHz UT produces a large bubble than a 120kHz UT.
-The cavitation intensity is proportional to the bubble diameter and the tank power (watts/L).
-The number of cavitation bubbles produced is proportional to kHz, so a 120kHz produces more bubbles than a 40kHz, but smaller bubbles.
-The smaller the tank volume, the more power that is required. It has to do with the ratio of the tank volume to its interior surface area.
-For lower kHz units (<60kHz), if the tank bath flow rate (from filtering or spinning) >50% of the tank volume per minute, cavitation intensity decreases.

-The KL Audio 40kHz 2.5L 200W is a very powerful machine and so is the Degritter 120kHz 1.4L 300W machine. And, given the high power (most of the energy goes ultimately goes to heat) and small volumes, the bath can heat up quickly. The Degritter mitigates this with a cooldown mode if temperature >95F while the latest KLAudio with its external pump/filter system mostly avoids the overheating. But by the experience of others, the high powered Elmasonic P-series UT tanks need a cooler/radiator if high throughput serial cleaning is performed.

-The Elmasonic P-series with its dual frequency 37/80kHz variable power and pulse power for record cleaning is near ideal. The two frequencies can target the different types of soils that may be present with the higher 80kHz targeting the very fine particles and films that the lower frequencies are not as effective. The reason has to do with the boundary layer. The fluid flow at the record (or any) surface develops a static layer that is separate from the bulk fluid that is moving. The boundary layer thickness is dependent on the ultrasonic frequency (high kHz = thinner boundary layer), acoustic energy, and fluid properties (viscosity & density). To get the most effective cleaning, the complete cleaning process has to penetrate the boundary layer to remove the soil and particles that are contained within it. At 40-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thick as 5 microns, while at 120-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thin as 2 microns.

-Lowering the surface tension of the fluid reduces the energy needed for cavitation and can improve cleaning efficiency - better opportunity to penetrate the boundary layer. Using surfactants can improve cleaning efficiency. But there is a delicate balance with using chemistry with UT that can improve the cleaning efficiency more than the small expense to the cavitation intensity. But use too much chemistry or the wrong chemistry and it's all downhill.

-The benefit of the nonionic surfactant Tergitol 15-S-9 is its very high performance. For a no-rinse wetting solution, you want the lowest concentration that will lower the surface tension of the water enough to wet the record.

1. Surface tension of the water is ~72 dynes/cm.
2. Surface tension of the record is ~37 dynes/cm.
3. 10 ppm (0.001%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~45 dynes/cm.
4. 20 ppm (0.002%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~37 dynes/cm. This is enough to 'wet' the record.
5. 52 ppm (0.0052%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~30 dynes/cm. Adding anymore will not lower the surface tension any further and is known as the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and at >52 ppm, and you begin to get detergency.
6. 3xCMC (0.016%) for a filtered UT tank will give the full detergency that Tergitol 15-S-9 can give and good bath life.

-Note that Triton X100 (now banned in the EU) CMC is 189-ppm, so it's not very efficient and requires much higher concentration which now complicates rinsing. Note that the one disadvantage of Tergitol 15-S-9 (and Triton X100) is that it foams. Some UT units like the Degritter whose filter system acts as a surface skimmer is very sensitive to producing foam, so any surfactant use is pretty much limited to very low concentrations.

If the above info spurs your curiosity, further details with over 80 linked references is available in this free book - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press.

 

[gajgmusic]

Please understand what UT cavitation is: Ultrasonic tanks 'grow' bubbles Principle-of-ultrasound-cavitation-16-The-initiated-bubbles-grow-due-to-evaporation.png (850×553) (researchgate.net) until the bubble collapses. Watch this video between 6:19 and 8:30 Cavitation - Easily explained! - Bing video to see how the bubble collapses. This is going to happen whether the tank has objects in it or not. However, for side firing transducers in a very small tank, like the KLAudio, the Degritter, or the Humminguru, I could see how operating without a record or sometime between the transducer's could be a problem.

These are some of the basic rules for UT tanks.
-The power to produce cavitation is proportional to the kHz, so a 120kHz UT needs more power than a 40kHz.
-For ultrasonic tanks, the bubble diameter is inversely proportional to the kHz, so a 40 kHz UT produces a large bubble than a 120kHz UT.
-The cavitation intensity is proportional to the bubble diameter and the tank power (watts/L).
-The number of cavitation bubbles produced is proportional to kHz, so a 120kHz produces more bubbles than a 40kHz, but smaller bubbles.
-The smaller the tank volume, the more power that is required. It has to do with the ratio of the tank volume to its interior surface area.
-For lower kHz units (<60kHz), if the tank bath flow rate (from filtering or spinning) >50% of the tank volume per minute, cavitation intensity decreases.

-The KL Audio 40kHz 2.5L 200W is a very powerful machine and so is the Degritter 120kHz 1.4L 300W machine. And, given the high power (most of the energy goes ultimately goes to heat) and small volumes, the bath can heat up quickly. The Degritter mitigates this with a cooldown mode if temperature >95F while the latest KLAudio with its external pump/filter system mostly avoids the overheating. But by the experience of others, the high powered Elmasonic P-series UT tanks need a cooler/radiator if high throughput serial cleaning is performed.

-The Elmasonic P-series with its dual frequency 37/80kHz variable power and pulse power for record cleaning is near ideal. The two frequencies can target the different types of soils that may be present with the higher 80kHz targeting the very fine particles and films that the lower frequencies are not as effective. The reason has to do with the boundary layer. The fluid flow at the record (or any) surface develops a static layer that is separate from the bulk fluid that is moving. The boundary layer thickness is dependent on the ultrasonic frequency (high kHz = thinner boundary layer), acoustic energy, and fluid properties (viscosity & density). To get the most effective cleaning, the complete cleaning process has to penetrate the boundary layer to remove the soil and particles that are contained within it. At 40-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thick as 5 microns, while at 120-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thin as 2 microns.

-Lowering the surface tension of the fluid reduces the energy needed for cavitation and can improve cleaning efficiency - better opportunity to penetrate the boundary layer. Using surfactants can improve cleaning efficiency. But there is a delicate balance with using chemistry with UT that can improve the cleaning efficiency more than the small expense to the cavitation intensity. But use too much chemistry or the wrong chemistry and it's all downhill.

-The benefit of the nonionic surfactant Tergitol 15-S-9 is its very high performance. For a no-rinse wetting solution, you want the lowest concentration that will lower the surface tension of the water enough to wet the record.

1. Surface tension of the water is ~72 dynes/cm.
2. Surface tension of the record is ~37 dynes/cm.
3. 10 ppm (0.001%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~45 dynes/cm.
4. 20 ppm (0.002%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~37 dynes/cm. This is enough to 'wet' the record.
5. 52 ppm (0.0052%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~30 dynes/cm. Adding anymore will not lower the surface tension any further and is known as the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and at >52 ppm, and you begin to get detergency.
6. 3xCMC (0.016%) for a filtered UT tank will give the full detergency that Tergitol 15-S-9 can give and good bath life.

-Note that Triton X100 (now banned in the EU) CMC is 189-ppm, so it's not very efficient and requires much higher concentration which now complicates rinsing. Note that the one disadvantage of Tergitol 15-S-9 (and Triton X100) is that it foams. Some UT units like the Degritter whose filter system acts as a surface skimmer is very sensitive to producing foam, so any surfactant use is pretty much limited to very low concentrations.

If the above info spurs your curiosity, further details with over 80 linked references is available in this free book - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press.

Neil

That is very interesting. Perhaps you might have some thoughts. I have a VPI 17.5 that has worked flawlessly for many years. I bought an early version of the Audiodesk and it worked well, for about 400 cleans. It is clearly not designed to be worked (though my business partner was able to resurrect it with a lot of work). I have given thought to a degritter but the thought of buying another 'anchor' for under a thousand cleans is somewhat bothersome. I would value your thoughts. Thanks

 

[djsina2]

Neil

That is very interesting. Perhaps you might have some thoughts. I have a VPI 17.5 that has worked flawlessly for many years. I bought an early version of the Audiodesk and it worked well, for about 400 cleans. It is clearly not designed to be worked (though my business partner was able to resurrect it with a lot of work). I have given thought to a degritter but the thought of buying another 'anchor' for under a thousand cleans is somewhat bothersome. I would value your thoughts. Thanks

Degritter is good for 3k+ cleans and for a modest fee they will rebuild the machine to new if/when it wears out. I think I saw it mentioned that one machine was over 5k cycles.

 

[Neil.Antin]

I have given thought to a degritter but the thought of buying another 'anchor' for under a thousand cleans is somewhat bothersome.

There is a long thread over at SH Degritter Users | Page 141 | Steve Hoffman Music Forums and the takeaway is that the unit appears good for about 2000 to 3000 uses and maybe more. But the company continues to improve the unit and is very responsive, and they are now offering to refurb the units for a not crazy fee so the risk of a boat anchor is currently low, https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/degritter-mark-ii.35816/post-835914.

But none of these units is going to give you 15-20 years of the VPI simple vacuum-RCM. They are quite complex and these are not industrial bench top UT machines that can last >10-yrs with heavy use and are priced according - they start at about $3K. But right now, Degritter probably has the best business model for the all-in-one UT record cleaning machine, and their operating manual reflects that - download the latest version here: Update your record cleaner software | Degritter.

 

[Fishfood]

Degritter is good for 3k+ cleans and for a modest fee they will rebuild the machine to new if/when it wears out. I think I saw it mentioned that one machine was over 5k cycles.

I'm at over 2k and it's still perfect, just FYI.

 

[tima]

I would not use the Al foil test. I did once a few years back in an open tank and dealt with small particles of the foil for months.
If you think the transducers have failed, check power usage with a Watt meter. Doing so confirmed my transducers were no longer functioning.

You make an excellent point. I've only done the foil test in open top machines. I will adopt the view that the foil test, while effective should not be used in covered desktop units for the reason you cite.

 

[tima]

Please understand what UT cavitation is: Ultrasonic tanks 'grow' bubbles Principle-of-ultrasound-cavitation-16-The-initiated-bubbles-grow-due-to-evaporation.png (850×553) (researchgate.net) until the bubble collapses. Watch this video between 6:19 and 8:30 Cavitation - Easily explained! - Bing video to see how the bubble collapses. This is going to happen whether the tank has objects in it or not. However, for side firing transducers in a very small tank, like the KLAudio, the Degritter, or the Humminguru, I could see how operating without a record or sometime between the transducer's could be a problem.

These are some of the basic rules for UT tanks.
-The power to produce cavitation is proportional to the kHz, so a 120kHz UT needs more power than a 40kHz.
-For ultrasonic tanks, the bubble diameter is inversely proportional to the kHz, so a 40 kHz UT produces a large bubble than a 120kHz UT.
-The cavitation intensity is proportional to the bubble diameter and the tank power (watts/L).
-The number of cavitation bubbles produced is proportional to kHz, so a 120kHz produces more bubbles than a 40kHz, but smaller bubbles.
-The smaller the tank volume, the more power that is required. It has to do with the ratio of the tank volume to its interior surface area.
-For lower kHz units (<60kHz), if the tank bath flow rate (from filtering or spinning) >50% of the tank volume per minute, cavitation intensity decreases.

-The KL Audio 40kHz 2.5L 200W is a very powerful machine and so is the Degritter 120kHz 1.4L 300W machine. And, given the high power (most of the energy goes ultimately goes to heat) and small volumes, the bath can heat up quickly. The Degritter mitigates this with a cooldown mode if temperature >95F while the latest KLAudio with its external pump/filter system mostly avoids the overheating. But by the experience of others, the high powered Elmasonic P-series UT tanks need a cooler/radiator if high throughput serial cleaning is performed.

-The Elmasonic P-series with its dual frequency 37/80kHz variable power and pulse power for record cleaning is near ideal. The two frequencies can target the different types of soils that may be present with the higher 80kHz targeting the very fine particles and films that the lower frequencies are not as effective. The reason has to do with the boundary layer. The fluid flow at the record (or any) surface develops a static layer that is separate from the bulk fluid that is moving. The boundary layer thickness is dependent on the ultrasonic frequency (high kHz = thinner boundary layer), acoustic energy, and fluid properties (viscosity & density). To get the most effective cleaning, the complete cleaning process has to penetrate the boundary layer to remove the soil and particles that are contained within it. At 40-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thick as 5 microns, while at 120-kHz, the boundary layer can be as thin as 2 microns.

-Lowering the surface tension of the fluid reduces the energy needed for cavitation and can improve cleaning efficiency - better opportunity to penetrate the boundary layer. Using surfactants can improve cleaning efficiency. But there is a delicate balance with using chemistry with UT that can improve the cleaning efficiency more than the small expense to the cavitation intensity. But use too much chemistry or the wrong chemistry and it's all downhill.

-The benefit of the nonionic surfactant Tergitol 15-S-9 is its very high performance. For a no-rinse wetting solution, you want the lowest concentration that will lower the surface tension of the water enough to wet the record.

1. Surface tension of the water is ~72 dynes/cm.
2. Surface tension of the record is ~37 dynes/cm.
3. 10 ppm (0.001%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~45 dynes/cm.
4. 20 ppm (0.002%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~37 dynes/cm. This is enough to 'wet' the record.
5. 52 ppm (0.0052%) Tergitol 15-S-9 reduces the surface tension of water to ~30 dynes/cm. Adding anymore will not lower the surface tension any further and is known as the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and at >52 ppm, and you begin to get detergency.
6. 3xCMC (0.016%) for a filtered UT tank will give the full detergency that Tergitol 15-S-9 can give and good bath life.

-Note that Triton X100 (now banned in the EU) CMC is 189-ppm, so it's not very efficient and requires much higher concentration which now complicates rinsing. Note that the one disadvantage of Tergitol 15-S-9 (and Triton X100) is that it foams. Some UT units like the Degritter whose filter system acts as a surface skimmer is very sensitive to producing foam, so any surfactant use is pretty much limited to very low concentrations.

If the above info spurs your curiosity, further details with over 80 linked references is available in this free book - Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press.

Superb post Neil. Thank you! I suggest you put what you wrote here in a separate post in its own thread, so it is not 'hidden' here in this thread.

 

[gajgmusic]

Degritter is good for 3k+ cleans and for a modest fee they will rebuild the machine to new if/when it wears out. I think I saw it mentioned that one machine was over 5k cycles.

Thanks for the thoughts. It does make sense. The VPI is great but I have to keep it in the basement and don't use it when my wife is around. I am thinking it would be nice to have one easy to use and leave around.

 

[aangen]

If I had to buy a new Degritter every three years I would not shed a tear. I really appreciate mine coming from the Auto Desk Glass Pro.
I gave it away, bah.

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

Hi WBF Members that have a few years experience with RCM's;
If you were looking for your first Ultra Sonic Cleaning Machine (USCM) (and ultimately your last one, so cost not a big issue) for a final cleaning treatment (as I already have the Keith Monks Classic RCM for the initial pre-wash If records are very dirty) and main cleaning wash), would you go for;
- The Degritter USCM ?
- The Kuzma US Kit with a Elma Elmasonic P 120H- 37/80 kHz USCM ?
- The Kirmuss Audio KA-RC-1 USCM ?
- A another better USCM than the above short list ?
- Don't buy a USCM at all and just stick with the Keith Monks RCM I currently own and increase the wash cycles to say also include a final wash with pure distilled water ?

Your thoughts and experiences of USCMs would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Neil.Antin]

Hi WBF Members that have a few years experience with RCM's;
If you were looking for your first Ultra Sonic Cleaning Machine (USCM) (and ultimately your last one, so cost not a big issue) for a final cleaning treatment (as I already have the Keith Monks Classic RCM for the initial pre-wash If records are very dirty) and main cleaning wash), would you go for;
- The Degritter USCM ?
- The Kuzma US Kit with a Elma Elmasonic P 120H- 37/80 kHz USCM ?
- The Kirmuss Audio KA-RC-1 USCM ?
- A another better USCM than the above short list ?
- Don't buy a USCM at all and just stick with the Keith Monks RCM I currently own and increase the wash cycles to say also include a final wash with pure distilled water ?

Your thoughts and experiences of USCMs would be greatly appreciated.

You need to ask yourself a few questions:

1. How many records do no you want to clean at-once? The Kuzma-Kit & P120 (12L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P120H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) is designed to clean many records at once. An alternative for 2-3 records at once is a P60 (6L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) with Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner - The Vinyl Maid (thevinylsource.co.uk). But you should also add a decent pump/filter system to keep the bath clean. For high throughput a radiator is required to keep the bath <95F (powerful tanks). And note that using these UT tanks requires some assembly of the record(s) on to the spinner.

2. For convenience of work throughput, the Degritter MKII or the KLAudio Klaudio-Vinyl LP Record Ultrasonic Cleaner With Dryer External Reservoir-Record Cleaning Machine|Acoustic Sounds provide final clean and dry. Lift the record from the Monks and insert into the UT tank record slot. The Degritter (120kHz-300W) has a filter, but nothing compared to what the latest version of the KL Audio (40kHz-200W) has (which is good, but not as good as DIY above which can use a 0.2 micron absolute). And the Degritter on heavy cycle will need to periodically cooldown where the KL Audio with its external pump/filter appears based on reports is enough to keep the bath from overheating. Note that @Bill Hart has a Monks and KLAudio (earlier version w/o external pump/filter) for his cleaning process - record cleaning, VPI, Monks, ultrasonic, Audio Desk, KL Audio (thevinylpress.com)

3. What is you access to distilled (or better) water? The P-120 is 12-L, the P-60 is 6L, the KLAudio is 2.5L and the Degritter is 1.4L. The larger the volume and/or with the better filtration the longer the bath can last. The Elmasomic P-series with 0.2-micron filter, the bath should last 3-4 wks, the KLAudio should get ~2-wks (others with experience can chime in), the Degritter not more than 1-wk.

4. How much space do you have? The DIY with Elmasonic and pump/filter will take up more space than KLAudio which will take up more space than the Degritter.

5. How much control over your process do you want? The Elmasonic is very flexible both with chemistry and a multitude of power settings. The Degritter can only use a low-foaming surfactant in very low concentrations and the KLAudio says to use water only and the latest unit may not work with really pure water (water needs some conductivity for the level sensors to work).

6. As far as durability and reliability - the Elmasonic since its the simplest should last the longest although the latest KLAudio with external pump/filter should push its reliability which is pretty good (based on user reports) to begin with even higher. Note that Elmasonic is pretty big company that has been in business for some time. The Degritter because it's a very compact high-powered unit with internal pump is not as reliable based on user comments. However, Degritter may have the best customer service and they are offering a rebuild service.

7. As far as power to clean, any of the three will do the job. The Elmasonic has the advantage of the dual frequency which would be useful for cleaning records not previously cleaned by the Monks. The KLAudio at 40kHz & 200W is a very powerful machine (low kHz needs less power) and any advantage the Degritter at 120kHz & 300W may have for very fine particles (the benefit of the high kHz) should be offset by the KLAudio's brute power.

8. You should familiarize yourself with each of the operating manuals - for the Degritter MKII - download here Update your record cleaner software | Degritter; KLAudio - manual_kd-cln-lp200t_d100eng.pdf (klaudio.com), and the Elmasonic P-Series - Elmasonic P Ultrasonic Cleaning Units - Operating Instructions (elma-ultrasonic.co.nz)

Just some casual thoughts...

Good Luck

PS/Absence of Kirmuss from this post is deliberate and nothing to add.

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

You need to ask yourself a few questions:

1. How many records do no you want to clean at-once? The Kuzma-Kit & P120 (12L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P120H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) is designed to clean many records at once. An alternative for 2-3 records at once is a P60 (6L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) with Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner - The Vinyl Maid (thevinylsource.co.uk). But you should also add a decent pump/filter system to keep the bath clean. For high throughput a radiator is required to keep the bath <95F (powerful tanks). And note that using these UT tanks requires some assembly of the record(s) on to the spinner.

2. For convenience of work throughput, the Degritter MKII or the KLAudio Klaudio-Vinyl LP Record Ultrasonic Cleaner With Dryer External Reservoir-Record Cleaning Machine|Acoustic Sounds provide final clean and dry. Lift the record from the Monks and insert into the UT tank record slot. The Degritter (120kHz-300W) has a filter, but nothing compared to what the latest version of the KL Audio (40kHz-200W) has (which is good, but not as good as DIY above which can use a 0.2 micron absolute). And the Degritter on heavy cycle will need to periodically cooldown where the KL Audio with its external pump/filter appears based on reports is enough to keep the bath from overheating. Note that @Bill Hart has a Monks and KLAudio (earlier version w/o external pump/filter) for his cleaning process - record cleaning, VPI, Monks, ultrasonic, Audio Desk, KL Audio (thevinylpress.com)

3. What is you access to distilled (or better) water? The P-120 is 12-L, the P-60 is 6L, the KLAudio is 2.5L and the Degritter is 1.4L. The larger the volume and/or with the better filtration the longer the bath can last. The Elmasomic P-series with 0.2-micron filter, the bath should last 3-4 wks, the KLAudio should get ~2-wks (others with experience can chime in), the Degritter not more than 1-wk.

4. How much space do you have? The DIY with Elmasonic and pump/filter will take up more space than KLAudio which will take up more space than the Degritter.

5. How much control over your process do you want? The Elmasonic is very flexible both with chemistry and a multitude of power settings. The Degritter can only use a low-foaming surfactant in very low concentrations and the KLAudio says to use water only and the latest unit may not work with really pure water (water needs some conductivity for the level sensors to work).

6. As far as durability and reliability - the Elmasonic since its the simplest should last the longest although the latest KLAudio with external pump/filter should push its reliability which is pretty good (based on user reports) to begin with even higher. Note that Elmasonic is pretty big company that has been in business for some time. The Degritter because it's a very compact high-powered unit with internal pump is not as reliable based on user comments. However, Degritter may have the best customer service and they are offering a rebuild service.

7. As far as power to clean, any of the three will do the job. The Elmasonic has the advantage of the dual frequency which would be useful for cleaning records not previously cleaned by the Monks. The KLAudio at 40kHz & 200W is a very powerful machine (low kHz needs less power) and any advantage the Degritter at 120kHz & 300W may have for very fine particles (the benefit of the high kHz) should be offset by the KLAudio's brute power.

8. You should familiarize yourself with each of the operating manuals - for the Degritter MKII - download here Update your record cleaner software | Degritter; KLAudio - manual_kd-cln-lp200t_d100eng.pdf (klaudio.com), and the Elmasonic P-Series - Elmasonic P Ultrasonic Cleaning Units - Operating Instructions (elma-ultrasonic.co.nz)

Just some casual thoughts...

Good Luck

PS/Absence of Kirmuss from this post is deliberate and nothing to add.

Ooo wow fantastic reply 'Neil.Antin' That is very kind and thoughtful of you. Very much appreciated.

That's a lot of very interesting information to digest and consider as a newbie on USCM ! .

I guess the Elmasonic USCM is the all round machine that appears to have more flexibility than the others, (with two different cleaning frequencies that can be used, different cleaning media cocktails etc. and a high and professional level of build quality and performance etc. ).

I have no issues buying distilled water here in the UK, so this shouldn't affect my choice.

I have no issues with space to accommodate the USCM. It will sit alongside my KM RCM on the same table.

I only normally need to clean max 10 LP's at any one time If I buy this quantity at the same time and leave to clean them all in one go over a weekend day, normally only one or two (I normally clean LP's on the first weekend If I have received them during the week - both new and second hand normally second hand LPs from Discogs etc. ).
Therefore maybe an Elmasonic P-60 will fit my lower 'in-one go' cleaning quantity than the P-120 and also save on distilled water with filling the tank and the additional hardware i.e. not requiring an an external heater / radiator etc.

I will read through the manuals for all of the USCM thoroughly. Thank you very much for the links to the manuals.

You did't mention the Kirmuss Audio KA-RC-1 USCM 'Neil.Antin', so can I assume that this particular USCM is not worth considering along with the other USCMs in my post ?

 

[Neil.Antin]

@Bonesy Jonesy

If you decide on the DIY path with the Elmasonic, recommend you download this free book and read Chapter XIV Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-3rd Edition - The Vinyl Press which discusses ultrasonic tanks and goes into detail on the pump/filter system which reflects what @tima addresses on his thread tima's DIY RCM | What's Best Audio and Video Forum. The Best High End Audio Forum on the planet! (whatsbestforum.com) as his final setup. Noting that he and @dminches use an Elamsonic P120 for cleaning and then another Elmasonic (single kHz) for rinse. But understand as a DIY that some assembly is required.

Being in the UK, you would not use a 115VAC pump, but the 12VDC pump is available in the UK - see Table XXIV UCM Pump-Filter System Parts List which lists three different price-point designs. I have worked with people in the UK setting these systems up, so I also know that applicable filters are available. However, if you decide on the DIY Elmasonic recommend you use @tima thread for questions, etc.

Keep in mind with the DIY Elmasonic you have two options for drying - you can let the record air-dry or you dry with your Monks.

As far as Kirmuss, its good when using his process. It has the convenience of a drop-in slot record spinner, but it has no option for a filter. If you do not filter it does not take long before you are 'cleaning' with a dirty bath - that's up to you. His unit has a continuous operating limit of about 25-min after which you have to shut it down to cool. Here is his manual KirmussAudio-V12-User-Manual-Vinyl-Restoration-NOV-2021.pdf. The base ultrasonic tank is pretty sure is an Isonic unit - iSonic Inc. (ultrasonic cleaners, ultrasonic accelerators). Be careful of fancy words and tricky phrases - compare this to Elmasonic - Ultrasonic cleaning - Elma Schmidbauer GmbH (elma-ultrasonic.com) and draw your own conclusions.

 

[tima]

PS/Absence of Kirmuss from this post is deliberate and nothing to add.

Thanks for that note, Neil. After watching that offering and the pitch given for it for several years now, I would avoid Kirmuss -- my opinion. Thanks for your synopsis covering options.

If you were looking for your first Ultra Sonic Cleaning Machine (USCM) (and ultimately your last one, so cost not a big issue) for a final cleaning treatment (as I already have the Keith Monks Classic RCM for the initial pre-wash If records are very dirty) and main cleaning wash), would you go for;

BJ, Having gone through this for some time now, from building what turned out to be an inexpensive starter setup, it should be no surprise that I speak for what I consider current state-of-the-art. I will advocate for the Elmasonic P120 tank with 0.2 micron filter with Kuzma rotisserie as the base platform for a record cleaning system that will serve you well for years.

My original goal was to build a system that did not require a seperate rinse step, predicated on the idea of using a top grade absolute rated filter for the wash tank. I built that and it worked very well. Eventually I became convinced that rinsing was critical. Happily that coincided with Elmasonic coming out with their 'S' series of UT tanks which were less expensive versions of the P series with fewer functions. David (@dminches ) and I added those to our systems for rinsing and achieved top-flight results.

Using individual components (as we do with our stereos) yields considerable flexibility and control over time, whereas a single do-it-all machine is convenient, but depends on a single source for service and parts. We each make our choices.

Here is a parts list:

tima's DIY RCM

FWIW, I use Zippo, primarily to remove stickers from sleeves, but it works wonders on paint and other similar substances. It evaporates very quickly, however, so there is no ability to soak. Where does this paint even come from?!

www.whatsbestforum.com

Pictures on this page:

tima's DIY RCM

I bought the 3ml Calibrated Eye Dropper pipettes Neil mentions, and 1 pint of Tergitol 15-S-9 from Talasonline.com ($21.75 + ship) The calibrated pipettes graduated in 1,2 and 3 ml are a perfect tool for adding Tergitol to a tank - very nice, thanks for the suggestion Neil. I emptied the tank of...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[Neil.Antin]

I will advocate for the Elmasonic P120 tank with 0.2 micron filter with Kuzma rotisserie as the base platform for a record cleaning system that will serve you well for years.

Tim;

The alternate 2-3 records at once is a P60 (6L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) with Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner - The Vinyl Maid (thevinylsource.co.uk) is a nice smaller (and less expensive) setup. It has all the same functions as your P120 just a smaller tank, and the UK made Viny Maid uses a magnetic coupling allowing records dry while other records are being cleaned - like the old VinylStack (USA) unit that is no longer being manufactured.

Take care,
Neil

 

[tima]

Tim;

The alternate 2-3 records at once is a P60 (6L) Elmasonic PP_Elmasonic_P60H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com) with Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaner - The Vinyl Maid (thevinylsource.co.uk) is a nice smaller (and less expensive) setup. It has all the same functions as your P120 just a smaller tank, and the UK made Viny Maid uses a magnetic coupling allowing records dry while other records are being cleaned - like the old VinylStack (USA) unit that is no longer being manufactured.

Take care,
Neil

Yes, thanks Neil, I'm aware of the P60 and list its specifications in the first link in my message above. I have not seen a Vinyl Maid in operation. Yes it is less expensive. It would be nice if the Vinyl Maid rotisserie made its manual available. I'd like to see how straightforward it is to move a spindle's worth of records from one rotisserie to another (from a wash tank to a rinse tank) I"d also like to learn the materials and technique for both loading records and allowing them to dry. Have heard from end-users who have had one for a while?

By looking at the VM's pictures alone I gauge the Kuzma unit as easier to use and of higher quality (granted price diference). To my knowledge, thus far only the Kuzma rotisserie has held up over time as an available and supported product while various other rotisseries have come and gone; there are Kuzma dealers world wide. But I can only speak from my experience. I have not used an Elmasonic P60 but looking at the internal tank dimensions, it also should work with the Kuzma unit, based on sizing in Kuzma's list of compatible tanks. (http://www.kuzma.si/media/uploads/files/US CLEANERS LIST 150304.pdf)

edit: I should add a positive note that there continue to be relatively low cost options for putting together a record cleaning system. We are but curators of our vinyl for the next generation who will enjoy playing records.

 

[Neil.Antin]

It would be nice if the Vinyl Maid rotisserie made its manual available. I'd like to see how straightforward it is to move a spindle's worth of records from one rotisserie to another (from a wash tank to a rinse tank) I"d also like to learn the materials and technique for both loading records and allowing them to dry.

Tim:

Here is the manual - The Vinyl Maid Mk II instruction (thevinylsource.co.uk). The record stack attaches to the motor drive by a magnetic coupling. Simply detach (simply pull apart) the record stack from the motor drive and attach another - they provide two kits.

Is the Vinyl Maid built to the same standards as the Kuzma no, but that is reflected in the price, and both appear to be using a high torque gear-drive motor at similar speeds.

Vinyl Records Cleaner/Washing Machine (thevinylsource.co.uk) - £320.00
KUZMA RD Ultrasonic Record Cleaning kit (mackenziehifi.com) - £1,250.00

Take care,
Neil