Degritter ultrasonic record cleaner

Hi y’all, just a few words on what I think is a worthy alternative to the Audio Desk Systeme and KLAudio ultrasonic cleaners.

http://degritter.com/media-kit/

I’ve been a beta tester on the Degritter for the last few weeks, and am happy to offer my opinions and answer any qs for those interested.

I believe official launch is in early May, and at this stage after a couple of quibbles in day to day use, I’m planning to keep my unit, it’s been a pretty good success, and invaluable addition to day to day life as a vinyl addict.

 

We finally have a Support Center available on our website.
The Support Center provides you with latest software updates and troubleshooting guides.

Also, we have just released software version 1.6.1 that compared to the earlier versions that we shipped out with has multiple features like:

• Automatic water cooling
• Smart drying
• Longer washing programs
• Multiple improvements and fixes for smaller issues

Deionized water is not recommended, as it is corrosive and has very low conductivity, possibly resulting in harm to the machine.

This is a precautionary warning as the pure deionized water can absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide and can produce carbonic acid, which can reduce the water's pH to as little as 5.5. Also, total lack of ions can theoretically cause our sensors to not detect the water, but adding cleaning fluid to the water will immediately introduce ions to the water.

This means that when deionized water is used with cleaning fluid it will work all right, but we want to run some tests with laboratory grade deionized water before we remove the warning from our manual.

 

Can i ask, how does the Degritter compare with the Audio Desk rcm?

I would like to chip in a bit to the AudioDesk vs Degritter comparison. Again, I emphasise that I am a representative of Degritter company and therefore I cannot be taken as an unbiased reviewer even though I will try to be one.

Recently we got our hands on one of the AudioDesk PRO machines and we did a bit of poking around to see how exactly does their ultrasonic cleaning work. Previously we have expressed our concerns about it because the machine is using external 24 v DC power adapter and you normally do not power your ultrasonic amplifiers with 24 v DC and also because the machine consumed only 40 W while it was cleaning together with all the pumps and motors.

What we found was that the "ultrasonic" label on AudioDesk comes from a small ultrasonic mist maker that has been placed inside of the machine. Ultrasonic mist makers are basically small transducers that are running on 1.7 MHz frequency and with this high frequency they are able to turn water into mist.

The one inside AudioDesk looks like this: https://www.amazon.com/Lemonbest-Ultrasonic-Atomizer-Humidifier-Charger/dp/B00H1MD3R2

The problem with using a mist maker as a cleaner is that it runs at so extremely high frequency 1700 kHz that the ultrasonic cavitation has very little or no effect on the surfaces. The cleaning effect is diminished even more with the use of only 10W of power.

We shot a small video where you can see the AudioDesk mist maker complete with the mood setting RGB LEDs in action:

While the ultrasonic cleaning in AudioDesk is lacking, we are not trying to dismiss AudioDesk as a great record cleaning machine. What we also saw was a machine with good build quality and great design concepts. The mechanism with rolling brushes is very effective and it does its job well.

 

At what temperature does the Degritter warn that the water temperature is too high?

 

At what temperature does the Degritter warn that the water temperature is too high?

At 35 degrees C.

We have now included a feature in the software that will turn off the ultrasonic cleaning and the machine will cool the water for 2 minutes once it happens. After the 2 minute cooling the machine will resume washing and will complete the washing and drying cycle.

 

At 35 degrees C.

We have now included a feature in the software that will turn off the ultrasonic cleaning and the machine will cool the water for 2 minutes once it happens. After the 2 minute cooling the machine will resume washing and will complete the washing and drying cycle.

Thanks. It's nice you have a programmable interface sufficient to control the unit in that way.

I'm interested in the use of heat as part of the vinyl record ultrasonic cleaning process. How did you arrive at 35 degrees C?

 

How did you arrive at 35 degrees C?

The melting point for PVC plastics that Vinyl is made out of range from 100 C - 200 C, but the materials become soft long before this happens. Starting from temperatures of 40 C you can start seeing warping damage on records.

 

The melting point for PVC plastics that Vinyl is made out of range from 100 C - 200 C, but the materials become soft long before this happens. Starting from temperatures of 40 C you can start seeing warping damage on records.

Thanks for your follow-up.

So your rationale here for a temperature warning at 35° C is based on the potential for record warpage or damage at higher temperatures around 40° C, and that is based on observation of deformation at the higher temps. I too have seen very slight deformation (say 1-2mm) at temperatures north of 40° C. From observation I'll note this in the bath while upon removal to cooler temps (room temp) records always return to the same flatness they had prior to heating. I have not seen a record fail to return to flat, although I've also not exposed records to temperatures higher than 42-43° C. Which isn't to say it cannot happen.

So damage potential is a rational for staying below a specific temperature.

My understanding of using heat as part of the ultrasonic cleaning process in general, not just for records, is that heat can improve cleaning effectiveness. Heat may improve the strength of cavitation. Likewise the amount of heat to use may tie to the material cleaned and the makeup of the cleaning solution. This is why many commercial USC machines have heaters and thermostats. (I understand your product does not have a built-in heater and heat generated wilth it comes from the transducers putting energy into the solution, so this angle may not be of interest to you. Not a criticism.)

But I'll ask: Has Degritter done any research into the amount of heat to use for optimal cleaning of vinyl generally or the material composition of a vinyl record?

 

I bought a record cleaner made by a friend

It’s an off the peg ultrasonic. Price is a fraction of the pro machines.
CNC made motor and mount on top.

Cleans just as well and costs about 300 quid.
There’s no foo in this. It’s like buying a nylon brush for a pound and buying the same one labelled as a record cleaner for ten.

I have a Loricraft prc4 and May sell as the cheap ultrasonic does me.

Not sure what else you need?

 

Have you done any testing with 78’s and shellac?

david

I would like to chip in a bit to the AudioDesk vs Degritter comparison. Again, I emphasise that I am a representative of Degritter company and therefore I cannot be taken as an unbiased reviewer even though I will try to be one.

Recently we got our hands on one of the AudioDesk PRO machines and we did a bit of poking around to see how exactly does their ultrasonic cleaning work. Previously we have expressed our concerns about it because the machine is using external 24 v DC power adapter and you normally do not power your ultrasonic amplifiers with 24 v DC and also because the machine consumed only 40 W while it was cleaning together with all the pumps and motors.

What we found was that the "ultrasonic" label on AudioDesk comes from a small ultrasonic mist maker that has been placed inside of the machine. Ultrasonic mist makers are basically small transducers that are running on 1.7 MHz frequency and with this high frequency they are able to turn water into mist.

The one inside AudioDesk looks like this: https://www.amazon.com/Lemonbest-Ultrasonic-Atomizer-Humidifier-Charger/dp/B00H1MD3R2

The problem with using a mist maker as a cleaner is that it runs at so extremely high frequency 1700 kHz that the ultrasonic cavitation has very little or no effect on the surfaces. The cleaning effect is diminished even more with the use of only 10W of power.

We shot a small video where you can see the AudioDesk mist maker complete with the mood setting RGB LEDs in action:

While the ultrasonic cleaning in AudioDesk is lacking, we are not trying to dismiss AudioDesk as a great record cleaning machine. What we also saw was a machine with good build quality and great design concepts. The mechanism with rolling brushes is very effective and it does its job well.

 

I would also like to follow up with tima’s excellent points and question in post #407, above:

“Has Degritter (OR ANYONE) done any research into the amount of heat to use for optimal cleaning of vinyl generally or the material composition of a vinyl record?”

Thanks,
Don

 

Hi!

Has Degritter done any research into the amount of heat to use for optimal cleaning of vinyl generally or the material composition of a vinyl record?

Optimal cleaning, if at all possible to define, will very much depend on the type of dirt we are trying to clean. Due to the undefined nature of "dirt" I argue there is no one optimal cleaning procedure (or temperature) for vinyl records.

You will find that ultrasonic cleaning studies will generally focus on "a very specific kind of dirt removed" vs some "very specific" adjustable external parameter, eg. temperature. There are many of these studies. Google Scholar will help with the searches. The first one I found:
"Cleaning of Conveyor Belt Materials Using Ultrasound in a Thin Layer of Water"
https://jfoodprotection.org/doi/abs/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-12-563

There is a rule of thumb in chemistry: for every 10 C of temperature rise in a "common" reacting solution you achieve double the rate of the reaction. However when looking at US cleaning, there are caveats at play - the higher the temperature in water, the higher is the vapor pressure in the water and the more easily cavitation bubbles are formed and collapsed. This means less energy per collapse, less cleaning power.

The reason why commercial cleaners have heating elements and thermostats is that the chemical benefits start dominating over the cavitation intensity drop off at higher temperatures, achieving a better cleaning effect as a whole. But we cannot go into the typical 50-70 C ultrasonic cleaning temperature range with vinyl records.

As you see, there might be a balance (higher temperature = better solubility+faster rection rates - less cavitation intensity), but there are so many more variables that go into the mix. Following rules of thumb are pretty good for achieving 80% accurate enough results.

There is a famous example of the 80% rule from the Trinity atomic explosion - Enrico Fermi calculated on a napkin how much the blast yield will be, based on simple calculations and presumptions. His estimate was 10 kt TNT equivalent. The measured result was 20 kt TNT. Given how complicated this calculation would have been if one tried to consider all variables - well, you would probably had the same result as Fermi did due to the errors and whatnot involved. Not to mention the massive effort to compile the calculations. These kind of calculations are known as Fermi Problems.

What we know from experiment is that above 40 C records start warping - check. What we know is that room temperature (below which you need a refrigeration system), is around 21 C - check. This leaves us a range of about 15 C to play with. As you increase the temperature however, you lose some strength in cavitation. Based on this non-numeric herustic, I would estimate that the cleaning efficiency in terms of reaction rate and ultrasonic cavitation is pretty flat across the given temperature range.

I dare argue what makes a much bigger difference in cleaning than our given temperature range is the construction of the cleaning tank (directing the cleaning action), function of the ultrasonic amplifier (frequency and special functions, eg. sweep and pulse), cleaning medium and added cleaning fluids. General rules apply here too - you need something to transport the dirt away (water), you need something for polar dirt molecules (water dissolves sugars), you need something for nonpolar dirt molecules (surfactants/organic solvents eg IPA help dissolve fingerprints).

As for the question regarding shellacs - we have people using Degritter on shellac records with success. US record auction site Venerable Music has cleaned 10" pre-war era records with Degritter. There are pictures on our Facebook page of that.

Uku Püttsepp
co-counder at Degritter

 

Thanks for taking your time to follow-up, Uku, and share your deep knowledge about ultrasonic cleaning - I/we appreciate your particpation here.

Fwiw, I posted a bit more on the general topic of heat and ultrasonic cleaning in my own thread, message #74.

Optimal cleaning, if at all possible to define, will very much depend on the type of dirt we are trying to clean. Due to the undefined nature of "dirt" I argue there is no one optimal cleaning procedure (or temperature) for vinyl records.

I have to smile at this... it's kinda like begging the question - assuming what you're trying to prove - but here assuming the object of what you're trying to define doesn't exist (or is so amorphous) such that definition becomes impossible. But, it's clever and I like that.<smile>

I suppose we could think of 'optimal cleaning' in terms of an absolute, the presence or total absence of some specific substance. Not sure that advances the ball, but those are indeed possible states a record could take. On the other hand we might say of a given record that it is as clean as it can get with a particular process which avoids the 'optimally clean' verbiage. (I could have used the word "effective" rather than "optimal".) I'll presume we can agree that some processes/techniques/methods can get a record cleaner than others.

We might also consider that under typical conditions we're more apt to find certain substances on dirty records than other substances. Perhaps we can be so gauche as to talk about normal record dirt. <smile> Presumably our cleaning solution formulations and ultrasonic cleaner designs take something like that into account, and we believe certain solutions and designs clean more effectively than others under the conditions in play.

And lastly, there may be other standards for judging clean or optimally clean. I use what I call the Ellington Standard: if it sounds clean, it is clean.

As you see, there might be a balance (higher temperature = better solubility+faster rection rates - less cavitation intensity), but there are so many more variables that go into the mix. Following rules of thumb are pretty good for achieving 80% accurate enough results.

Yes - exactly! I don't have a percentage but do agree multiple variables are in play and we make trade-offs. Yes, there's a trade-off between higher temperatures improving cleaning agent effectiveness and better distribution of ultrasonic action one the one hand, and on the other, at higher temps the cavitation explosions lose force . You can see the difference in a foil test at higher temperature (smaller, better distributed perforations) and lower temperatures (larger perforations.) Certainly the damage potential from heat is a major consideration. If a given solution might work better at a higher temperature but that temperature can permanently harm what we're cleaning, then it's a no go. We choose our methods within a context that orients towards success - perhaps that is what we can accept as optimal.

Thanks again and good luck with Degritter. I find it really helpful that we can share our observations.

 

Interesting views from an owner on audiogon. Not sure I would want to lose leading edge of music.

As for sonic results, like any record cleaner it depends on the shape of the record and the nature of it's noise. Obviously this machine won't get rid of pops and ticks caused by actual damage to the record, only if it's caused by debris that can be scoured out. Overall I'd say I hear an appreciable difference with every record after cleaning - smoother, less hash, somewhat less pops and ticks. There have been the occasional jaw-dropping difference. One record went from sounding like it had been taken directly from a trash compactor - hard to even hear the music through the noise - to sounding almost brand new after a wash in the Degritter. I hadn't thought such a thing possible until I heard it.

Downsides? Sometimes I'm not sure I prefer the sound of the washed record to the unwashed record. It can sometimes make a record sound in a way a bit more CD-like than vinyl. Can sometimes seem to lose a little bit of life/air/leading edge after a wash.

 

Interesting views from an owner on audiogon. Not sure I would want to lose leading edge of music.

I have not experienced any such thing.

 

giving this thread a little bump.....VERY interested in this unit...I noticed today that Music Direct is selling these in the US and have them in stock......makes it a little more appealing to me to be able to buy one local

 

Kozzmo, many here have reinforced my good feeling in bringing Degritter to the attention of WBF. Hopefully that engenders confidence on any possible purchase. For me, a fantastic find.

 

Was using mine today. One of the better things I have purchased.

 

We finally have a Support Center available on our website.
The Support Center provides you with latest software updates and troubleshooting guides.

Also, we have just released software version 1.6.1 that compared to the earlier versions that we shipped out with has multiple features like:

• Automatic water cooling
• Smart drying
• Longer washing programs
• Multiple improvements and fixes for smaller issues

This is a precautionary warning as the pure deionized water can absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide and can produce carbonic acid, which can reduce the water's pH to as little as 5.5. Also, total lack of ions can theoretically cause our sensors to not detect the water, but adding cleaning fluid to the water will immediately introduce ions to the water.

This means that when deionized water is used with cleaning fluid it will work all right, but we want to run some tests with laboratory grade deionized water before we remove the warning from our manual.

Of course, DI water is a poor conductor due to lack of dissolved ionic contaminants, and yes it will dissolve CO2 from the air and create carbonic acid, but remember this is an extremely weak acid and adding the smallest amount of buffer of nay kind will cause the pH to swing back up quickly.

As a pure water professional, I regularly explain this to clients. As little as 4 ppm CO2 in pure water will lower pH to 4.5. Adding a trace of weak base like sodium bicarbonate (baking soda), about the amount that would fit on the head of a pin, will move the pH to 8.

I have used water with resistivity ~ 10 meg-ohms in my KLAudio cleaner with no apparent ill effects. I do appreciate your concerns, but since you recommend a cleaning agent be added, starting with the purest water seems optimal.

I have not tested the pH of the water in the tank after several cleanings or after the unit has been idle for multiple days. These might be valuable data points but strength of the solution is important not just pH. Of course, testing pH in extremely pure water requires skill and proper equipment as the pH will change during the test. If using calomel electrodes salt will leak across the junction. And of course you must bracket calibrate your meters before use.

 

I received my Degritter about 3 weeks ago. Since then I've cleaned at least 30 records. As far as the quality of cleaning, I would say that the Degritter is at least as good as the home brew ultrasonic cleaner it replaced, and my sense is that it is quite a bit better. There seem to be fewer records that need a 2nd (or 3rd) cleaning after using the Degritter.

I am also EXTREMELY pleased with the ease of use. I am cleaning far more records than previously, because it is so much easier. With the homebrew US cleaner, I had to clean ultrasonically and then dry on a VPI RCM. With the Degritter I pop a record in, push Start, come back in 8-10 minutes, and the record is clean and dry. Both the US and drying cycles are reasonably quiet. No, I wouldn't want the cleaner in my listening room but it is FAR quieter in both cleaning and drying modes than my previous system. My wife HATED when I got the VPI 16.5 out to dry records and wouldn't come anywhere near it because it was so loud. She likes the Degritter a LOT!

I was worried about fan drying leaving particulates on the record compared to a vacuum drying machine, but if particulates are left behind, it doesn't seem to be a significant problem because more records sound cleaner with fewer clicks and pops compared to my previous US cleaning setup.

One of the design features I like about the Degritter is that it incorporates an active water filter. I haven't measured particulates in the water reservoir, so I can't say how effectively the filter cleans the water, but I checked the filter after ~20 records and was surprised at how filthy it was. (And I mean FILTHY.) So it is definitely getting at least some particulates out!

I am extremely happy with my purchase and would buy the Degritter again with absolutely no reservations!

 

I am waiting for them to have a dealer in Turkey...