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.

 

I wouldn't let the online crap deter you from an Audio Desk. You're welcome to come and see ours, that we've had for 3 years, and has cleaned 1000s of records. And it's not even a Pro.


cheers,
alex

A local friend had an Audio Desk. He had similar issues to the "online crap" and poor customer service from the manufacturer. He replaced it with a KLA unit, and is much happier. I'm avoiding Audio Desk. But thanks!

 

+1
I too have friend who would like a less pricey alternative to the KLA I own

This is Great info Marc....thinking of getting a third one myself to streamline record cleaning , I must say the KLA has changed record cleaning from a chore, to like putting a pizza in a microwave

I am interested u are going to get rid of your Loricraft which I have heard is an excellent cleaner
I had a VPI for many years, but since the KLA I never use it, but I do recall an earlier thread where people thought u really needed both?
I haven’t found this, but interested have u tried putting thru both wet and US cleaning, I personally found the US made more of a change

I have both a Loricraft PRC 4 Delux and a KLAudio. I will not be selling the Lori. I find that I need both for best results. The Lori with 4-step AIVS fluids gets mold release compound out and I like the super pure water rinse. So right now I am first using 2 X 5min clean and one 4 min dry on the KLAudio and if I care and want to spend the time for even better results, I use the Loricraft with 4-step solutions and double pure water rinse. Super quiet vinyl surfaces and I can hear deep into the music for very subtle details and hall ambiance if it is on the recording. The double cleaning removes a slight greyish veil even on new LPs, and is wonders for used, second hand LPs. The ultrasonic cleaner might be slightly better at removing hard crud/grit that causes clicks and pops as long as it is not actual groove damage, but the Loricraft also brings something to the results. The bottom line is that the surface noise is reduced and the backgrounds are blacker allowing one to hear more of what is on the LP. YMMV.

 

I have both a Loricraft PRC 4 Delux and a KLAudio. I will not be selling the Lori. I find that I need both for best results. The Lori with 4-step AIVS fluids gets mold release compound out and I like the super pure water rinse. So right now I am first using 2 X 5min clean and one 4 min dry on the KLAudio and if I care and want to spend the time for even better results, I use the Loricraft with 4-step solutions and double pure water rinse. Super quiet vinyl surfaces and I can hear deep into the music for very subtle details and hall ambiance if it is on the recording. The double cleaning removes a slight greyish veil even on new LPs, and is wonders for used, second hand LPs. The ultrasonic cleaner might be slightly better at removing hard crud/grit that causes clicks and pops as long as it is not actual groove damage, but the Loricraft also brings something to the results. The bottom line is that the surface noise is reduced and the backgrounds are blacker allowing one to hear more of what is on the LP. YMMV.

For a person that adjust VTA every time they play a record, I'm surprised that you don't have a three machine regimen.

 

Thanks Peter

My own thoughts were that the thread type cleaners were a step above machine like the VPI suction only machines

So I was a little surprised about Marc jettisoning the Loricraft

There seem to be some records that have tougher stuff to remove at times, that require different techniques

Thus may not be such a problem for newer or better preserved records.

I seem to have a mixture of all types .

I have found with some records, the more you clean them the better they seem to get.

I simply don’t have the time these days to wet wash the records, but I have found adding steam while in the KL Audio helps with some records.

How are the Q3 going ?

 

For a person that adjust VTA every time they play a record, I'm surprised that you don't have a three machine regimen.

I don’t know how they let people who don’t adjust VTA on every record on this site

 

For a person that adjust VTA every time they play a record, I'm surprised that you don't have a three machine regimen.

Funny. I listened to a batch of LPs tonight which all had the same VTA/arm height settings, so I did not have to adjust the arm at all. I felt like I was on vacation.

I would like to add the Furutech Demag machine to my LP cleaning regimen, but it is too expensive, so I use a hand held cheap tape demagnetizer instead.

 

Thanks Peter

My own thoughts were that the thread type cleaners were a step above machine like the VPI suction only machines

So I was a little surprised about Marc jettisoning the Loricraft

There seem to be some records that have tougher stuff to remove at times, that require different techniques

Thus may not be such a problem for newer or better preserved records.

I seem to have a mixture of all types .

I have found with some records, the more you clean them the better they seem to get.

I simply don’t have the time these days to wet wash the records, but I have found adding steam while in the KL Audio helps with some records.

How are the Q3 going ?

Unless Marc does some experiments with both machines, he may not realize what he is missing by selling the Lori. I have cleaned new LPs with one and listened. Then I clean them with the other machine and listen again. The order does seem to matter, and they do clean differently. Using both machines once seems to work better than using either machine twice. There is no way to understand this unless you experiment. Using only the ultrasonic cleaner certainly is the easiest way to do things.

The Q3 is great, thanks for asking. I should add some more listening impressions on my system thread. It is truly a phenomenal speaker, but set up is really important.

 

I don’t know how they let people who don’t adjust VTA on every record on this site

View attachment 40560

I know...I feel like a lazy audiophile next to some of these guys.

 

+1

I think there needs to be a second division

With people like Peter and Michael in first division like Pele amd Messe lol

 

Funny. I listened to a batch of LPs tonight which all had the same VTA/arm height settings, so I did not have to adjust the arm at all. I felt like I was on vacation. (...)

Be careful. There is the risk that, unconsciously, your musical preferences are becoming dictated by LP thickness ...

 

Be careful. There is the risk that, unconsciously, your musical preferences are becoming dictated by LP thickness ...

That thought has crossed my mind, seriously. However, and this is way too far into the weeds, I know, but it is NOT LP thickness that matters, it is cutting angle, so that stack of records I listened to the other night had some variations in thickness for different LPs. The thought of organizing my collection according to noted arm height settings has crossed my mind, oddly.

The toughest thing is when friends come over with their LPs to play on my system. Last weekend MadFloyd came because he wanted to hear the new Q3s again and to compare my two cartridges. He has heard each in his own system, but wanted another direct comparison. So, we first played the AirTight Supreme with his LPs. Each record seemed to have a different ideal arm height setting. We would listen, then I'd say, "it needs to go a bit higher". I then spent a minute to raise the arm and then it sounded as it should. Eight or ten LPs later we switched cartridges which involved changing to a lighter counterweight. 45 minutes later the MSL Sig. Gold was mounted and aligned. Al M showed up and we went through Ian's stack of LPs again. The MSL cartridge has a different SRA than the Supreme, so for each LP we listened to for the second time, the arm had to be 0.5mm higher than it was for the Supreme. We got through it all, had a blast, Ian learned a lot about the cartridge differences, and Al thanked God that he only listens to digital at home.

What a strange and fascinating world.

 

 

Hmm, in answer to all those w multiple tts, arms, carts, and now it seems more than one record cleaner, I’m proud to use no more than one of each.

 

Hmm, in answer to all those w multiple tts, arms, carts, and now it seems more than one record cleaner, I’m proud to use no more than one of each.

Pride is a good thing Marc.

 

First of all congratulations to Taniel for what looks like a well thought out product!
I've been experimenting myself with US cleaning albeit using a simple 40kHz tank.
For those interested more in the theory, I've found a very nice article on submicron particle removal
efficiency: http://http://infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/02/01805.htm

WARNING: While looking at the data, pls keep in mind that IMHO 80&100kHz data are highly unreliable, so its more about comapring 40, 65 and 862kHz.

Few interesting observations:

1. There are two mechanisms - cavitation (not really that great due to the potential damage) and acoustic streaming. The latter produces vortices close to the surface that remove particles.
2. At 40kHz freq with 2.8u thick boundary layer there was 70% efficiency in removing 0.3u particles! So the boundary layer thickeness is not a 0/1 thing (above remove, below leave)
3. The differences between various freq are within some 10%. Not night & day I'd say but maybe those 10% do matter a lot like it's the notorious case in audio
4. Degassing might not be the best idea as the air concentration reduces cavitation damage (reducing also efficiency, no free lunch). Cavitation damage increases quadratically with the sound pressure, so mind your power settings!
5. 20min seems the time when the full efficiency is reached. I'm safer and use 15mins.


Cheers,

This is is the link I wanted you to read, it describes how different frequencies work.

https://www.cemag.us/article/2003/10/development-ultrasonic-cleaning

david

 

(...) Few interesting observations:

1. There are two mechanisms - cavitation (not really that great due to the potential damage) and acoustic streaming. The latter produces vortices close to the surface that remove particles.
2. At 40kHz freq with 2.8u thick boundary layer there was 70% efficiency in removing 0.3u particles! So the boundary layer thickeness is not a 0/1 thing (above remove, below leave)
3. The differences between various freq are within some 10%. Not night & day I'd say but maybe those 10% do matter a lot like it's the notorious case in audio
4. Degassing might not be the best idea as the air concentration reduces cavitation damage (reducing also efficiency, no free lunch). Cavitation damage increases quadratically with the sound pressure, so mind your power settings!
5. 20min seems the time when the full efficiency is reached. I'm safer and use 15mins.


Cheers,

Again, most of what we easily find is about immediate mechanical damage and cleaning efficiency in industry, most of the time with materials very different from LP vinyl (polyvinyl chloride , a vinyl polymer) .

Researching with google scholar on the subject presents an wide and different view. Ultrasonic exposition can have a chemical action, modifying the polymer surfaces - it can be even used to harden them. How will LPs react in the long term to this type of cleaning in unknown, and cleaner manufacturers do not have the resources to research properly on this subject - the equipment to study these effects is extremely expensive.

I am not against progress, but IMHO manufacturers should release the technical information we need to assure us that their machines are safe, as well as the results of tests they have been carrying. Probably these new machines will be safe, but beta testers are surely risking their LPs ...

Just to say that after some reading I am cowardly staying with my AudioDesk - people I know well have been using it for seven years without any secondary effect. But I recognize that the temptation of what seems a technologically better and cheaper european machine is high!

 

Francisco, if I had an ADS or KLA, then I wouldn’t have been looking at the Degritter.
As it is, I was trawling the Web when I came across them and the beta trial opportunity.
Such is how decisions are made.
Re damage, I’m going to remain optimistic since US cleaning of lps has been going on for many years now, and there have been no reports of l/t negatives.
And with my results being positive so far, and my luck re pricing at the launch of Degritter, I can’t find a reason not to stick with the machine.

 

Just received an email from Taniel

Https://mailchi.mp/7b88d36781ab/degritter-beta-testing-status-update

 

My daily routine of cleaning a half dozen lps is carrying on apace.

No issues, vinyl absolutely scrupulously clean and shiny.

A lot of cleaned lps sound absolutely fresh. Now my current sound is the best it’s ever been by a wide wide margin, so I can’t definitively gauge the absolute effect of Degritter amongst the aggregate upstick I’m getting. But the one or two lps that I’ve a/b’d before and after Degritter use shows a definite quieter background, reduction in intrusiveness of pops and clicks, and definite increase in transparency and air.

All in all, a marvellous upgrade.

 

No issues, vinyl absolutely scrupulously clean and shiny.

A lot of cleaned lps sound absolutely fresh. Now my current sound is the best it’s ever been by a wide wide margin, so I can’t definitively gauge the absolute effect of Degritter amongst the aggregate upstick I’m getting. But the one or two lps that I’ve a/b’d before and after Degritter use shows a definite quieter background, reduction in intrusiveness of pops and clicks, and definite increase in transparency and air.

Common Marc. Records cleaners don’t do “wide wide margin” unless my dog has slept on the vinyl.

Tang