tima's DIY RCM

[Neil.Antin]

I already have whole house water filtration of a 20 micron filter, then a.carbon tank, then a bone char tank. If I just put a 2 micron filter at my clean sink, would that work. Or is the DI rinsepro also removing minerals I am not getting out?

Your whole house filter is good large particulate (the 20 micron is likely nominal), the carbon filter is good for removing odors and some soluble organic substances and is generally also a particulate filter (some go as low as 0.5 micron), and the bone-char is good for removing fluoride. However, these filters do not remove the dissolved minerals (calcium/magnesium) that are in the water which is the total dissolved solids (TDS); these are what leave the water spots.

To remove TDS, demineralizer (DI) resin works as can reverse osmosis (RO). But, RO is not as effective as DI resin but is more efficient, so RO is often used first to lower the TDS, and then DI resin is used for the final allowing the DI resin to last longer.

Neil

 

[Bobvin]

Your whole house filter is good large particulate (the 20 micron is likely nominal), the carbon filter is good for removing odors and some soluble organic substances and is generally also a particulate filter (some go as low as 0.5 micron), and the bone-char is good for removing fluoride. However, these filters do not remove the dissolved minerals (calcium/magnesium) that are in the water which is the total dissolved solids (TDS); these are what leave the water spots.

To remove TDS, demineralizer (DI) resin works as can reverse osmosis (RO). But, RO is not as effective as DI resin but is more efficient, so RO is often used first to lower the TDS, and then DI resin is used for the final allowing the DI resin to last longer.

Neil

one reason for using reverse osmosis before deionization is so a system can be designed that is economical regardless (with exceptions) of TDS of source water. for example, the tap water in west texas is often greater than 2000 ppm, where in Seattle it is either 34 ppm (tolt river watershed) or 84 ppm (cedar river watershed), or Vancouver BC which is 6 ppm. DI resin in Vancouver will last a very long time before needing to be replaced (years), in Lubbock it could be a weeks. (Depends obviously on usage, and I typically think in terms of drinking water / cooking water consumption for typical families.) Families in Lubbock will find a “zero water” brand filter not an economically viable filter.

i don’t know what MikeL‘s water source is, but it is possible perhaps RO wouldn’t be needed and just a big DI tank, but RO first means DI resin would last a very long time. (A competitor in Seattle uses this approach.) My lab customers use RO first which means only changing DI tanks bi-annually, as opposed to without RO they were changing monthly (and this with low TDS Seattle water — they use a LOT of DI water in the lab).

downside of RO is concentrated brine water goes to drain, so it does use more water and system design is important to minimize waste

 

[Folsom]

Mike,

The inherent problem with ultrasonic cleaning is the bath management - do you replace frequently or do you filter? Otherwise, after a few records, the bath is dirty and you are trying to clean records with dirty fluid. Waiting for the bath to look dirty is way too late. You are not getting the record as clean as you could - and that can sometimes be an epiphany. @Bill Hart who also uses a KL Audio, uses a Keith Monks for pre-clean and then the KL Audio as the final clean; so, the record is pretty clean by the time it gets to the KL Audio.

Given you setup with a kitchenette, instead of filtering you can take the brute-force approach. Install a deionized/demineralized water system - any competent plumber can do it. They are not complicated; it's a resin column such as DI Rinse Pro 50 Spot Free Rinse System and at the outlet you install the same cannister/filter @tima & @dminches is using (0.2 micron absolute). If your tap-water (freshwater) is good (low total dissolved solids-TDS) the resin column should produce ~2000 gallons of DIW. These DIW resin columns are common with car collectors to ensure they get a spot-free rinse.

If you just use the one Elmasonic P120H (no rinse tank) each tank refill is ~3.2 gallons. If instead of filtering you drain and refill for every cleaning batch of 6-record, ~2000 gallons = ~500 tank refills and if you are cleaning 6 records at a time = 3000 records. Add a rinse UT tank, and your good for ~1500 records before having to recharge the resin. Once the resin in the column is exhausted (install a TDS meter to monitor) it can be removed and replaced with fresh resin. The only disadvantage to refreshing the UT bath for each batch is that you need to first run the degas cycle, so it adds some time to the overall process.

So, there are options on how this can be installed.

Neil

You still need to at least rinse off the records. They'll play much cleaner.

 

[Kingrex]

Interesting Bob. I have noticed I get 0 scale in my coffee makers.

I have my brushes, detergent, a spin clean for final rinse with store bought water. Yet the stuff sits unused. Basically I still don't have a comfortable station to plow into the process.

I'm looking at my basement bathroom and thinking I need to strip the existing sink and replace it with more a work station and sink. And my OCD says I want a DI filter. The spin clean should work for final with distilled water in it. Thats why I bought it. But hey, all water could be free of minerals.

I kind of also want a tap with a nice goose neck and a nozzle that makes a gentle fan of water. I figure a little directed pressure should reduce water usage and push detergents out of the groove.

Thanks guys. You have cost me an additional $1,000 to bring this all to fruition.

 

[Neil.Antin]

Interesting Bob. I have noticed I get 0 scale in my coffee makers.

I have my brushes, detergent, a spin clean for final rinse with store bought water. Yet the stuff sits unused. Basically I still don't have a comfortable station to plow into the process.

I'm looking at my basement bathroom and thinking I need to strip the existing sink and replace it with more a work station and sink. And my OCD says I want a DI filter. The spin clean should work for final with distilled water in it. Thats why I bought it. But hey, all water could be free of minerals.

I kind of also want a tap with a nice goose neck and a nozzle that makes a gentle fan of water. I figure a little directed pressure should reduce water usage and push detergents out of the groove.

Thanks guys. You have cost me an additional $1,000 to bring this all to fruition.

You may find this of interest. I was working with someone else who uses a Spin Clean, and after some digging, I ferreted out the following:

Depending on how many records you are cleaning and how much DIW you have access to: you can cheaply/easy recycle/filter the rinse water. Just filter through an unbleached coffee filter - they are generally good for about 10-15 microns filtration which is not bad and a pour-over coffee maker such as Amazon.com: Melitta 640616 Coffee Maker, 52 oz, Glass Carafe : Home & Kitchen (this unit was $15 two-weeks ago, Amazon changes prices hourly). In this case, refresh every 5 records or so. And reuse the fluid (after filtering) 3-4 times. So essentially after cleaning 5-records drain and collect to filter and refresh. By the time you are done cleaning five records the fluid should be filtered and ready for reuse and the used fluid ready to be filtered.

Can you similarly recycle/filter cleaning fluid if using a 2nd Spin Clean. Depends on the specific cleaning agent. Some such as Tergikleen are combinations of soluble and insoluble ingredients, and the filter may remove the insoluble ingredient. For the cleaning agent you should be able to reuse more than 3-4 times.

But, if you add filtration, you can reduce your need for DIW.

Another thought, as I wrote in my book, Chapter VII, VII.4.b There are a number of vendors manufacturing countertop pitcher/filter systems that can produce Purified water. The ZeroWater™ units Water Filters & Water Filter Pitchers - Clean Water at Home – ZeroWater have the benefit of containing the most amount of demineralizer resin. Given that your house water may be very good, the 30 Cup Water Filter Dispenser - Ready-Pour® – ZeroWater may be able to produce 40-gallons of excellent water with each cartridge - tds-chart.jpg (2400×1066) (shopify.com).

So, instead of $1000, maybe $65.

Just some thoughts.

Neil

 

[tima]

Thanks guys. You have cost me an additional $1,000 to bring this all to fruition

You're welcome - that's what we're here for! . Some of that software could be priceless.

 

[tima]

btw; point me to your post where you talk about adding a second (love the picture) wash tank. i'd like to read about it without having to find it.

Hi Mike, the way things worked out for David and I had the second tank being the rinse tank. I will find that discussion. In the meantime, here is a useful summary post (#470) with info about both tanks and both filters.

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

The filter we use on the rinse tank was originally built for the wash tank and moved over when a more substantial filter was adopted for the wash tank - where the most dirt is. If I had to do it over with hindsight, there would probably modifications to the rinse tank filter

 

[tima]

btw; point me to your post where you talk about adding a second (love the picture) wash tank. i'd like to read about it without having to find it.

Back to your question...

The discussion about adding a rinse tank largely took place in an almost daily back-and-forth that Neil and I had from May - August shortly after the first (5-20-2020) publication of his paper Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records on Bill Hart's site The Vinyl Press. If you go to that first link then scroll past Hart's introduction down to the Comments section you can see the beginning of my discussion with Neil - it is long, dense, covers a multitude of topics and it has a certain thesis-antithesis-synthesis character as we work our way through topics to considerations that along with further discussions here eventually led to the construction of the system that David and I use. Feel free to dive in - but given that, I will try for a synopsis here.

One of the ideas behind my original system was to avoid the need for a rinse step by keeping the wash tank water scrupulously clean by using filtration while running the wash. My goal, again, was clean records via an automated process with reasonable throughput. I was pretty satisfied with the results of doing things that way, however Neil convinced me that records would be cleaner when rinsed. One methodology that Neil focused on initially was largely manual, one record at a time, with record rinse done using a spray bottle. I was not going to adopt a manual approach because it could easily triple the amount of time needed to clean a record.

The 'problem' is what is referred to as NVR - non-volatile residue that remains in the tank water and on the removed record. Here is Neil, from that conversation: "For the purpose of a record, NVR is any residue that is either on the record or will remain on the record after all solutions have dried/evaporated. NVR can be insoluble particulate that can be removed by filtration or it can be soluble matter that cannot be removed with normal filtration." ... "Solubilized matter can be solubilized salts that contribute to TDS, [total dissolved solids] or they may be nonionic surfactant, or soluble contaminates in the IPA [iso-propyl alcohol] that do not contribute to TDS. Either way, solubilized NVR is not removed by the particulate/sediment filter..." I left out a ton of v technical information that you can find in our on-line conversation.

I started thinking about how to do an automated rinse and came to the (now obvious) approach of adding a second ultrasonic tank - clean water with agitation. The key for me was to be able easily to move a spindle full of 5-6 records from wash tank to rinse tank without touching the records. That meant using another Kuzma RD. The ultrasonic rinse tank did not need the bells and whistles that the Elma P-120H offered so I chose the Elma S-120H machine. Neil said using a second ultrasonic tank for rinsing would yield ">90%" reduction in NVR. So, there it is.

The other major changes were replacing my current wash tank filter with an 0.2 micron absolute filter and putting a differential pressure gauge on the filter's cannister to monitor its filling up with captured particulate. I moved my wash tank's previous filter to the rinse tank. And switched to using Tergitol 15-S-9 as the sole 'soap' in the wash tank.

There may be other ways to produce records as clean as this system does. David (@dminches), if I may speak for him, and I are very very satisfied with the results we get. Elsewhere, Neil has called it state-of-the-art. I have learned a lot from Neil during this adventure - the improvements we made would not be possible without his contributions. Thank you Neil.

Fwiw, aside from the design itself the 'hard part' of this as a DIY effort is gathering all the parts together. Assembly is simple. Space is needed for the two tanks and a reccomendation is to put them in a tray to handle any water drops. Temporary space is needed for drying - the spindles and drying stands come with the RD.



Records on their spindles, drying.
Note the Audio Desk machine forlorn in the back corner.

 

[Addicted to hifi]

I have never cleaned a lp because I believe they are better left alone.

 

[Neil.Antin]

I have never cleaned a lp because I believe they are better left alone.

In book Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-2nd Edition - The Vinyl Press (download free at end of article), Chapter IV shows pictures of new records under ultraviolet light showing just how dirty they are. Record pressing plants are industrial environments - they are not clean nor is the packaging; and most records are delivered with a very high static charge.

A full wet cleaning process is the best way to completely remove all static charge and remove all the small particulate from the record. As far as the mold release and plasticizer, its mostly urban legend with very little truth. The book Chapter X goes into some detail.

In Chapter XI, the book does a deep-dive into "...what is clean, and what a reasonable cleaning process can achieve, the existential question remains – is what can be achieved using reasonable chemistry and methods good enough for a record? and asks and answers the question; " how large do imperfections need to be before they are audible?" Quick summary, the record 'can' playback a stylus motion = 0.1 micron. So, a precision cleaned record can with an appropriate system and someone with sensitive hearing reveal details not otherwise heard.

However, using a dry brush before play incorrectly, can compromise the best wet-cleaning process. Consider the ubiquitous Audioquest (or equal) carbon fiber brush - 1,116,000 carbon fibers of likely ~7.6-micron diameter. Carbon fiber is stronger than steel length-wise, but cross-wise its very brittle. If the brush is used to dig into the groove, parts of the carbon fiber bristle are breaking off. It may only be 5-microns (or less), but over time they will accumulate in the groove. You may not directly hear them, but they can lead to accelerated wear.

Just some thoughts. But if you are satisfied with what you have, there is the old saying - if it's not broke, don't fix it. This hobby/passion has many off-ramps, each of us picks our own.

Neil

 

[Kingrex]

I was at a used record shop and the storekeeper told me the best thing to do was let your very expensive needle dig the dirt and grime out of the grooves. I just left. Can't argue with one carrying such a divergent opinion from my own.

Maybe Im just sensitive since unclean records destroyed two cartridge of mine by wearing the diamond into a cutting lathe. I probably then ruined a bunch of records running what amounted to a chisel edge through my soft vinyl.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I have never cleaned a lp because I believe they are better left alone.

Doesn't the dust build up -- and cause accumulating ticks and pops?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Tim, Neil and David.........many thanks. wow! great to be able to proceed with your road map. i can see where i'd like to get to. for the short term, next 3-6 months, i will likely add a second RCM, probably a Degritter. then scrupulously change the water in both machines. this is so i can comfortably not feel compelled to re-do the records i clean. later this will always leave me the option of cleaning and listening at the same time.

then when my kitchenette work is complete i will assemble the pieces and dive into the full meal deal, or as serious as i can get my head around. i plan on retiring in the next 6-12 months, so i will soon have all the time in the world to get deep into it.

you have convinced me that i need to get much more serious about cleaning records completely. i have the space to do it, the inventory of records to rationalize it, and the love of playing vinyl to justify it. and with all these used records arriving, it's the perfect time for me to change processes.

 

[dminches]

Mike, feel free to ask questions. Some of us have been on this journey for a while and have only gotten to where we are by sharing information.



5 LPs being cleaned and 5 being rinsed.

 

[Ron Resnick]

My current record cleaning process is for audiophile friends whose systems I visit to take pity on my dusty records and generously clean my records for me.

 

[Addicted to hifi]

Doesn't the dust build up -- and cause accumulating ticks and pops?

No not at all.I clean the record with a brush before playing.I believe this is enough.all my lps are quiet.

 

[Ron Resnick]

No not at all.I clean the record with a brush before playing.I believe this is enough.all my lps are quiet.

Now I understand better. I thought you meant that you don't even clean your LPs with a brush!

 

[Kingrex]

How is it some records are so dirty. Used that is. I wonder how many albums are never put away. Just lay around in a pile on the floor with beer and bong water washing over them. Some of my worst were European.

 

[tima]

Tim, Neil and David.........many thanks. wow! great to be able to proceed with your road map. i can see where i'd like to get to. for the short term, next 3-6 months, i will likely add a second RCM, probably a Degritter. then scrupulously change the water in both machines. this is so i can comfortably not feel compelled to re-do the records i clean. later this will always leave me the option of cleaning and listening at the same time.

then when my kitchenette work is complete i will assemble the pieces and dive into the full meal deal, or as serious as i can get my head around. i plan on retiring in the next 6-12 months, so i will soon have all the time in the world to get deep into it.

you have convinced me that i need to get much more serious about cleaning records completely. i have the space to do it, the inventory of records to rationalize it, and the love of playing vinyl to justify it. and with all these used records arriving, it's the perfect time for me to change processes.

This sounds like a plan, Mike. For the most part, design, build, and testing have been done so you'll be coming into this at a good point. Enjoy your new collection!

 

[rDin]

I have never cleaned a lp because I believe they are better left alone.

Would be easy enough for you to test that belief, but why do you feel they are better left alone?