Thanks Tim. It was the undissolved solids that threw me. I wasn’t expecting to see so much. But I don’t do any pre cleaning - the records (and some are used buys) just go right into the tank. Where do the undissolved solids come from?
tima's DIY RCM
- Thread starter tima
- Start date
So I did a more controlled (near as I can make it) experiment. I looked over some records for which I have multiple copies, and I found among my Diane Schuur disks 6 copies of Deedles (okay, I liked it back in the day 
). In that mix I have two records that have the exact same matrix runout codes. I have another pair also with matching (but not the same as the first pair) matrix runout codes. All four records are essentially unplayed, as I typically pull the same copy when I listen to it.
Figuring that’s as close as I’m going to get to identical disks, I took one of these pairs, and did an ultrasonic cleaning on one, and a VPI 16.5 two step (Neil’s specified Liquinox mix, then a DIW rinse) on the other.
I played them both. Interestingly, there wasn’t much of a difference with in-between track surface noise, although both were reasonably quiet. The differences, in favor of the USC disk, was improved dynamics, a less sort of “grayish scrim” to her vocals, and surprisingly (to me) improved bass. Things seemed “quieter”. But on the side of the VPI cleaned disk, there was a sort of better sense of “inner illumination“ - I don’t know how else to describe it. Almost like that record had a bit more brightness to it. Curious.
). In that mix I have two records that have the exact same matrix runout codes. I have another pair also with matching (but not the same as the first pair) matrix runout codes. All four records are essentially unplayed, as I typically pull the same copy when I listen to it.Figuring that’s as close as I’m going to get to identical disks, I took one of these pairs, and did an ultrasonic cleaning on one, and a VPI 16.5 two step (Neil’s specified Liquinox mix, then a DIW rinse) on the other.
I played them both. Interestingly, there wasn’t much of a difference with in-between track surface noise, although both were reasonably quiet. The differences, in favor of the USC disk, was improved dynamics, a less sort of “grayish scrim” to her vocals, and surprisingly (to me) improved bass. Things seemed “quieter”. But on the side of the VPI cleaned disk, there was a sort of better sense of “inner illumination“ - I don’t know how else to describe it. Almost like that record had a bit more brightness to it. Curious.
If the records you cleaned were ll unplayed it would be surprising if there were marked differences in sonics.
Well, I wouldn’t say they were unplayed, but less frequently played. The difference was small but noticeable.
Tony,
There is a plausible, not outside the realm of possibility, that the difference is in the vinyl itself. I know that this concept is hard to grasp, but the record vinyl is, especially at the higher frequencies, flexing. So long as the forces are within the elastic limits of the vinyl, no permanent damage is done.
1. If you read and can understand this article - Disc Phonograph Records by Dr. A. M. Max, RCA Engineer Magazine 1966-08-09 - 1966-08-09.pdf (worldradiohistory.com) then you may appreciate the stylus forces (>10,000 psi) that are developed during playback and that the record material is flexing/moving during playback. So, each stylus profile and VTF exerts a difference pressure which then deforms the vinyl differently depending upon its physical properties. You may not notice this on lower frequencies where the vinyl likely deforms very little, but the higher frequency side wall ridges are much more susceptible. And the physical properties are affected by the vinyl composition for which variances between pressings can change and where the pressing time & temperature can vary.
2. If you read and understand this article Disc cutting in theory, Hugh Finnimore, Studio Sound and Broadcast Engineering, July 1975 - Studio-Sound-1975-07.pdf (worldradiohistory.com) then you may appreciate again the stylus forces that can be >1000-g’s that can be developed during playback. Any variation in the vinyl properties can affect how the stylus reproduces the groove.
3. This concept of the elasticity of the vinyl is discussed in this this article - Stylus Mass and Distortion, By J. Walton Wireless-World-1963-04.pdf (worldradiohistory.com)
So, it's possible that the difference is the vinyl itself. I use a UV light to inspect the surface for lint/particles, and under UV light, the color and appearance of the black vinyl can vary widely, especially older records. Newer records appear to be using a new pigment that adsorbs UV light and they appear absolutely black, the book Chapter IV addresses some of the variances.
Take care,
Neil
Neil, what would we do without you?
And thanks, I’ll be working through these articles today to learn a thing or two.Might be worth getting a UV light of my own.
This is the UV light I use - ALONEFIRE SV003 10W 365nm UV Flashlight Portable Rechargeable Blacklight for Pet Urine Detector, Resin Curing, Scorpion, Fishing, Minerals with Aluminum Case, Battery Charger - Amazon.com. It has enough output for use in a dimly lit room, but not too much power than could harm the record. It uses a standard 18650 Lithium Battery but has no battery power indicator. At 10W, it drains the battery quite quickly, so if using for record inspection which is for just 5-10 seconds - you will need to recharge about every 50-records; don't count records just eyeball the decrease in light output.
Do Not shine this in your eyes (or anyone else's) you can do harm; note that I do not wear UV glasses when inspecting records. Also, do not expose the record for any extended time (say >1-min for each inspection) otherwise, you 'may' do harm. If you are someone who can become obsessive - I would recommend you not use a UV light. It will easily show lint and particles on the record and trying to remove everything you see will be a source of great frustration. A few pieces of lint/particles are OK, and you will find that some records attract more than others, and some sleeves shed more than others - it's all 'perfectly' imperfect. You may also find that some dry brushes do nothing than move the particle(s), while others leave more than they takeaway. Sometimes, out of sight is out of mind.
So I’ve come to understand it’s not a very good idea to run records through a USC too many times. I’ve done about 70 records to far (out of some couple of thousand) with a 37KHz machine. If I were to get a hold of an Elmasonic P120, would it be too risky to run these same disks through it, but only at the higher frequency setting to hit the finer debris?
Neil, what would we do without you?
Might be worth getting a UV light of my own.
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
Someday I need to create an index to this thread ...
I don't see the risk in doing that. In fact I don't see the risk in cleaning records multiple times with a USC as long as your'e rational about it. To me that includes:
a) Don't let the tank water get too hot. I try to stay no higher than 35° C. but that temperature is not deadly.
b) Don't wash for an exessive amount of time in one session. I've run two 10 minutes cycles back to back, one at 37kHz and one at 80kHz. Let your records dry and cool down, say for an hour or two before entering them into another cleaning cycle.
c) Use a reasonable cleaning solution. Tergitol 15-S-9 at a concentration of 0.150% + 99% IPA at 2% has proven safe and effective.
d) Perhaps the greatest danger in cleaning records regardless of cleaning format is the risk that comes from handling them. Taking them out of their sleeves, re-sleeving, mounting and unmounting them to whatever device is used for cleaning, etc. Imo the risk of nicking a record's surface, or dropping it while handling has a much higher liability than cleaning.
The Elmasonic P120 is among the best USC tanks for cleaning records. (I'd say it is the best but I have not tried them all.) Along with its many features is the fact that It is a 'democratic' or open machine inasmuch as you may use whatever accessories (rotissierie, pump, filter, etc.) you choose.
Tim, ever seen this one before?
Uc3360 360w 20khz 40khz 80khz 120khz Multi-frequency Desktop Laboratory 15l Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine - Buy Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner,Laboratory Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine,15liter Industry Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner Product on Ali
Uc3360 360w 20khz 40khz 80khz 120khz Multi-frequency Desktop Laboratory 15l Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine - Buy Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner,Laboratory Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine,15liter Industry Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner Product on Alibaba.com
www.alibaba.com
tony:
There is little benefit between 80-kHz and 120-kHz when it comes to record cleaning - look at Table XXI Ultrasonic Tank Wavelength & Standing Waves of the book. For Elmasonic that uses 37/80-kHz - look at the difference. Then look at the difference between 80 and 120 kHz. The wavelength is proportional to the bubble size. Once above 80-kHz, for record cleaning, there is not much benefit. And, as the kHz increases you need more power for cavitation which stresses the unit's electronics and power supply. Which if not designed well, results in reduced service life.
Now, compare the Elmasonic P-series features/manual Elmasonic P Ultrasonic Cleaning Units - Operating Instructions (elma-ultrasonic.co.nz) with what you are asking about - good luck trying to find an operators manual. The Elmasonic P-series offers a lot more than just fine quality, it offers 4-different cleaning processes, variable power, sweep mode power, pulse mode power and an automatic frequency change mode. Here is the tech-data sheet for the P-120, PP_Elmasonic_P120H_EN.pdf (elma-ultrasonic.com), please note the UT power - Effective 330W and Peak 1320W.
Sorry, but there is no real comparison. You pay for what you get, and I make no recommendations for any UT machine that does not have a detailed operating manual and does not have a set of detailed technical specifications.
Take care,
Neil
Or you can always search the booktima'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...
Someday I need to create an index to this thread ...
Neil, I was not in any way suggesting this is some sort of giant killer to a machine like the Elmasonic, but rather whether anyone has heard of it or knows anything about it. I’m looking at it this way - right now I’m using a low end (for US cleaning purposes) single frequency machine that operates at very low power. Can’t really swing a P120 and can’t seem to find any of them used at a great price. If there were any reports that this thing can be a reasonable compromise, it might be worth trying. There’d be no intention to use the highest frequency as there was no recommendation by you or anyone else to do so.
Tony,Neil, I was not in any way suggesting this is some sort of giant killer to a machine like the Elmasonic, but rather whether anyone has heard of it or knows anything about it. I’m looking at it this way - right now I’m using a low end (for US cleaning purposes) single frequency machine that operates at very low power. Can’t really swing a P120 and can’t seem to find any of them used at a great price. If there were any reports that this thing can be a reasonable compromise, it might be worth trying. There’d be no intention to use the highest frequency as there was no recommendation by you or anyone else to do so.
The 40/80/120 kHz is sold in the US here - CleanerVinyl: Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaning Systems. It's not inexpensive.
Do you need such a large tank (15-L)? The Elmasonic P60H which is 6L has all the features of the P120H, just in a smaller size at a lower cost - High Frequency Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaning (cleanervinyl.com). If you can make do with only cleaning 2 to 3 records at a time, then it can be the better option.
Right, but it’s the same one sold on Alibaba at much less cost (even after adding shipping to the U.S.). It’s made by these guys
www.jydultrasonic.com
With a couple of thousand records, doing 2 or 3 at a time will take a while, although I agree a 15L tank is a bit large. Their U3240L is jus a hair too small to be guaranteed to fit 12” records - 300mm, 11.8”.
China Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner Suppliers, Manufacturers - Best Price Multi Frequency Ultrasonic Cleaner for Sale - Jiayuanda Technology
As one of the best multi frequency ultrasonic cleaner manufacturers and suppliers in China, we warmly welcome you to wholesale quality multi frequency ultrasonic cleaner for sale here from our factory. for price consultation, contact us.
www.jydultrasonic.com
With a couple of thousand records, doing 2 or 3 at a time will take a while, although I agree a 15L tank is a bit large. Their U3240L is jus a hair too small to be guaranteed to fit 12” records - 300mm, 11.8”.
Or you can always search the book
Sure. An index is very helpful as is a table of contents when they provide links to the relevant page(s).
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |