Jump to content

Experiences with Record Cleaning Machines.


Recommended Posts

From my point of view, the question is not whether it is a KeithMonks or an ultrasound system. Both have been necessary for more than half a year.
Cleaning the records by ultrasound is certainly an intensive and gentle way to remove impurities. To simply drain the records afterwards or wipe them with a microfibre cloth, I think it is completely inadequate.
From my point of view, it is unavoidable to rinse and suck these ultrasonic cleaned records afterwards.
The KeithMonks achieves an excellent cleaning result, but it does not manage to remove all impurities from the groove. For this reason, I decided in the last one to deal with ultrasonic cleaning.
I clean the records before using ultrasound and then wash them twice with the KeithMonks. The result is excellent. I’m talking about the sound and the musicality.
The records sound so relaxed and stress-free in the high frequency range, the middle is wonderfully audible it all comes together and the bass becomes more accentuated and defined.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I wouldn't buy one on principle as they call records 'vinyls'!

I would like to add two more aspects to this statement, which is also important for me, even though I have “only” about 3500 records. 1. By really excellent washed records you get a sound quality

There's nothing anonymous about the VV,  its Spider here.  Quite a long thread in the DIY room.  An enthusiast first and foremost Tim builds them in his shed in Chesterfield  *In the interests of t

Posted Images

8 hours ago, TooManyCatweazles said:

But @DavidHB had some strong arguments pro Keith Monks, which would be the real alternative in my eyes. So this Hamlet's question is rather to vacuum, or to ultra-sonic?

I have the loricraft and the degritter and had the Audiodesk i would go with the degritter every time after cleaning have no problems with static which I used to have with Loricraft

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Nrwatson said:

I would go with the degritter every time after cleaning have no problems with static

I have a Hannl, which although does a very thorough job, I do find a bit of a chore to use. I liked the idea of an ultrasonic cleaner, but the one I saw demo’d from Kirmuss, seemed even more of a chore. Do you find the Degritter easy to use? Is it as easy as https://degritter.com implies? How does it compare with the AudioDesk? 

Thanks in advance, Nestor. 

Edited by Nestor Turton
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is very easy to use pop record in press button take out put on turntable and play no need for zerostat which I always needed with the loricraft 

the Audiodesk was a pain as it was difficult to remove record without smearing it. also it grips record and you need to tug it out 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nrwatson said:

Yes it is very easy to use pop record in press button take out put on turntable and play no need for zerostat which I always needed with the loricraft 

That’s interesting. I always assumed that any of the wet cleaners removed static. Clearly not all.

Mick

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Rille said:
From my point of view, the question is not whether it is a KeithMonks or an ultrasound system. Both have been necessary for more than half a year.
Cleaning the records by ultrasound is certainly an intensive and gentle way to remove impurities. To simply drain the records afterwards or wipe them with a microfibre cloth, I think it is completely inadequate.
From my point of view, it is unavoidable to rinse and suck these ultrasonic cleaned records afterwards.
The KeithMonks achieves an excellent cleaning result, but it does not manage to remove all impurities from the groove. For this reason, I decided in the last one to deal with ultrasonic cleaning.
I clean the records before using ultrasound and then wash them twice with the KeithMonks. The result is excellent. I’m talking about the sound and the musicality.
The records sound so relaxed and stress-free in the high frequency range, the middle is wonderfully audible it all comes together and the bass becomes more accentuated and defined.

I agree!
I use a heavily modified Keith Monks Gemini (dual platter) and I do a thorough cleaning first with it, multiple cleaners/cycles, depending on need.
I then run the Lp through the Degritter.
Then final rinse on the Keith Monks.

There is no way to get a cleaner Lp than this.

To just use a US as an RCM is defeating the purpose.
You are sludging each Lp into the dirt/oils/contaminants of each and every Lp that you cleaned before.
Even a fresh bath is still going to have whatever was removed from the first Lp contaminating it.
Wiping down is just wrong.

Edited by rich121
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, rich121 said:

I agree!
I use a heavily modified Keith Monks Gemini (dual platter) and I do a thorough cleaning first with it, multiple cleaners/cycles, depending on need.
I then run the Lp through the Degritter.
Then final rinse on the Keith Monks.

There is no way to get a cleaner Lp than this.

To just use a US as an RCM is defeating the purpose.
You are sludging each Lp into the dirt/oils/contaminants of each and every Lp that you cleaned before.
Even a fresh bath is still going to have whatever was removed from the first Lp contaminating it.
Wiping down is just wrong.

My understanding of the  Degritter documentation is, that they constantly pump the cleaning fluid through a filter. Maybe, it's not as effective as implied. Is your 'sludge' statemend based on observation, or expectation?

If your budget allowed only one RCM would you prefer a Keith Monks, or a Degritter?

Edited by TooManyCatweazles
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TooManyCatweazles said:

My understanding of the  Degritter documentation is, that they constantly pump the cleaning fluid through a filter. Maybe, it's not as effective as implied. Is your 'sludge' statemend based on observation, or expectation?

If your budget allowed only one RCM would you prefer a Keith Monks, or a Degritter?

Keith Monks any day of the week!  The Degritter is a great supplement, but cannot clean effectively alone... the Keith Monks does it all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nrwatson said:

Degritter

The Degritter can't clean your records effectively... it can 'clean' a nearly perfect record... but if it is used, or more than somewhat dirty, oils etc.  nope.
You also have contaminants that are redeposited during the cleaning process... and the built in filter... may filter some large solids, but so much remains on the walls of the inner tank and remember... the filter is worked 'both' directions... and you have all the dissolved contaminants that are not getting cleaned off your records...

Even using a 'spin-clean' before the Degritter would help greatly.... but you still have the rinse issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can clean really dirty records by hand then into degritter

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have the Hannl then adding a Degritter would seem a good move for me. Thanks @Nrwatson and others who have commented. For me ease of use is very important. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nrwatson said:

Can clean really dirty records by hand then into degritter

Yes, of course!    :^)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, rich121 said:

The Degritter can't clean your records effectively... it can 'clean' a nearly perfect record... but if it is used, or more than somewhat dirty, oils etc.  nope.
You also have contaminants that are redeposited during the cleaning process... and the built in filter... may filter some large solids, but so much remains on the walls of the inner tank and remember... the filter is worked 'both' directions... and you have all the dissolved contaminants that are not getting cleaned off your records...

Even using a 'spin-clean' before the Degritter would help greatly.... but you still have the rinse issue.

When I look at the filter of the degritter, it doesn’t seem to be very effective in really removing fine particles from the washing water.
In my 6 litre US bath I am currently washing 75 pre-cleaned records with one filling. After 15 pieces, I filter the entire content through a 0,3 μm ceramic filter. The pump has to be quite strong for that. The liquid is then clear again.
So that the particles don’t stick to the record again, I wash only one record in one wash cycle. The damp record is rinsed directly and washed once again.

Edited by Rille
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/05/2021 at 22:21, Nrwatson said:

I have the loricraft and the degritter and had the Audiodesk i would go with the degritter every time after cleaning have no problems with static which I used to have with Loricraft

Which solution did you use to Loriclean causing a problem with static? I've had zero static using L'Art du Son solution for over a decade. Love to have a Degritter, but my PRC 3+L'Art du Son still does a great job with all records.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...