Can anyone share experiences of record cleaning machines

[chiily]

Revive?. That RCM states that it also dries (7 to 10 min's overall procedure; is that both sides? If so, not bad at all). This facility in an ultrasonic is a real bonus, though I wonder if it simply uses a warm air fan and/or some vacuum function; I can't find this under 'spec's'. Price is competitive for ordinary RCMs, even at £500. Although I think a warm-air fan is dubious at best, I wonder if there's a caveat somewhere. Does it use any formulation of fluid?

For the Hummingru, it does drying both sides at the same time, but not heated air, just from the room through an air filter. There are two vents each side of the slot the record sits in that blow air on to the surface of the record.

For me, it does a pretty good job. And I gauge that but the amount of dirt in the fluid tank after cleaning a few records.

And it is much quieter than my Moth RCM, but then again a jet plane over my house would be quieter than the Moth.

 

[hockman]

This is exactly what I've worked out after getting a Kirmuss in addition to my trusty old VPI 17. After the ultrasonic bath, air drying seems to be daft because after a while the ultrasonic water gets pretty soiled. I usually put the record through a distilled water rinse then vacuum with the VPI.

The ideal for myself is (was) ultrasonic plus a suction cleaner. Air drying just can’t be right…there can easily be debris left in the grooves, a good localised area suction machine (eg Loricraft) is probably best for drying and removing remaking debris. I had a Kirmuss ultrasonic RCM, very effective indeed though I used my PRC3 for drying. Having cleaned my collection I’ve sold the Kirmuss, this has freed up a lot of space and I have reverted to using the PRC3 to keep my records clean, I hope to not need really deep cleaning now that the Kirmuss has been used. I could be tempted by the small footprint HumminGuru at some point, I would pre-treat with surfactant…again no air drying for me…PRC3 instead.

 

[oldius]

I have a Keith Monks and it is superb. I bought it years ago from the former head of marketing for Polydor records, driving to Camden and back, from Liverpool, all in a day when audio was an obsession. What a guy he was, with a room filled with vinyl and an absolute passion for music. He had the KMAL stored in a wardrobe, unused, for decades - lucky me - and played me some Sarah Vaughan on his Dual CS505.2. He was just a great guy, so engaging, and we kept in touch for some time afterwards.

 

[clivem2]

This is exactly what I've worked out after getting a Kirmuss in addition to my trusty old VPI 17. After the ultrasonic bath, air drying seems to be daft because after a while the ultrasonic water gets pretty soiled. I usually put the record through a distilled water rinse then vacuum with the VPI.

I omitted to mention that I too rinsed as well as dried with my vacuum rcm following using the Kirmuss. This must be better than air drying which I believe will “glue in place” any remaining debris.

 

[Stew B]

I bought a S/H Moth mk2 for £250 and it works fine though is bloody loud so as I use it in a small room I wear ear plugs. It does a good job, similar to most of the vacuum machines i expect. I only have around 400 LP's and 300 7" singles and am slowly working my way through them. As my collection is small in comparison to others the expense of a De gritter is not viable to me. It has definitely made some of my old LP's playable again with much reduced surface noise and no static but has taken a few repeated cleans on some LP's to work best . I do put them into poly inner sleeves after cleaning. There is the minefield on what cleaning fluid to use, either shop bought or make your own. I am using the Moth fluid and it works well, doesn't leave any residue.

 

[Jason P]

Don’t know if the project supplied cleaning fluid is the best option for the more difficult jobs.

I use home brew cleaner - distilled water, isopropyl alchohol, a drop of Ilfotol wetting agent (80/20 water to IPA) and it works brilliantly. Cost about £35 for the ingredients on eBay, now I've more cleaner than I know what to do with...

 

[Tumeni Notes]

Moth - works well, but loudly.

 

[Tumeni Notes]

Also, making my home-brew cleaning fluid for the Moth soon, the constituent ingredients arrived in dribs and drabs over the last fortnight - purified water from one supplier, isopropyl alcohol from another, wetting agent from a third .....

 

[paulfromcamden]

Similar experience to James, I bought a project vc-e a few months ago and have only cleaned 20-30 records, all look like new, some sound much better others less so but they might need another clean.

Depends on whether the record is just grimy or whether there's damage to the grooves - it's almost impossible to spot groove damage visually.

I love my Pro-Ject. Though it does mean I'm even more likely to pick up filthy records from the £1 box. I have about a 50/50 success rate in cleaning them up but at that price who cares. All good fun : )

 

[Mike Reed]

Choice: (ultrasonic) RCM which uses recycled (albeit filtered?) fluid and dries via cold (can't believe that) or warmed air blown at the grooves. OR

regular RCM which uses fresh fluid every time, has a vacuum to extract all but residual dampness which then evaporates before sleeving.

Despite the apparent cleaning efficacy of ultrasonics, for me the rest doesn't stack up.

 

[uncl_nigel]

I've had two RCMs
Moth for 17 years and still working well when I gave it to somebody less allergic to noise
Clearaudio Smart matrix pro - much quieter (people and dogs no longer flee the flat)

Both do a good job, the Moth is very "industrial" even DIY in appearance the Clearaudio is much prettier to look at.

Never really noticed a difference in results between Art du Son solution and the usual mix of isopropyl/purified water/wetting agent, though.

 

[clivem2]

Choice: (ultrasonic) RCM which uses recycled (albeit filtered?) fluid and dries via cold (can't believe that) or warmed air blown at the grooves. OR

regular RCM which uses fresh fluid every time, has a vacuum to extract all but residual dampness which then evaporates before sleeving.

Despite the apparent cleaning efficacy of ultrasonics, for me the rest doesn't stack up.

IME ultrasonic cleans very well with less effort than a suction RCZm. I’m with you on the drying aspect and water…well Kirmuss doesn’t filter and uses 4.5l at a time, it’s your choice for when you change the water…that’s a lot of pure water. That said I’m not keen on the small amount of water in the HumminGuru…it could be fine if changed for each record, that’s what I’d do.

A suction RCM needs good technique in terms of soaking & sometimes scrubbing which gets you close to ultrasonic-level cleaning ability.

 

[Mike Reed]

A suction RCM needs good technique in terms of soaking & sometimes scrubbing which gets you close to ultrasonic-level cleaning ability.

Nice to hear as an ultrasonic RCM cynic. I agree about method. Experimenting and then deciding on an effective cleaning method (practice makes perfect) is key. Squirt; distribute; soak; scrub; vacuum; evaporate. Of course, some of these may be repeated. E.g., when I go on pfm whilst doing a batch I lose track and have to start the process again; no worries though!

Really can't see the advantage of 'rinsing' with distilled water when using IPA/water mix though. As 75 to 80% of your fluid is water anyway, which is then almost totally removed, why waste more?

 

[clivem2]

Nice to hear as an ultrasonic RCM cynic. I agree about method. Experimenting and then deciding on an effective cleaning method (practice makes perfect) is key. Squirt; distribute; soak; scrub; vacuum; evaporate. Of course, some of these may be repeated. E.g., when I go on pfm whilst doing a batch I lose track and have to start the process again; no worries though!

Really can't see the advantage of 'rinsing' with distilled water when using IPA/water mix though. As 75 to 80% of your fluid is water anyway, which is then almost totally removed, why waste more?

I’d probably only rinse if I’d used an ultrasonic machine as I don’t like the idea of air drying. An enzyme based fluid in a suction RCM could need a rinse. IPA/water as you say = no rinse needed.

 

[Tumeni Notes]

Any Moth users still using the original brush applicator as supplied, or moved on to something else? If moved on, what did you select as the new brush?

 

[ian123running]

I recently bought the project VC-S2 - that's the slightly bigger version. It's good - very effective and has rescued quite a few of my old records that I thought were ruined - even ones with nasty had 'mouldy' fingerprints. Eg I have a few Neil Young albums being near the end of the alphabet that were stacked against a (cold) exterior wall in a damp house for a while. Plus I was never very diligent in adding plastic liners so any LPs with paper or card sleeves were vulnerable. Anyway the cleaner has been remarkably successful. Not 100% but really good. A bit of a palaver, but not unpleasant and quite satisfying. I'm not aiming to do all my records right away, just the ones that need it as I play them. I do maybe 6 lps at a time, then get bored and play some music instead.
I just ordered a little drying rack - even with the vacuum cleaner, it can leave a bit of residual moisture so which I obviously don't want to trap in the sleeve. I'm also trying to remember to brush off the felt pad from time to time (when it's dry) in case that gathers any crud that could damage the record.

 

[chiily]

This is exactly what I've worked out after getting a Kirmuss in addition to my trusty old VPI 17. After the ultrasonic bath, air drying seems to be daft because after a while the ultrasonic water gets pretty soiled. I usually put the record through a distilled water rinse then vacuum with the VPI.

The joy of the HumminGuru is that the water, once the ultrasonic clean is complete, is drained into a separate tank. When the water is recycled from this tank it passes through a filter to remove the cleaning crud.

 

[uncl_nigel]

Any Moth users still using the original brush applicator as supplied, or moved on to something else? If moved on, what did you select as the new brush?

When I gave the Moth away I kept the brush and still use it

 

[Mike Reed]

I just ordered a little drying rack - even with the vacuum cleaner, it can leave a bit of residual moisture so which I obviously don't want to trap in the sleeve. I'm also trying to remember to brush off the felt pad from time to time /QUOTE]

Indeed, there is always some initial dampness after vacuuming but, depending on ambient temp's, I simply leave the record on the platter until fully dry (<1 to 2 minutes max). Putting in a rack (near vertically, I guess), most likely hinders that evaporation time and presumably something must touch the record surface. I always brush the debris off the felt pad afterwards; away from its centre (mine's a VPI). To me it doesn't matter whether it's damp.

If you rack the record, I imagine you turn it over when damp, unless your RCM does both sides simultaneously. My example above refers to one side at a time RCMs.

 

[doctorf]

I’ve used a noisy Moth for years and have never really worked out what the fuss is about. I’ve never really noticed much of a difference in sound quality afterwards.