ochremoon Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 A cautionary note on Arthur Salvatore's website: "The requirements of the US machine are that its tub capacity be a minimum of 9 liters and that it has an integral power limiter. The former is necessary so that LPs will fit comfortably in the tub for proper cleaning, while the latter permits the reduction of the ultimate power operating parameters to a maximum of 60%. Full power operation will cause permanent damage to the vinyl with the attendant sonic degradation. The complaints coming from some quarters about high end roll off after an ultra sonic cleaning are due to full power output during the cleaning process. Furthermore, the records should not be in the cleaning tub for longer than 15 minutes. " Surely the above depends on the frequency of the machine. Anyway, it seems that careful research is required before diving in.
EV Cali Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 2 hours ago, Powerglide said: I have parts in transit to build based on @EV Cali build, what spacing does the vinyl stack system use? Also noted a post from @Citroen suggesting 1 rev per 5 min, was this a misprint? Guessing the BBQ motor will do 1 rev per 10-15 sec Didn't go to my workshop yesterday but the bath was meant to arrive with the motor due Monday, keen to get started but want the optimum speed and gaps "knowledge is king" I believe vinyl stack takes three records and spaces them at about 25mm http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/161402849405?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&rmvSB=true I can just about get the 25 mm spacing on mine with four records BBQ motor turns at 2 RPM
EV Cali Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 7 minutes ago, ochremoon said: A cautionary note on Arthur Salvatore's website: "The requirements of the US machine are that its tub capacity be a minimum of 9 liters and that it has an integral power limiter. The former is necessary so that LPs will fit comfortably in the tub for proper cleaning, while the latter permits the reduction of the ultimate power operating parameters to a maximum of 60%. Full power operation will cause permanent damage to the vinyl with the attendant sonic degradation. The complaints coming from some quarters about high end roll off after an ultra sonic cleaning are due to full power output during the cleaning process. Furthermore, the records should not be in the cleaning tub for longer than 15 minutes. " Surely the above depends on the frequency of the machine. Anyway, it seems that careful research is required before diving in. I do not want to debate Arthur Salvatore's opinion but it is not in line with what I have read or my experience. 1
MattyW Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 I'll be keeping an eye on Jakes results. With luck it will do a decent job as isSent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
ochremoon Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 3 minutes ago, EV Cali said: I do not want to debate Arthur Salvatore's opinion but it is not in line with what I have read or my experience. Not my opinion as I have no experience of US cleaners; just putting it out there as I think that getting the frequency and power right may be important.
Guest jakeyb77 Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 Well before I had a Knosti and this is a lot easier and better results than that machine. Actually the Knosti is a PITA if you're like me and have hundreds of records. I picked this machine up last night and I've already done about 30 records. Much simpler process. I've also made it 6 at a time. You could double space and do 3 should you wish.
PorkBun69s Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 @Jakeyb77 - My turn for a dumbass question. What is the purpose of the piece of chipboard (Axel base)? Did you end up using it?
Guest jakeyb77 Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 13 minutes ago, katattack74 said: @Jakeyb77 - My turn for a dumbass question. What is the purpose of the piece of chipboard (Axel base)? Did you end up using it? Yep you stand the spindle in it to load and unload it with records. Saves being an octopus haha
Hergest Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 4 hours ago, Powerglide said: I have parts in transit to build based on @EV Cali build, what spacing does the vinyl stack system use? Also noted a post from @Citroen suggesting 1 rev per 5 min, was this a misprint? Guessing the BBQ motor will do 1 rev per 10-15 sec Didn't go to my workshop yesterday but the bath was meant to arrive with the motor due Monday, keen to get started but want the optimum speed and gaps "knowledge is king" The Vinyl Stack spacers are around 22 mm. I think the wavelength of the ultrasonic is the deciding factor as to the best gap between records. For myself I use the setting on the Vinyl Stack motor at 7.5 volts which looks like it's about 1 revolution a minute. It might be a bit different but it's certainly not 1 per 5 minutes. No trial and error though, I use that speed as it looks about right and the results are good. 1
Hergest Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 1 hour ago, EV Cali said: I do not want to debate Arthur Salvatore's opinion but it is not in line with what I have read or my experience. If I had a dollar for everytime I've disagreed with what Arthur Salvatore has said on the net or people have quoted him saying I would own a Continuum turntable running through some humongous and expensive monoblocks into the most outrageously expensive Wilson speakers I could find. 4
PorkBun69s Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 Ok..fired up my unit this arvo. Yes, its noisy as expected. The contraption works as expected. Definitely needs an tap outlet to excrete the bath fluids. The motor is a tad fast, needs to be around 1-2 rpms a min. Overall its great, works as expected and cost/time effective way of cleaning your prized vinyl. I'd probably wait and get the v2 unit as its much better than the unit I bought.
Guest jakeyb77 Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 Ok so this afternoon I've been listening to only my cleaned records. I am VERY happy with the results in regard to SQ. These records are silent on par with or better than fresh new ones. Is it the best machine in its class? Probably not. Could I build a better one knowing what I know about this unit now? Yes. But with a $30 fish tank pump/filter of Ebay I ordered today I will be on the fast track to perfect vinyl. I have to be honest and say I've never used a vac RCM but to be able to let 6 or 7 records clean on their own for 15 mins then let them dry on the same spindle is the selling point for me. If the records can get cleaner than these are then I wouldn't be able to hear a difference. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Guest Hensa Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 I've also had mine running since yesterday and very pleased with the results. Absolutely it is built to a price such as the jam jar lid spacers but for $340 landed, it is surprisingly effective. I use two spacers between LPs, cleaning 4 at a time rather than the 7. After a 10 min US clean, I dry on the RCM and allow the remaining dampness (from the small diameter RCM mat which gets wet in this process) to air dry.Will add a filter when it arrives and this package will do the job nicely until I may think about a more professionally built US cleaner.I would never replace my rcm with the US cleaner, the rcm being my preference for a quick clean and for drying after the US clean.All in all, highly recommended and especially if, like me, you just wanted to get a low cost feel for the US cleaning process before possibly investing in a higher end machine.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Guest jakeyb77 Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 46 minutes ago, Hensa said: I've also had mine running since yesterday and very pleased with the results. Absolutely it is built to a price such as the jam jar lid spacers but for $340 landed, it is surprisingly effective. I use two spacers between LPs, cleaning 4 at a time rather than the 7. After a 10 min US clean, I dry on the RCM and allow the remaining dampness (from the small diameter RCM mat which gets wet in this process) to air dry. Will add a filter when it arrives and this package will do the job nicely until I may think about a more professionally built US cleaner. I would never replace my rcm with the US cleaner, the rcm being my preference for a quick clean and for drying after the US clean. All in all, highly recommended and especially if, like me, you just wanted to get a low cost feel for the US cleaning process before possibly investing in a higher end machine. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Great to hear @Hensa
Guest Hensa Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 Great to hear @Hensa Thanks for heads-up,@Jakeyb77! It really wasn't on my radar till I saw your thread and for so little dough, it was definitely worth a shot!Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
astormsau Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 When is version 2 due for those who have enquired?DrewSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hammo1981 Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 Thought this would be interesting to everyone. For those who aren't confident with building their own spindle etc
jamesg11 Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 8 hours ago, astormsau said: When is version 2 due for those who have enquired? Drew Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Available for purchase in about a week, is my info as per today - hasn't put together or hasn't yet received components ... dunno how many he does in a batch; maybe just a few on top of exp of int.
MattyW Posted November 23, 2016 Posted November 23, 2016 Ok, got around to doing two batches of records. I've some records I couldn't even listen to previously which now sound like new. Fantastic results. I just use this stuff in the water. Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
RaoulJuke Posted November 28, 2016 Posted November 28, 2016 (edited) I read up above the having them in there longer than 15 minutes can damage the records - how & why would that be? What would be the signs of a record that has been damaged in this way? Also, didn't realize i was meant to me rinsing them afterwards. Ive noticed some of my recently cleaned ones still have a lot of pops in there. Is this possibly why? Edited November 28, 2016 by RaoulJuke
MattyW Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 I used too much surfactant on mine. Will have to clean them all over again. On the upside it doesn’t seem to affect performance Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
EV Cali Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 8 hours ago, MattyW said: I used too much surfactant on mine. Will have to clean them all over again. On the upside it doesn’t seem to affect performance Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk Matt Could you elaborate a bit more . I can't see how this is an issue .
MattyW Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 The surfactant on the surface makes the records stick to the inner sleeves. That's irritating. I also worry that it might cause the diamond to come loose on my cartridge stylus Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
EV Cali Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 6 hours ago, MattyW said: The surfactant on the surface makes the records stick to the inner sleeves. That's irritating. I also worry that it might cause the diamond to come loose on my cartridge stylus Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk I think you had better dump the Wetter 600 and use Photo flow. No issues with it.
RaoulJuke Posted December 9, 2016 Posted December 9, 2016 I ended up re-doing the 100 i had already done as i found some of them sounded a little restricted and lacked depth after the wash. I put this down to me not rinsing them as it never occurred me to do that - so re-washed them all on a 10-12minute was, rinsed with tap water, then hanged them to drip dry with a quick hit of a hairdryer just to move as much of the excess water of it as possible. Noticed a good improvement from doing that. I also used a stronger mix of wash the 2nd time around, making the isopropyl alcohol 10% of the total mixture ( 400ml to 4litres), personally I think the mix ratio worked better also. I have found the best results are when * using a strong 10% ratio mix with a shot of Photoflo * 2 records at each time with at 75mm gap inbetween - centred into the tank where the majority of the water action is * shorter 10-12minute wash, rather than a 20+min one. I then stop the rotation to cover a 1/4 of the record and let it sit before rotating it another 1/4, repeat that 2 more times then let the rotation spin at the standard pace for the final 4 minutes * Rinse with tap water in sink using a tap-hose. * place a metal rod through centre hole of record and hang dry, using a hairdryer to get the as much of the sitting water droplets off. Let them hang for an hour till completely dry (nothing worse than putting it into the sleeve with it still even slightly wet - just sticks and smudges ) * put it in a brand new sleeve with a small colored circle sticker dating it (ie 11/16) so I can tell which ones I have cleaned & when it was done - as i have a terrible memory. Take that process with the smallest grain of salt, but this seems to be what works best for me.
Recommended Posts