I made myself a record cleaner - Page 22 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analogue Source

Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th June 2012, 12:31 PM   #211
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Hey andyr!
Thanks for your interest! I was told about the 55HC on the phone but I do not have exact dimensions. They only said me that it will have less width. So for the guys who only clean a few records a good solution.

I was able to clean up to 6 records with the 60H cleaner at the same time successful. For testing I lend a construction using a "grill engine", normally used to spin meat on your bbq plate

Yes the HC version only has very few minor improvements. For example the pot in the middle to adjust ultrasonic power. Nothing that is important as we need the full 350W cleaning power. Highest value you can find! Chinese machines only have half of this.

Unfortunately I do not have the time now to build this "rotisserie". University keeps me busy, but in 3 months I will do my best to present a professional solution. It is really hard to find a good engine to spin slow but with force. Any suggestions appreciated.

Very important: suck the water out after the cleaning! I bought a old american Nitty Gritty cleaner from ebay but there are better machines out there for this job. Again time intensive to import this from a foreign country..

See attachments for the prototype and Nitty Gritty cleaner.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1.JPG (449.7 KB, 1028 views)
File Type: jpg 2.jpg (386.8 KB, 974 views)

Last edited by Zen5656; 12th June 2012 at 01:01 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2012, 07:46 PM   #212
CT0wens is offline CT0wens  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CT0wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Default I'd love to see this thread "reactivated" with energy and conversation

... so, to chum the water here are a few conversation starters.

Reiner Gläss of AudioDesk Systeme should be commended for his design of his Vinyl Cleaner in its unique ability to totally automate the record cleaning process - while still keeping the actual cleaning thorough and effective.

IMHO, the above scenario is usually mutually exclusive in that automation and convenience often sacrifice performance and high performance sacrifices convenience, etc. To me, this is his major achievement. I've had the pleasure to experience the product in person several times and have been tempted to (find a way) to acquire one - or at least similar results.

The critical accolades his AudioDesk Systeme Vinyl Cleaner (ADSvc) is getting right now (despite it being available for several years) is genuinely deserved - and as the first mover with a viable commercial concept is open to set his own price/profit margins relative to his R&D, bravery, etc. This happens in every industry.

This brings us to the next inevitability - iteration, imitation, evolution and eventually the next/next thing. This also happens in every industry. This is also the very same process that keeps DIYers like all of us engaged.

So, on that note, there are several things in his design that I'm curious about - because, they seem to buck the general consensus of best practices established in this thread as well as other ultrasonic cleaning conversations. Most of these design decisions can be observed here:

1 - The effectiveness of ultrasonic cleaning benefits from a heated bath (as far as I know, the AudioDesk product is not intentionally heated)

2 - The item to be cleaned should remain still in the bath (not only does his design have the LP constantly spinning at different speeds - there are roller brushes in full action for a majority of the bath cycle agitating the water)

3 - The amount of undisturbed time an item should remain in the bath should be relatively long (when compared to the exceptionally brief and "anything but still" minute that the ADSvc requires)

4 - No additional additive is required for effective bath water in the ultrasonic process (yet he has an additive - rumored to be some type of wetting agent/surfactant to aid in the drying process?)

5 - Finally, nothing is vacuumed. Simply dried with the ASDvc. This violates most known record cleaning concepts considered most effective up to now (Keith Monks, VPI, etc.).

So, despite all of these transgressions from known "rules' for effective ultrasonic cleaning (or vinyl LP cleaning in general) -- this product is highly effective.

So, what say you readers? I'm interested in the discussion.

cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd July 2012, 08:18 PM   #213
CT0wens is offline CT0wens  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CT0wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
I forgot to add to my post above (too late to edit):

6 - The ultrasonic fluid should be degassed in the bath for 5-10 minutes prior to cleaning (the ADSvc doesn't have a degassing phase)

cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th August 2012, 09:46 PM   #214
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
I have not seen the ADS machine in person, and I'm still planning/deciding whether to do a DIY version. So, keep my lack of direct experience in mind. That being said, here are some thoughts and speculation in response to some of your questions.

2 - The item to be cleaned should remain still in the bath (not only does his design have the LP constantly spinning at different speeds - there are roller brushes in full action for a majority of the bath cycle agitating the water)

I saw a comment (somewhere) from a US expert to the effect that a certain amount of flow is acceptable. Presumably, the record rotation isn't an issue. The rollers might be a problem locally, but the flow they generate drops rapidly with distance, so still might not prevent good cleaning over most of the wetted surface. Beyond this, I think the rollers perform an important function in moving dislodged particles away from the grooves.

3 - The amount of undisturbed time an item should remain in the bath should be relatively long (when compared to the exceptionally brief and "anything but still" minute that the ADSvc requires)

A nit pick: the author of the video quoted 2 minutes of total cleaning time. Anyway, it appears to be long enough in this application. Is there some study elsewhere that suggests it needs to be longer? As per previous comment, the bath might in fact be still enough for good results.

4 - No additional additive is required for effective bath water in the ultrasonic process (yet he has an additive - rumored to be some type of wetting agent/surfactant to aid in the drying process?)

My observation is that the use of surfactancts is pretty common in US cleaning. Look into some of the industrial equipment providers; most sell this stuff by the gallon. Perhaps it's needed to ensure that the bath penetrates into tight places, such as record grooves.

5 - Finally, nothing is vacuumed. Simply dried with the ASDvc. This violates most known record cleaning concepts considered most effective up to now (Keith Monks, VPI, etc.).

There are some differences in this process vs. the ones you mention. (1) The volume of fluid in the bath is much greater than thin layer we spread on lps in the conventional machines. Thus, the particles per unit volume is orders of magnitude lower in the ADS machine, and this alone should substantially mitigate the problem of particles reentering the grooves. (2) ADS claims to filter the bath during use, and this should remove many or even most particles. (3) The vertical orientation allows suspended particles to fall to the bottom of the tank where they can do no harm. In conventional machines on the other hand, the horizontal orientation of the record means that all suspended particles will return to the LP surface if the fluid is allowed to dry in place. Surface tension might even pull particles deep into the grooves (possibly, surfactant in the US bath helps prevent this effect, too). My speculation is that these differences explain why vacuuming isn't critical in the ADS design. All that being said, vacuuming and a distilled water rinse might still be a good thing in a DYI version of US cleaning (your trade off between convenience and effectiveness might apply here).

6 - The ultrasonic fluid should be degassed in the bath for 5-10 minutes prior to cleaning (the ADSvc doesn't have a degassing phase)

The operating instructions, available on the ADS website, call for running the machine through a full cycle before inserting the first disk everytime new liquid is put into the machine. They say it's because "Air needs to be bled out of the pumps." However, this might also serve to degas the bath. It's not clear that degassing is needed before every use if the liquid has not been changed.

Anyway, thanks for keeping the conversation going.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2012, 02:03 AM   #215
CT0wens is offline CT0wens  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CT0wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Ishmail - Thank you for your reply. Your points make good sense. I've complete my DIY US bath cleaner and hope to post some photos soon.

One key differentiation I've made is to use a time cycled power adapter to rotate the record every 3 minutes -- effectively allowing each 1/4 of the record to remain still in the bath on the modified rotisserie. The total cleaning time is then 12 minutes per record (have not tried multiple records at once). I've also been using the AudioDesk surfactant in my bath and manually filtering the water using a DIY system incorporating some fine filtering sponges (aquarium style).

Oh, and did I mention that the telescopic structure that suspends the rotisserie motor was fashioned out of the support base of an old EA RockBand video game drum set?

I know - strange, but it works
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2012, 08:39 PM   #216
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT0wens View Post
Ishmail - Thank you for your reply. Your points make good sense. I've complete my DIY US bath cleaner and hope to post some photos soon.

One key differentiation I've made is to use a time cycled power adapter to rotate the record every 3 minutes -- effectively allowing each 1/4 of the record to remain still in the bath on the modified rotisserie. The total cleaning time is then 12 minutes per record (have not tried multiple records at once). I've also been using the AudioDesk surfactant in my bath and manually filtering the water using a DIY system incorporating some fine filtering sponges (aquarium style).

Oh, and did I mention that the telescopic structure that suspends the rotisserie motor was fashioned out of the support base of an old EA RockBand video game drum set?

I know - strange, but it works
CTOwens-

Thanks for the update on your progress. I like the power-cycled rotation idea, and thanks for the detail on how you implemented the telescopic support --- a nice solution that's on my short list of designs. So far, none of the postings I've seen mentioned the source for the telescoping hardware. In researching the idea, I did look at frames for real drum kits (not too promising) and especially entry-level monopods made for cameras (some reasonable options including the use of ball-head mounts). But can't beat the price of your recycled RockBand mount.

On multiple records, I think one could go to, say, 2-3 records without much loss of cleaning power, but I have doubts about designs that show 6 or more lps at the same time; I'm not sure the US cleaning action would be as effective in these tightly-packed configurations. Perhaps this is part of the reason ADS decided to limit their design to 1 record. Another reason might be that implementing rotating brushes for a stack of lps is considerably more difficult. I've given some thought to how brushes might be added to a DYI version. I'm also considering filtering, first manually with a Brita Pitcher filter, then automated with a low-flow-rate pump. I'd be interested to hear how your experiments with filtering work out, and overall, how effective the DYI US approach is with respect to traditional vacuum cleaning.

Have you looked at Alconox 1104 and Alconox 1304 (enzymatic), for example, as reasonably priced alternatives to the ADS surfactant? You can find them as concentrate or premixed liquid on Amazon. I haven't looked into it, but I guess that the ADS surfactant comes with the usual audiophile mark-up.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to over-think the design while waiting for my bank balance to recharge after a recent audio purchase.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2012, 06:11 AM   #217
CT0wens is offline CT0wens  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CT0wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Default My version

Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.

And, yes...that is the simple telescopic base of a RockBand drum set. I cut the plastic piping to fit the required length, installed a rotisserie motor to the top, repurposed all sorts of things from closets/garage and several hardware store trips.

For example, the discs that help hold the record in place were fashioned from furniture floor sliders, drilled, affixed with dashboard iPhone grip pads for - well - gripping power.

The motor plugs into this: Amazon.com: ART-DNe - Adjustable Cycle Timer: Home Improvement
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2012, 04:27 PM   #218
CT0wens is offline CT0wens  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CT0wens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
[QUOTE=Ishmail;3124074]
Quote:
Thanks for the update on your progress. I like the power-cycled rotation idea,
Ishmail -- Yes. The idea for power cycling was inspired from the online research we discussed earlier regarding the (potential) efficacy of US cleaning when the object is still versus in motion. A timed power cycler simply acts as a programmable switch with variable timing for on/off -- hooked up at the AC plate with motor power plugged directly into it. There are many options for these types of devices -- make sure you find one that can program ON-time in seconds (important for a 5-6 second rotation of 1/4 of a 12" LP -- depending on motor RPM) as well as minutes for OFF-time (experimenting with 2-3 minute still bath time for each 1/4 of an LP). There are many options that only do 30 minute cycles, hours, days for use in gardening, hydroponics, etc.

Quote:
... and thanks for the detail on how you implemented the telescopic support --- a nice solution that's on my short list of designs. So far, none of the postings I've seen mentioned the source for the telescoping hardware.
I did similar research -- focusing primarily on inexpensive camera mounts and desktop digital camera mounts (which are far more expensive than I desired). The main issue was an inability to get flush enough with the US machine given the tripod footprint -- which then effects balance as well as length of spindle. Coincidentally, I was clearing out a cupboard around the same time and caught a glimpse of the RockBand kit -- eureka moment... the rest was trial and (lots of) error. The pipe is a perfect material to cut and shape for desired height. The base allows for flush mounting on either side (however it does need some additional weight to balance weight of motor).

I refashioned and spliced a long AC cord from an old dead APC backup battery to provide power to the motor up through the piping. This required making the cord coiled to allow for the raising and lowering of it within the telescopic pipe. I achieved this by winding it tightly around the unused skewer from the rotisserie motor package and then using a hair dryer to mold it into shape.

Quote:
I've given some thought to how brushes might be added to a DIY version.
This is my next challenge as well. I'm currently toying with (over-thinking the implementation of two spare VPI velvet-lipped tubes from a 16.5 being affixed to the metal basket that came with my US cleaner. This may allow the brushes to gently come into contact with the LP's surface during rotation to help dislocate any grime. Easier said than done - given torque of the motor, lining everything up, maintaining an effective pressure on the surface of the record, etc. Have also considered dual carbon fibre brushes that sweep the record on either side at the surface of the water suspended from above the water line mounted on one side of the machine. To be honest, if I were at Spin-Clean and owned the rights to this machine: Vinyl Record Cleaner and Washing System | Spin Clean Record Washing System
I'd simply find a way to make the bath base stainless steel and add some US transducers -- keeping it manual to offset cost. Rush it to market and dramatically underprice AudioDesk with (potentially) analogous results. A testable proposition - nonetheless.

Quote:
I'm also considering filtering, first manually with a Brita Pitcher filter, then automated with a low-flow-rate pump.
I've stuck to manual thus far. I use the spicket on the machine to drain down a flexible tube into two stages of tupperware (with holes poked into them for drainage) where I've layered two aquarium filter sponges that are rated for super-fine particulant filtering. I cut them out in the shape of the tupperware. This then trickles into a simple funnel that balances on top of a 5.25 liter storable water container form the Container Store. I collect lots of old german pressings of ECM jazz vinyl bought from folks in Europe who seemingly like to smoke while they listen It's crazy to see dark yellow stains in the filters of residual nicotine in the shape of the drainage holes! I doubt Manfred Eicher ever considered the sound of nicotine whilst meticulously recording and mastering his artists The hardest part here is maintaining the speed of water flow as not to cause too much backup or leaking along the way. This stage could definitely be improved.

Quote:
... and overall, how effective the DIY US approach is with respect to traditional vacuum cleaning.
Too be honest, this is where you may think I'm a total OCD nut. I'm using this DIY US bath as just an initial stage for what I believe to be heavily soiled or older LPs in my collection (like the german ECMs I referred to above). After this initial stage, I then continue with my usual process -- Walker Audio Prelude Quartet (4-step) cleaning fluids on my VPI 16.5. I then apply LAST LP conditioner as final step before demag-ing (another story) and bagging in MoFI static-suppressive sleeves. Obviously, not for the faint of heart - nor necessary for every LP I own. For others that I am simply suspect of - I simply do a rinse and vacuum on the VPI. Apparently, I'm not the only crazy one to experiment with such a lengthy process, as this reviewer has come to similar results: SoundStage! - The Vinyl Word - Audio Desk Systeme Vinyl Cleaner (3/2010)

Quote:
Have you looked at Alconox 1104 and Alconox 1304 (enzymatic), for example, as reasonably priced alternatives to the ADS surfactant? You can find them as concentrate or premixed liquid on Amazon. I haven't looked into it, but I guess that the ADS surfactant comes with the usual audiophile mark-up.
I'll definitely look this up. If cheap enough, it may rule out the need for filtering as one could just empty the bath and start fresh for the next session. Currently, I do not drain and filter the water after each record -- just at the end of each session --- which never goes longer than 4 records. I use cheap bottles of Aquafina water (recommended by Mikey Fremer in a pinch) that goes through a purification process that incorporates reverse osmosis, ultraviolet and ozone sterilization at non-Audiophile pricing

Quote:
Meanwhile, I'll continue to over-think the design while waiting for my bank balance to recharge after a recent audio purchase.
I'm right there with you, friend.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2012, 04:41 AM   #219
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Thanks for the pictures --- lot's of good technical improvisations and creative details! Thanks also for the link to the Soundstage! review; I hadn't see it before. It partly debunks some of the more euphoric reviews of the ADS machine, but still finds a good deal of value that is complementary to the VPI machine. I wonder if the two procedures could be blended in an abbreviated hybrid method that is less time consuming than doing them each complete. For example, it seems that ADS does not use enzymes in its fluid. Maybe an enzyme presoak would make the US process effective on a wider range of dirt. A distilled water rinse and vacuum at the end should be better than fan drying, too. But, as the review points out, there are too many possible permutations and life is short ...

[By the way, your ECM collection sounds interesting, and yes, they smoke like chimneys in Europe compared to here. Or they did; in the last 10 years or so I've been happy to see a significant trend away from smoking take hold in the places I visit.]

You win on the OCD scale. I only use a 3-step process (AVI) and don't demag or LAST, but otherwise similar. Recently switched to Aquafina, too.

For rotating brushes, I'm considering using microfiber mini rollers for paint mounted on steel shafts and motorized and suspended from a superstructure spanning over the lps. Seems complicated, but I couldn't come up with a good way to mount the brushes from the sides. There are still several details that need more thought.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2012, 08:04 PM   #220
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
So I picked myself up a used ultrasonic cleaner off of eBay and I justed placed an order with Servocity for the rotation motor, mounts, shaft coupling, and power supply. My question is, what should I used for an actual cleaning fluid? I was thinking of using my regular home brew record cleaning fluid (3:1 distilled water to 90% isopropyl alcohol w/ Triton X-100 surfactant). Anybody have any better ideas? I'll post up pics when I get everything put together.

Kevin T
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When a Kenwood record cleaner-to be becomes a Garrard 301/Thorens TD124 Hybridmonster honinbou Analogue Source 37 18th March 2014 06:21 PM
My DIY record cleaner. mattjk Analogue Source 104 26th April 2013 09:10 PM
Ultrasonic Record Cleaner- any feedback Ianmac Analogue Source 7 13th November 2012 03:28 AM
DIY Record Cleaner Machine cactuscowboy Analogue Source 19 3rd August 2009 05:15 AM
Inverting rotation of a VPi record cleaner m.parigi Analogue Source 4 29th October 2003 08:11 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:40 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2