BB thanks for the great thoughts. Remain a bit confused on an issue.
The Zenith 'Crossfire' system uses six 40 kHz and six 80 kHz frequency generators (transducers?) that operate simultaneously per their literature. How should that compare with the 60 kHz of the ST-136 in cleaning vinyl records?
How many 60 kHz transducers are in the ST-136?
Thanks. atlanta.
Atlanta,
The ST-136 has three 60-watt transducers operating at 60khz. ST-236 has five I believe.
No need to bother with both 40khz and 80khz transducers. Just the 80s would be best, and will get records clean at a more affordable price than the multi-frequency setup.
Only reason to have the 40s also to would be if you're cleaning lots of other things besides LPs in the cleaner, including metal items that were very dirty and harder to clean for example.
Cheers,
B B
The ST-136 has three 60-watt transducers operating at 60khz. ST-236 has five I believe.
No need to bother with both 40khz and 80khz transducers. Just the 80s would be best, and will get records clean at a more affordable price than the multi-frequency setup.
Only reason to have the 40s also to would be if you're cleaning lots of other things besides LPs in the cleaner, including metal items that were very dirty and harder to clean for example.
Cheers,
B B
BB apologize for not being clear about the Zenith ultrasonic cleaner. In the Zenith Crossfire ultrasonic cleaners they include both six 40 kHz transducers and six 80 kHz transducers that function all at the same time. Stated purpose is to remove heavier deposits with the 40 kHz and more delicate deposits with the 80 kHz while using both at the same time to reduce hot spots, etc.
There is no Zenith option for one or the other. Both are included as basic to the Zenith Crossfire technology.
All that seems logical to me. But am not sure how that actually applies to cleaning deposits from vinyl records in the real world.
Suspect 60 kHz is superb.
Do not understand how the combination of (a) six 40 kHz and six 80 kHz transducers all working at the same time should compare to (b) five 60 kHz (ST-236H) or (c) three 60 kHz (ST-136H) transducers working together on several dirty vinyl records.
Any additional thoughts would be welcome.
atlanta
There is no Zenith option for one or the other. Both are included as basic to the Zenith Crossfire technology.
All that seems logical to me. But am not sure how that actually applies to cleaning deposits from vinyl records in the real world.
Suspect 60 kHz is superb.
Do not understand how the combination of (a) six 40 kHz and six 80 kHz transducers all working at the same time should compare to (b) five 60 kHz (ST-236H) or (c) three 60 kHz (ST-136H) transducers working together on several dirty vinyl records.
Any additional thoughts would be welcome.
atlanta
Hi, I have followed the thread with interest and built myself a US cleaner from scratch (against good advice) using a pan and cheap ebay parts. I got it going today and will post some pictures.
But first I want to ask about noise levels with the commercial bath units. What I hear is a kind of hiss / sizzling noise of no great intensity, much like the Utube video. But after I spent about 1 - 2 minutes next to mine cleaning a record I seem to have got a high pitched tinnitus (hopefully temporary). I got my 17yr old daughter to listen very briefly and she said it was very loud. I know what my hearing loss is from tests (and I am 62) but scary to think that HF noise that one is oblivious to is causing further damage. ie you can damage your hearing with sounds you cant properly hear.
My questions are:
Are commercial units noisy?
Is hearing protection advised with them? (I shall be using it)
Does the noise come off the surface of the water or the bottom / sides of the bath?
Do the commercial units sound insulate the bottom / sides? Is the cover supposed to be on at all times in use? (mine has a partial cover - obviously the cleaners on here have none).
Anyone else experience a noise hazard?
Thanks for great thread - and it did clean the trial record pretty good
martin
But first I want to ask about noise levels with the commercial bath units. What I hear is a kind of hiss / sizzling noise of no great intensity, much like the Utube video. But after I spent about 1 - 2 minutes next to mine cleaning a record I seem to have got a high pitched tinnitus (hopefully temporary). I got my 17yr old daughter to listen very briefly and she said it was very loud. I know what my hearing loss is from tests (and I am 62) but scary to think that HF noise that one is oblivious to is causing further damage. ie you can damage your hearing with sounds you cant properly hear.
My questions are:
Are commercial units noisy?
Is hearing protection advised with them? (I shall be using it)
Does the noise come off the surface of the water or the bottom / sides of the bath?
Do the commercial units sound insulate the bottom / sides? Is the cover supposed to be on at all times in use? (mine has a partial cover - obviously the cleaners on here have none).
Anyone else experience a noise hazard?
Thanks for great thread - and it did clean the trial record pretty good
martin
Martin,
Some of the inexpensive ultrasonic cleaners often use transducers operating in the 20-24khz range, and exhibit the type of problems you describe. They're very noisy, irritating, even if you cant hear tones in that frequency range, can hurt your ears, etc.
What frequency transducers do you think you bought?
Your complaints aren't an issue with high quality, higher frequency transducers, 40khz and above. All the more reason to use 60khz transducers or higher.
I have no discomfort or noise problems with my setup.
The transducers are certainly enclosed in commercial units, reducing the ambient noise they emit. These machines are often operated without the cover on.
Cheers,
B B
Some of the inexpensive ultrasonic cleaners often use transducers operating in the 20-24khz range, and exhibit the type of problems you describe. They're very noisy, irritating, even if you cant hear tones in that frequency range, can hurt your ears, etc.
What frequency transducers do you think you bought?
Your complaints aren't an issue with high quality, higher frequency transducers, 40khz and above. All the more reason to use 60khz transducers or higher.
I have no discomfort or noise problems with my setup.
The transducers are certainly enclosed in commercial units, reducing the ambient noise they emit. These machines are often operated without the cover on.
Cheers,
B B
I was contemplating buying the Audio Desk, but its price is outrageous, so after some googling here I am
I m so excited to have found this thread
Some tips though from my experience in film photography...
The photo film still has to be dried after it's out from the developing canister (where photo-flo is added on the last step). Photo-flo merely prevents water from concentrating and forming dots or lines. Photo people help the film by pulling it between two fingers. This along with photo-flo also allows for faster drying. But it still needs a few hours to completely dry before it is safe to get it to open space without worrying that dust might stick to it.
Similarly, I bet there is some moisture that remains on the grooves after the UC. Admittedly, vinyl is quite hydrophobic, but still the tiny grooves are a perfect spot for moisture to hide in. It might not be visible or easily felt, but it is there.
My point is that adding a couple of fans somewhere high to allow them to blow the record while it is above the water might be a very good idea to help make sure the record is completely dry. A couple of 12V pc fans should be perfect.
Oh and about the motor, I really do not like searching for hard to find things. I plan to use a slightly modified hobby servo. Modified in the sense that all electronics will be removed and it will be operated as a plain DC geared motor.
Operation will probably be straight from a wall psu with some kind of attenuator to control its speed. The same for the fans. If I feel fancy enough, I might end up using an arduino that I have lying around, but it will be an overkill. A single DPDT switch with middle position should be enough to allow bidirectional control of the motor. And a plain SPST for the fans.
Oh and here s the UC I am thinking to get
http://www.ebay.com/itm/18118197863...l?_sacat=0&_from=R40&_nkw=181181978638&_rdc=1http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-5...io01-20&ipn=psmain&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg
I m so excited to have found this thread
Some tips though from my experience in film photography...
The photo film still has to be dried after it's out from the developing canister (where photo-flo is added on the last step). Photo-flo merely prevents water from concentrating and forming dots or lines. Photo people help the film by pulling it between two fingers. This along with photo-flo also allows for faster drying. But it still needs a few hours to completely dry before it is safe to get it to open space without worrying that dust might stick to it.
Similarly, I bet there is some moisture that remains on the grooves after the UC. Admittedly, vinyl is quite hydrophobic, but still the tiny grooves are a perfect spot for moisture to hide in. It might not be visible or easily felt, but it is there.
My point is that adding a couple of fans somewhere high to allow them to blow the record while it is above the water might be a very good idea to help make sure the record is completely dry. A couple of 12V pc fans should be perfect.
Oh and about the motor, I really do not like searching for hard to find things. I plan to use a slightly modified hobby servo. Modified in the sense that all electronics will be removed and it will be operated as a plain DC geared motor.
Operation will probably be straight from a wall psu with some kind of attenuator to control its speed. The same for the fans. If I feel fancy enough, I might end up using an arduino that I have lying around, but it will be an overkill. A single DPDT switch with middle position should be enough to allow bidirectional control of the motor. And a plain SPST for the fans.
Oh and here s the UC I am thinking to get
http://www.ebay.com/itm/18118197863...l?_sacat=0&_from=R40&_nkw=181181978638&_rdc=1http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-5...io01-20&ipn=psmain&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg
Last edited:
The transducers are these ones from ebay: I installed the ps board in a computer ps housing.
50W 40kHz Ultrasonic Cleaning Transducer Cleaner Power Driver Board 220VAC | eBay
The clamp is this one from ebay, I machined a new spindle and 'handle'. There were no leaks.
Vinyl ONE Stack Record Label Protector Clean 78s 45s 33s | eBay
The pan is a $10 baking tray - very thin -the transducer studs are arc or gas welded to the bottom - I hoped they could be cleanly spot welded on but the shop I went to said it couldn't be done that way.
I have a second pan that I use for spin drying, though one could just lift up the record above the water somehow. I just used an electric drill, but plan motors both for low speed rotation and high speed spin dry.
I would like to find a way to check if it is transducing properly, I figured they couldn't be a tuned resonance much if the water level was uncontrolled. But could be wrong - no effect on a piece of aluminium foil. The water looks to be agitated. Any ideas?
I guess these transducers are mass produced for Chinese made commercial units - seems to be the same unit everywhere.
Certainly it removes surplus water, with adequate rpm - but at the molecular level who knows? It might be good to retain just enough to keep static electricity at bay. Perhaps one could even keep a damp pad in the record sleeve after cleaning as a humidifier just for this purpose...mould might be an issue though.
Surplus water should never attach itself to the vinyl in the first place if we use photo-flo. At least in quantities with enough mass to centrifuge away.
Now about enough rpm... this could be tricky too, especially if an off-center record comes up.
And about moisture keeping static at bay... It s a weird argument. A little static never hurt anyone... On the other hand mold.... People use archival grade rice paper sleeves for a reason
Anyway, I have two ideas for now on how to implement the fans.
One is to use the drain to remove the water and blow the record where it was for the cleaning, with the fans attached on the arm. The drain line can also include a filter or something to keep the gunk, and the water in the reservoir should be ready to reuse. If we add a small pump to get it back up automatically, it will be exactly like the Audiodesk.
The other thought is to attach the fans on the left outer side of the cleaner/tower. That way by moving the arm to the left, the record will dangle on the left of the cleaner. The two fans should be fairly easy to position on the tower. I have a draft sketch, but I need to work on it a bit more.
I will post back later today from home.
My only problem for now is the price of the US cleaner...
Last edited:
Found this in a HSE guide: Q - Can ultrasonics cause damage to hearing? Are there any other effects on the body?
Ultrasonic cleaning equipment utilizes high energy sound waves at frequencies above those audible to humans to enhance the chemical and mechanical cleaning effects of liquids. The ultrasonic energy, although high in power, has no measurable impact on human auditory senses - in fact, there are no established time weighted average exposure limits for frequencies above 20kHz (20,000 cycles per second) . The frequencies of concern are the audible sub-harmonics of the ultrasonic primary frequency. These are produced due to sympathetic resonance of various components of the ultrasonic equipment which may include the cleaning tank, the enclosure panels, lids and other features. Pumps, blowers, and other ancillary equipment also contribute to the overall noise produced by the unit. In that regard, ultrasonic cleaning equipment is no different than a machine tool or any other piece of equipment found in the industrial environment. Ultrasound of the intensity that can be transmitted through the air has no
known effect on body tissue. Ultrasound, in fact, is commonly used for imaging of the human body. <<<<
Maybe a noisy diy bath like mine just needs to be encased and well damped. The US component will not be effected.
Ultrasonic cleaning equipment utilizes high energy sound waves at frequencies above those audible to humans to enhance the chemical and mechanical cleaning effects of liquids. The ultrasonic energy, although high in power, has no measurable impact on human auditory senses - in fact, there are no established time weighted average exposure limits for frequencies above 20kHz (20,000 cycles per second) . The frequencies of concern are the audible sub-harmonics of the ultrasonic primary frequency. These are produced due to sympathetic resonance of various components of the ultrasonic equipment which may include the cleaning tank, the enclosure panels, lids and other features. Pumps, blowers, and other ancillary equipment also contribute to the overall noise produced by the unit. In that regard, ultrasonic cleaning equipment is no different than a machine tool or any other piece of equipment found in the industrial environment. Ultrasound of the intensity that can be transmitted through the air has no
known effect on body tissue. Ultrasound, in fact, is commonly used for imaging of the human body. <<<<
Maybe a noisy diy bath like mine just needs to be encased and well damped. The US component will not be effected.
From TM Associates (tmasc.com), about whom I know nothing:
I know the question about damage to vinyl has come up before, but this does add to my concern. I can't interpret this to the effect on vinyl, and it sounds like it argues for higher frequencies. I know the vinyl isn't in the solution for long and I suspect for many it's used just once as a deep cleaning, to be followed by lighter cleanings over time, but any other thoughts?
I know the question about damage to vinyl has come up before, but this does add to my concern. I can't interpret this to the effect on vinyl, and it sounds like it argues for higher frequencies. I know the vinyl isn't in the solution for long and I suspect for many it's used just once as a deep cleaning, to be followed by lighter cleanings over time, but any other thoughts?
To be honest that is why I plan to use a much faster rotating speed. Something like 1rpm and two rotations per cycle. Of course this is completely out of my @#@$@ and I will surely experiment more once I have mine set.
I ve seen the audio desk in action and it s rotating speed is really fast comparing to BB's recommendation while still it gives supreme results.
I ve seen the audio desk in action and it s rotating speed is really fast comparing to BB's recommendation while still it gives supreme results.
Hi all. I'm jumping in here as I have recently acquired a US cleaner and I have some questions about how we can move this technology forward. It seems to me that the US technology has come down in price to make it practical for our hobby.
So with that said I would like to get some information on frequency.
What evidence is there that 60KHz is better for cleaning the groove of a vinyl record than 40 KHz? If we're talking about the size of the bubble it would seem that anything smaller than the tip of a stylus would be overkill as it is cleaning a part of the groove that the stylus will never contact. Remember the stylus is contacting the groove on its sides not tip so it is the sides of the groove that need to be clean not the deepest part of the groove.
I am working on designing some experiments to measure the cleaning efficacy at 40 KHz. Perhaps I can get a partner to reproduce an experiment on a 60 KHz machine.
I look forward to some great discussion,
Gary
So with that said I would like to get some information on frequency.
What evidence is there that 60KHz is better for cleaning the groove of a vinyl record than 40 KHz? If we're talking about the size of the bubble it would seem that anything smaller than the tip of a stylus would be overkill as it is cleaning a part of the groove that the stylus will never contact. Remember the stylus is contacting the groove on its sides not tip so it is the sides of the groove that need to be clean not the deepest part of the groove.
I am working on designing some experiments to measure the cleaning efficacy at 40 KHz. Perhaps I can get a partner to reproduce an experiment on a 60 KHz machine.
I look forward to some great discussion,
Gary
Better Particle removal; less risk of damage
Hi Gary,
60khz (and even better, 80khz) are preferred for two reasons:
1) Lower probability of damaging the LP than 40khz. Many sources confirm this. Here's a link to one that is pretty concise:
Weber Ultrasonics - Applications
2) Increased percentage of particle removal per attached graphic (60khz curve is between the 40khz and 80khz curves)
Cheers,
B B
Hi Gary,
60khz (and even better, 80khz) are preferred for two reasons:
1) Lower probability of damaging the LP than 40khz. Many sources confirm this. Here's a link to one that is pretty concise:
Weber Ultrasonics - Applications
2) Increased percentage of particle removal per attached graphic (60khz curve is between the 40khz and 80khz curves)
Cheers,
B B
I see. So the variable on the chart would be particle size. It looks like at about 6 microns the cleaning percentage crosses over with 40 KHz actually doing a better job on larger particles.
As far as damage goes, have we heard of anyone damaging a record with 40 KHz? I ask because I am using 40 KHz and I have experienced no problems whatsoever.
Forgive my exuberance but I'm excited to finally be able to get this going.
Thanks,
Gary
As far as damage goes, have we heard of anyone damaging a record with 40 KHz? I ask because I am using 40 KHz and I have experienced no problems whatsoever.
Forgive my exuberance but I'm excited to finally be able to get this going.
Thanks,
Gary
I have built DIY 40KHz USC and cleaned about 100 LPs
The only change I have detected is clean background and no surface noise, missing clicks & pops but I dont mind that
My friend cleaned abut 50 LPs using my machine and then built his own using 60Khz
so far we have not listened for differences on LPs cleaned at 40KHz on my machine vs 60KHz on his
He is too busy cleaning his LPs
I have cleaned very few LPs 2 times - I recleaned some using heat (initially I was using room temp water)
I would think most LPs will only be cleaned once
The only change I have detected is clean background and no surface noise, missing clicks & pops but I dont mind that
My friend cleaned abut 50 LPs using my machine and then built his own using 60Khz
so far we have not listened for differences on LPs cleaned at 40KHz on my machine vs 60KHz on his
He is too busy cleaning his LPs
I have cleaned very few LPs 2 times - I recleaned some using heat (initially I was using room temp water)
I would think most LPs will only be cleaned once