Yeah it was pretty gross actually. I was surprised that it turned out to be very playable afterwards. Cover is toast and the moldy side of the label needed a scrub so it's pretty much illegible. I forgot to take a picture of the before and after but I have another couple of candidates that will do nicely I think. I will be sure to post them.
BTW have you decided on an optimum temperature for your setup yet?
How well do carbon fiber brushes work?
Hello, Vinyladdict, I like your setup and might give it a try. I didn't know about Synchron motors until I read the posts. Looks like there are a lot on ebay and I suppose a cheapskate like me could get one out of an appliance. I assume you used the DAK fibre brush. Short of the ultasonic solution, have you been happy with that method?
Temp and Filtering
For temp, I'm liking 110 to 120°F. It's not too hot for vinyl or hands. If my cleaner is filled adequately, the heater on my URC may be left on and the temp seems to stabilize at 120°. The heat definitely improves the cleaning process. For good LP groove cleaning without the need for a brush of any kind, I think 60 khz, heat, and an appropriate cleaning solution are best.
The 120°F temp is also the max for the filtering setup I'm currently putting together. It will combine an excellent surplus motor/pump with a sub-micron filter for about $40. This optional setup will use the drain from the UC, piped to the inlet of the pump (whose max fluid temp is rated at 120°F) then through the filter and back up over the tank lip into the URC tank. The tubing outlet back into the tank will be below the liquid level so as to not introduce bubbles into the cleaning solution. The filter setup can be run between LP cleaning cycles. And I think it will probably work while a cleaning cycle is ongoing, such that continuous filtering will be possible if a user desires. This filter arrangement should allow extended use of one batch of cleaning solution.
More info, part numbers and pictures to come as I get the filter set up and working.
B B
For temp, I'm liking 110 to 120°F. It's not too hot for vinyl or hands. If my cleaner is filled adequately, the heater on my URC may be left on and the temp seems to stabilize at 120°. The heat definitely improves the cleaning process. For good LP groove cleaning without the need for a brush of any kind, I think 60 khz, heat, and an appropriate cleaning solution are best.
The 120°F temp is also the max for the filtering setup I'm currently putting together. It will combine an excellent surplus motor/pump with a sub-micron filter for about $40. This optional setup will use the drain from the UC, piped to the inlet of the pump (whose max fluid temp is rated at 120°F) then through the filter and back up over the tank lip into the URC tank. The tubing outlet back into the tank will be below the liquid level so as to not introduce bubbles into the cleaning solution. The filter setup can be run between LP cleaning cycles. And I think it will probably work while a cleaning cycle is ongoing, such that continuous filtering will be possible if a user desires. This filter arrangement should allow extended use of one batch of cleaning solution.
More info, part numbers and pictures to come as I get the filter set up and working.
B B
Can't wait to see the filter system!
In case anyone doubts the effectiveness of this type of record cleaning here are some pics of some nasty records I cleaned yesterday. They both sound great!
Nasty
Addict, I think that record takes the prize for worst ever. Looks like extreme biohazard!
Addict, I think that record takes the prize for worst ever. Looks like extreme biohazard!
Addict, I think that record takes the prize for worst ever. Looks like extreme biohazard!
Yeah it was pretty disgusting but the real irony is that I am not even much of a Cat Stevens fan!
Cool 78RPM! Just let us know if you have any questions. My setup is basically a knock off of BBFTX's build except I went with a pretty inexpensive 40KHz unit that seems to be doing the job just fine. I like Synchrons slow speed capability and at 19.95 is pretty good value.
Good Luck!
Prior to the ultrasonic machine, I have used a variety of methods to clean my records. Most recently I would clean the lps on an old turntable with some DYI cleaning solution,and a $7 carbon fiber brush or a paint pad, then vacuum up the residue. In my experience so far the ultrasonic method gets superior results.
In the recent photos in my earlier posts I only used a brush on the few really grungy garage sale finds as part of an experiment to see if it was possible to get them clean and playable in my ultrasonic setup. I am positive that my old brush and vacuum method would not have been successful on these moldy old records that are now like new and sound very good. Most of my records are in pretty decent condition but recently I purchased a collection of 500 records that had been sitting in someones basement for the last 30 years. I was searching for a efficient and thorough way of cleaning them and thankfully i found this thread. I have been spinning them manually in the ultrasonic bath and have probably cleaned close to 100 records. The task will be less labor intensive I am sure once my motor arrives.
Cheers
Checking in
Hi Vinyladdict and BB,
I'm still lurking here and following your experiences and ideas with interest.
I have nothing to report yet, but have parts starting to come in now for a design that is a hybrid between the designs on this thread and the Bent Audio prototype that never made it to market (see below). Features that might be of interest include an alternative take on the spacers between the LPs, the ability to easily move the entire 'rotisserie' unit from the ultrasonic cleaner onto third-size polycarbonate food pans for rinse or presoak steps (the pans also have airtight lids for storing the liquids between runs), and a variable-speed DC motor to explore different rotational speeds and cycle times for cleaning, rinsing and drying.
One thing that still confounds me is the discrepancy between the ~10 RPM speed the Audio Desk cleaner uses during its cleaning cycle of only 1-2 minutes vs. the much slower speeds and longer cycles used all across the diy community. The AD cleaner only slows down to roughly 1 RPM for drying.
I'm not sure how much difference rinsing will make, but the on-line info from the ultrasonic cleaning industry claims it's important. I've also ordered some Alconox free-rinsing detergent as an alternative to isopropyl alcohol and photo flow. You might find some of this information useful. They recommend about 120 degrees F for cleaning with the Alconox detergent. If this proves inferior to alcohol + photoflow, I can still use it to clean stainless flatware, glasses, etc.
I'll post results as I get them.
Hi Vinyladdict and BB,
I'm still lurking here and following your experiences and ideas with interest.
I have nothing to report yet, but have parts starting to come in now for a design that is a hybrid between the designs on this thread and the Bent Audio prototype that never made it to market (see below). Features that might be of interest include an alternative take on the spacers between the LPs, the ability to easily move the entire 'rotisserie' unit from the ultrasonic cleaner onto third-size polycarbonate food pans for rinse or presoak steps (the pans also have airtight lids for storing the liquids between runs), and a variable-speed DC motor to explore different rotational speeds and cycle times for cleaning, rinsing and drying.
One thing that still confounds me is the discrepancy between the ~10 RPM speed the Audio Desk cleaner uses during its cleaning cycle of only 1-2 minutes vs. the much slower speeds and longer cycles used all across the diy community. The AD cleaner only slows down to roughly 1 RPM for drying.
I'm not sure how much difference rinsing will make, but the on-line info from the ultrasonic cleaning industry claims it's important. I've also ordered some Alconox free-rinsing detergent as an alternative to isopropyl alcohol and photo flow. You might find some of this information useful. They recommend about 120 degrees F for cleaning with the Alconox detergent. If this proves inferior to alcohol + photoflow, I can still use it to clean stainless flatware, glasses, etc.
I'll post results as I get them.
A safety consideration
While weighing the pros and cons of a 12 VDC motor vs. a 120 VAC synchronous motor, it did occur to me that there is a safety concern if we have mains power coming within inches of the wet environment of an ultrasonic cleaner. This was not a deciding factor for me, but I do recommend using a GFCI outlets to power your AC motor. If you don't have one convenient to your location, you can either install a replacement GFCI outlet or purchase an inexpensive GFCI adaptor that plugs into an unprotected outlet. Apparently, these adaptors work even with non-grounded outlets in older homes.
Some claim their prized LPs are to die for, but in my opinion, not so much.
I will say that using 120 VAC synchronous motors makes for a much simpler, less expensive, no-fuss implementation compared to the path I chose.
While weighing the pros and cons of a 12 VDC motor vs. a 120 VAC synchronous motor, it did occur to me that there is a safety concern if we have mains power coming within inches of the wet environment of an ultrasonic cleaner. This was not a deciding factor for me, but I do recommend using a GFCI outlets to power your AC motor. If you don't have one convenient to your location, you can either install a replacement GFCI outlet or purchase an inexpensive GFCI adaptor that plugs into an unprotected outlet. Apparently, these adaptors work even with non-grounded outlets in older homes.
Some claim their prized LPs are to die for, but in my opinion, not so much.
I will say that using 120 VAC synchronous motors makes for a much simpler, less expensive, no-fuss implementation compared to the path I chose.
Thanks for the update Ishmail. My motor is scheduled to arrive on October 10 so I hope to be fully operational next week. Spinning by hand is not ideal but it has been valuable in helping me experiment with cleaning solution recipes and water temps.
I am currently using a distilled water / IPA / Triton X-100 mixture that seems to be doing the job. I am curious about experimenting with rinsing as I am still having difficulty wrapping my head around the air drying. I am looking forward to hearing about your experiences with Alconox. The Triton X I use was given to me from a friend of mine who works in a lab. The Triton is difficult and expensive to source up here so I am on the hunt to find a better solution. Is the Alconox easy to source and how much does it cost?
Vinyladdict,
I ordered the Alconox from BP Medical Supplies via Amazon; sometimes Techni-Tools comes up as the preferred vendor. The best price I found was about $31 shipped within the US for a 4-lb carton of powder that should last a long time. The user reviews are very positive. There is also a liquid form, Liquinox, that contains the same cleaner. It took a full week before it shipped, but it's on its way now.
Alconox is intended for commercial/industrial/lab use. It contains phosphates which are banned in domestic detergents in the US. Policies are a bit greener where you are, so I don't know if that's an issue for you or your government. If it is, there are some phosphate-free offerings from Alconox you can research on the company's website. We would use very small amounts in our ultrasonic cleaning application, so my conscience is pretty clear.
Check out the Alconox Canada website. Seems like it's OK where you are.
Triton X-100 is also available on US Amazon, but only ships within the US.
I found this quote in the wikipedia article on Triton X-100: Apart from laboratory use, Triton X-100 can be found in several types of cleaning compounds,[3] ranging from heavy-duty industrial products to gentle detergents. It is also a popular ingredient in homemade vinyl record cleaning fluids together with distilled water and isopropyl alcohol. This is interesting information for cost-efficient traditional vacuum cleaning. It suggests it's also a good choice for our use, but that rinsing is important (based on the usual instructions for this type of cleaner from AIVS, etc.). Perhaps it leaves a film that attracts dirt over time if left to dry without rinsing, but does not initially detract from the sound. The high viscosity of X-100 makes me think a rinse is a good idea.
I ordered the Alconox from BP Medical Supplies via Amazon; sometimes Techni-Tools comes up as the preferred vendor. The best price I found was about $31 shipped within the US for a 4-lb carton of powder that should last a long time. The user reviews are very positive. There is also a liquid form, Liquinox, that contains the same cleaner. It took a full week before it shipped, but it's on its way now.
Alconox is intended for commercial/industrial/lab use. It contains phosphates which are banned in domestic detergents in the US. Policies are a bit greener where you are, so I don't know if that's an issue for you or your government. If it is, there are some phosphate-free offerings from Alconox you can research on the company's website. We would use very small amounts in our ultrasonic cleaning application, so my conscience is pretty clear.
Check out the Alconox Canada website. Seems like it's OK where you are.
Triton X-100 is also available on US Amazon, but only ships within the US.
I found this quote in the wikipedia article on Triton X-100: Apart from laboratory use, Triton X-100 can be found in several types of cleaning compounds,[3] ranging from heavy-duty industrial products to gentle detergents. It is also a popular ingredient in homemade vinyl record cleaning fluids together with distilled water and isopropyl alcohol. This is interesting information for cost-efficient traditional vacuum cleaning. It suggests it's also a good choice for our use, but that rinsing is important (based on the usual instructions for this type of cleaner from AIVS, etc.). Perhaps it leaves a film that attracts dirt over time if left to dry without rinsing, but does not initially detract from the sound. The high viscosity of X-100 makes me think a rinse is a good idea.
Thanks for the info Ishmail. I have about 200ML of Triton X left so I have some time to do some research on alternatives such as Alconox. Please let me know your opinion on it once you have tried it for yourself.
How is your build coming? My motor arrives tomorrow (so says UPS), so I will be cleaning all my garage sale finds in earnest later this week.
BB - How is the filter system prototype coming along?
BB I was wondering if you can give some guidance on drilling the holes in the face plate where the spindle comes out of the motor box. What process did you use do determine where to drill the holes for the spindle and mounting screws.
Thanks
Motor Mount Holes for BB's URC
Addict -- a drawing is attached. I basically found the center of the round junction box cover (center of line drawn between screw holes) and laid out the holes from there according to the dimensional drawing of the Synchron motor.
BB
Addict -- a drawing is attached. I basically found the center of the round junction box cover (center of line drawn between screw holes) and laid out the holes from there according to the dimensional drawing of the Synchron motor.
BB
Hey BB,
Sorry for being a PITA but I have a few questions as I get my motor setup.
The rotating arm mechanism seems to be a bit loose and "flops" around a bit more than I expected so I am wondering if I have made some errors.
- How tight are the pipe straps on the 1/2" PVC pipe? Does the pipe move freely or is there some resistance?
- I was also wondering how warm the motor gets in your build? In my limited testing I have noticed that the motor case cover gets warm after a few minutes. Not hot, just warm.
Sorry for being a PITA but I have a few questions as I get my motor setup.
The rotating arm mechanism seems to be a bit loose and "flops" around a bit more than I expected so I am wondering if I have made some errors.
- How tight are the pipe straps on the 1/2" PVC pipe? Does the pipe move freely or is there some resistance?
- I was also wondering how warm the motor gets in your build? In my limited testing I have noticed that the motor case cover gets warm after a few minutes. Not hot, just warm.
Last edited:
Arm mechanics
The pipe straps and how much they are tightened are the way to manage the "tightness" or resistance of the arm movement so that it doesn't flop around. The attached photo shows a little more detail for my particular setup. Your mileage may vary since the edge and lip of your ultrasonic cleaner may be different than mine, or your pipe clamps and angle brackets may be different, etc.
To get the adjustability to the turning resistance I needed, I added the spacer pointed out in the photo. It's just a flat piece of metal held in place by the same nut and bolt that holds the pipe clamp to the angle bracket. It keeps as much of the pipe as possible in contact with the pipe clamp and allows one to tighten the nut to provide exactly the resistance desired for arm movement.
An alternative would be to use the threaded elbow connecting the 1/2" pipe to the arm as the moving element, instead of allowing the 1/2" pipe to turn in the pipe clamps.
The pipe and elbow connections in my setup are tight and fairly rigid. But before tightening everything down, you have to make sure your overall geometry works out right, such that the LPs end up in the right place in the URC tank. Again, this might vary a bit based on the particular dimensions of the cleaner you're using, or the dimensions of the elbows and pipe you're using.
My motor mounting box gets slightly warm; definitely not hot.
BB
The pipe straps and how much they are tightened are the way to manage the "tightness" or resistance of the arm movement so that it doesn't flop around. The attached photo shows a little more detail for my particular setup. Your mileage may vary since the edge and lip of your ultrasonic cleaner may be different than mine, or your pipe clamps and angle brackets may be different, etc.
To get the adjustability to the turning resistance I needed, I added the spacer pointed out in the photo. It's just a flat piece of metal held in place by the same nut and bolt that holds the pipe clamp to the angle bracket. It keeps as much of the pipe as possible in contact with the pipe clamp and allows one to tighten the nut to provide exactly the resistance desired for arm movement.
An alternative would be to use the threaded elbow connecting the 1/2" pipe to the arm as the moving element, instead of allowing the 1/2" pipe to turn in the pipe clamps.
The pipe and elbow connections in my setup are tight and fairly rigid. But before tightening everything down, you have to make sure your overall geometry works out right, such that the LPs end up in the right place in the URC tank. Again, this might vary a bit based on the particular dimensions of the cleaner you're using, or the dimensions of the elbows and pipe you're using.
My motor mounting box gets slightly warm; definitely not hot.
BB
Addict,
Originally you also asked about how tight the elbow going into the motor box was. Maybe you already solved this problem, but if I remember correctly, this elbow had more threaded length than needed to fully engage the threads in the motor box. I cut off the extra length of the elbow threads so that the end of the elbow wouldn't hit the motor itself when fully tightened. The motor is thick enough such that it takes up almost all of the available depth of the motor box. You also need to make sure you include the gasket (and possibly an extra gasket) between the motor box cover and the motor box to get just a little more space for the motor.
Originally you also asked about how tight the elbow going into the motor box was. Maybe you already solved this problem, but if I remember correctly, this elbow had more threaded length than needed to fully engage the threads in the motor box. I cut off the extra length of the elbow threads so that the end of the elbow wouldn't hit the motor itself when fully tightened. The motor is thick enough such that it takes up almost all of the available depth of the motor box. You also need to make sure you include the gasket (and possibly an extra gasket) between the motor box cover and the motor box to get just a little more space for the motor.
Yeah I cut the threads to tighten that part up and it is much better. I also put in a metal spacer and managed to tighten up the pipe clamps somewhat but still not as tight as I would like. Will look at a thicker spacer or perhaps different clamps.
Lots of tweaking to do now..... she sure ain't purty, but it is working!
Thanks again for the assist mate.