Видео

The problem with the Degritter is that it is getting too hot during the proces. I am looking forward to the FONOTEEK .

Glad you liked the review. Thanks for the feedback.

Hi, I'm afraid I can't agree regarding digital: digital doesn't have a sound... Well, sound waves, our hearing works in the analogue domain, so you could well say "digital doesn't have a sound" but I suspect that's not what you meant... I can certainly hear the differences between different digital to analogue convertors, and those with switchable digital filters, I can hear those differences (I do wonder if that particular element of the 'DtoA' chain is actually the one that I hear most...).

& no outtakes, no demos, no live tracks. Just waiting 25 years to get a different EQ & Compression setting? What the hell.

I certainly agree: a live concert video from this tour would have been very cool. I'm still watching Live at Pompeii...

Hi Chris, I've not ever tried the Project but I'd imagine that the strips are similar to those used on Clearaudio's and VPIs (both of which I have tried), and are simply narrower versions of those on the two cleaning pads I use on the Loricraft. I've not found these available on a big sheet, but I'd bet it is available somewhere, certainly worth a look!

@@DaveDenyer I was wondering what fabric. I was thinking either microfibre or velvet

@@chrisberry8218 I've often heard them referred to as "microfibre strips".

Hi Chris, certainly the solutions I use would work with the Project. My favourites are Clearaudio Pure Groove snd L’Art du Son. The latter is a biological liquid and benefits from being left on the LP for a few minutes to do its stuff. I must admit I didn’t used to bother rinsing, until a few years ago, but you should hear the improvement of a thorough rinse. Sorry, no idea when we’ll get the Yes.

Hi Austin, I’m due to record another video with Steve Evans this coming week (for posting in two-three weeks time). I shall try and prise as much information out of him as I can. In the meantime I’ll put the Humminguru’d Muse LP through the Degritter a few more times. To be honest I’m not certain anyone knows the absolute truth about this subject but I’ll do my best to unravel it. I ought to add: what I’m in pursuit of is THE BEST method. Even basic machines like the Himminguru, Project, etc., will benefit your record listening pleasure. I don’t mean to insinuate that everything I don’t do is bad.

@@DaveDenyer I really look forward to it. I'd like to know what components Steve uses to build his machines. As far as I can see, his are the only RCMs that cavitate above 200 kHz. I'd like to understand what went into his decision to design it that way and the science on which he bases it. He's certainly a leading authority on ultrasonic RCMs - more than most because he actually BUILT his systems. Thank you, Dave!

Interesting, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.

Interesting, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.

It was several years ago that I tried the Kirmuss, and it was at a friend’s so limited experience… It was undoubtedly effective though, and ensured I would investigate ultrasonics further…

@@DaveDenyer cool! Thanks. I have found it to really open my disks up. Maybe retry it again especially with your latest experiences. 👍🏻. It is more manual labor but it sounds like you are already doing that 😀

Hi Andreas, I usually change the solutions in the Degritter after approximately 50-100 cycles. Bear in mind I'm doing at least two cycles per fluid per LP, so reckon on around 30 to 40 LPs per fluid change. In addition the records are all pre-cleaned before going into the Degritter so quite honestly, the cleaning solution in the Degritter is not being made very dirty at all. If I see any visible residue whatsoever ever (usually tiny water marks in the run out area), that's when I'll change fluid.

⁠@@DaveDenyerthanks for the reply. I am trying to be a little more economical with time and expense, I run new records on one cycle on the Degritter. And used or dirty ones on the OkkiNokki first, using either Puregroove or the used solution from the Degritter followed by a rinse in DW. I am mined to add a little Ilfotol to the OkkiNokki rinse. Thoughts? What benefit do you think a second cycle would give me? Guess I should just try… Are you minded to investigate deionised water vs DW? Would be quite a saving. re the alcohol: besides cost and flashpoint: is there any concencus on which (ethanol vs isopropyl) would be better for sound? I think vinylforever had a preference for one? Based on a perceived harshness? Many thanks

Hi John, The reasoning is that the vacuum won't get every last bit of the fluid (and dissolved muck) off of the record, hence having completed the normal wash / dry cycle on the Project, give it another cycle but just using pure distilled water. It's essentially the same theory as when you do your laundry: you wouldn't want to wash and spin dry the clothes without a rinse cycle.

@@DaveDenyer thanks Dave - makes sense, thanks for taking the time to elaborate 👍

Thanks for the info Simon.

I used to feel like that (and still do with some albums), but in the case of the Bill Evans LPs it really doesn’t bother me.

Agreed. I’m looking forward to December… i think that’s when it’s due.

@@DaveDenyer Yup, it comes off on my birthday, December 6th, and Amazon says I should get it delivered that day. I haven't bought any of the other Contemporary Acoustic Sounds Series titles yet, but I'm planning on picking up some soon. I definitely appreciate that so many of the recent AAA jazz reissues are retail releases without strict price controls. It makes it a lot easier to catch up and build up a collection. I wish it also applied to the bulk of the Prestige reissues and also the old major label stuff, but those seem more the domain of Analogue Productions proper.

⁠​​⁠ what a cool birthday present! 😎

If I could build Steve’s lab at home I’d jump at the chance. I’d have thought it would a lot more than a Degritter, I’d have Steve’s lab over any consumer machine. I simply don’t the space. I don’t have the money either, but don’t have to worry about that because the space!

@@DaveDenyer I assume it costs Steve less than $4k to build one of his Ultradeep custom machines (obviously, I could be totally wrong). In my limited experience, individual components cost a lot less than a fully assembled, sleek-designed model with a marketing budget (such as any of the ultrasonics you've tested). I would much rather pay Steve $4k for his R&D production than these off-the-line models that have as many detractors as enthusiasts. From what I can infer from his interviews, Steve has followed the expensive, tedius, and time consuming scientific method to arrive at the Ultradeep 2.0. Your scientific sensibilities and his seem to meld on this.

@@austinhunt4260 Hey Austin! I don't mean to be presumptuous, but if you are interested, please feel free to check out my 4 part video series here on RUclips (under my name here) where I built what I feel is a very effective ultrasonic RCM based upon a lot of research and talking to people like the guy who did the huge paper on 'Aqueous Record Cleaning'. It uses the same basic tank Kirmuss does where you can easily set it up to clean 6 records at a time, properly spaced about 1 1/2" apart for proper cavitation. The tank uses powerful, oversized transducers, and at least the version I have also has 3 heating elements built in. I explain how I put it together, what parts I used (it wasn't hard... believe me I'm no Handyman Guru!) and I share the research on the chemistry, revolution speed, duration, proper rinse, and a 2 step filtration system. I've cleaned probably close to 2000 of my 2600+ vinyl albums, with almost all of them coming out very clean and quiet. I also suggest some other solutions and vacuum/rinse methods. Part 1 is the initial machine I built. Part 2 shows the improvements I made on it. Part 3 is about using a simple rinse tank and the same 6 record spindle/motor for a good distilled rinse after going through the US tank. Part 4 is about the filtration system. I hope that helps... Cheers! Jaime.

@@latheofheaven Hi Jaime, that's not presumptuous at all! It's being a great neighbor. Thank you. Going to watch them now. Cheers!

@@austinhunt4260 I hope there might be something there that will help. It is VERY primitive! I'm afraid I do not have anywhere NEAR the smooth aplomb and polish of our distinguished host here, but if you can bear the rough narrative, and if you wish, do check the research linked there because that is truly where I learned all this stuff from the people who actually know what they are doing. Personally, I just was not going to spend like $2000-$4000 on one of these commercial cleaners where they only do 1 record at a time, and you have no control over the temperature, chemistry, rotation speed, duration, and other things. So, for a LOT less I honestly think I now have something that I feel is far more effective. Cheers!

Hi Ross, glad you liked the video. I only use the knosti drying rack these days (and brilliant it is. Just discovered you can get it as a spare part). I can’t remember whether wet labels was an issue for me - hope someone else can help. Cheers.

I remember your videos. I guess space is what prevents me from going along the same lines as you, and PVF. I guess I’ve been approaching it from the perspective of buying one neat and tidy machine. Ultrasonic made that two machines. I’ll have to think about doing something like you. Thanks for sharing your approach.

@@DaveDenyer Well, at the time since I knew I was going to have to go through my 2600+ albums, I found the thought of doing 6 at a time VERY appealing... 😁

@@latheofheaven​​⁠ indeed: 6 at once is another highly appealing aspect…

@@DaveDenyer Yep... I like to take care of my records like I take care of my women... (🤣 Sorry, couldn't resist...)

@@latheofheaven😂

I have been very cautious about the flash point of ethanol. I’m probably going to revert to using isopropyl.

Thanks so much for the feedback. I appreciate that!

Part of the reason I’m doing this, so you don’t have to. 😊

Great to hear! Thanks for the feedback.

There’s no doubt that ultrasonic cleaning can give an already cleaned lp a clearly audible improvement. If you know anyone with an ultrasonic machine I’d suggest take along a record you’ve already cleaned and give it a try. How much improvement you hear may help decide whether & how much you invest in a machine.

I have had some new albums with faults that can’t be cleaned away.

@@DaveDenyer many of my new pressings are trash, only Analogue Productions are 99% perfect, MoFi less but mostly good too. Old pressing NM from good sellers mostly are perfect too but newer stuff from other pressing manufacturers mostly too much noise 😞

@@77MovieFan I do clean everything, new and used. Even AP, even UHQRs, Tone Poets, MOFI, everything.

It’s definitely not as bad as some & it does have some redeeming factors but (having now got the OG) the original is so much better.

Thanks for the feedback Best of luck!

Hi Dave. I do appreciate I’m perhaps obsessive. But hey, music, records, the best sound is my passion. I try to express the core ideas so people can apply this according to their budget. A Disco Antistat is better than nothing…

Spraying records with ultrathin silicone oil? Never heard of this. Could you provide some more background where to learn more about the reasoning behind this?

Interesting… as far as I’m aware the distilled water I buy is lab grade pure. I’ll look into deionized water. I think here in UK it’s cheaper! Regarding the oil. I have tried, very many years ago, using oil, squallen oil, I don’t think you can buy it anymore. Anyway, whatever benefit it may have given I decided against it, then spent a very long time cleaning my stylus, cantilever and those records I’d treated.

@@RillenReiner hi it's a known fact that on 78 shellac to use a mineral oil like WD-40, it dramatically cuts down surface noise and protects the record. But it's not suitable for vinyl because the oil is too thick so you need something ultra thin for 33s and 45s the viscosity on the Silicon oil is very low if you get a low viscosity as I pointed out, and it does the same thing as what you would for 78s. I don't know if anybody else has done it I haven't looked around I just did it myself. Actually it will nourish your cartridge cantilever as well the silicone oil it's very good for the rubber so don't worry about getting it on there but it's such a fine coating you're very unlikely to get any on there anyway. With vinyl you have a similar thing to Jitter in digital where the styli starts to jump because of the tight Groove so u get a motion backwards and forwards the oil prevents this and keeps the styli on track through every nook and cranny. A record microscopically is not smooth and that's not necessarily the grooves the actual vinyl plastic pellets do have a pitennes to them, that's why you find some records from different vinyl manufacturers mainly Japan is one of them that use a very fine vinyl process and heating it in pressing. and that might have been true for the old Deco records up to the early 60s what's highly sought after for the sound quality.

Hi Austin, not totally conclusive, but if the Degritter is within budget, that’s what i’d get.

@@DaveDenyer Your Muse trials seem to suggest that there is a maximum number of cleaning cycles you can run a record through any ultrasonic cleaner before it starts to degrade the groove structure. Since they don't regenerate with a good night's rest, doesn't that mean that once you hit that threshold, even after a couple decades, the record will be ultimately damaged. Thoughts?

@@DaveDenyer Seems PVF uses "135 kHz cavitation" in its cleaning tank, while Degritter uses 120 kHz. I'd like to know more about these kHz differences.

@@austinhunt4260 to be honest I’ve not noticed any degradation whatsoever with the degritter. And regarding the Humminguru’d Muse lp. I haven’t given up on it. It intrigues me. Steve Evans PVF speculated whether it just needed MORE cleaning. That the HG had just aggressively, but unevenly moved the greases on the vinyl surface (in the grooves). I’m still going to try cleaning further to see if I can resurrect it. To see if this is true…

@@DaveDenyer That would be an astonishing result if the HG was just moving the crud around. That should probably be the end for that particular product line, if true.

It is something I’m looking into…

Glad you enjoyed the video. I seem to remember the mono was not bad, but I already have a good original so I’ve since sold the boxed set.

Hi Brian, very good point: I think you’ve probably got it about right: just buy those ‘must have’ superior pressings & all the OJCs / Blue Note Classics / Tone Poets / Acoustic Sounds Series etc etc you can afford.

I honestly can’t remember how many cycles in a row. I think I was just getting on with stuff and started another cycle when I was passing the machine. I’d guess no more than 2 cycles at a time without at least half an hour cool down time in between. Incidentally, I have not lost all hope in that LP. Successive cleans and playing since this video is bringing some life back into it.

The tape does sound magical, and provides the best reference, besides as you rightly say, being there!

Thanks for the feedback Thomas! I do think that AP are reliably good too. Their Pablo series, for example, at $40 a record, are stunning.

Absolutely, the Pablos are great and many of the regular AP 45s are fantastic and do not need a UHQR 45 treatment for an enjoyable audiophile listening, in my humble personal opinion..

Thank you Thomas.

Thanks for the recommendation Michael.

Of course there is personal preference. Animals is my favourite Pink Floyd album. Obviously I like the sound…

@@DaveDenyer I know people like to do the "audiophile" thing and be weird but even some of the very picky people like this one the best. Its one of those rare times where the new one is better.

Curiosity perhaps?

@@DaveDenyer You're going to spend a lot of $ satisfying that curiosity 😊 Are you curious about how the other 12 thousand different pressings sound too? Do you listen to this album much or do you just want to hear how it sounds and file it away knowing you've got the best copy? I'm genuinely asking, I'm not being a smart ass, it's hard to not come across that way in the comments when asking because I'm a bit of joker and that probably comes across as rude sometimes. Tone is hard to convey

@@crazyprayingmantis5596I don’t play Thriller often at all. With 3-4 thousand records in my collection most don’t played that often. However, back when it was released I did play it often, and working in the hifi business it was a very popular demo disc. So, fond memories, curiosity of how a record I know so well sounds (having done so many sound quality demos at hifi shows back in the day…)…

@@DaveDenyer I'm wondering how many people that are buying this version will actually listen to it often, it's a lot to pay for something most people probably won't spin much. For someone like you who's using stuff like this for your RUclips content I totally understand. I think I've listened to my OG copy twice in 10 yrs and always feel unimpressed after it, it's a strange album full of fluff and hits that I don't need to hear anymore, I can tolerate about 2 tracks. I used to spin my mums Dangerous CD a lot when I was a kid though, I remember I'd turn it up when the breaking glass sound happened and I'd scare the crap out of my mum 😄

Thanks for the feedback Nick. I shall certainly be revisiting this album in a forthcoming video.

@@DaveDenyer Tori is not pro active enohgh to protect her fans.

Absolutely can't argue with the value of these new OJCs. Thanks for your feedback.

Hi, I shall hopefully be going into this in my next video - this weekend (watch this space..!). However to answer your question: as a 'wetting agent', then I feel Ilfotol is absolutely fine. That is after all, what it was developed to do (break surface tension, nothing else really). Of course a detergent will also break surface tension and so Terigitol will perform the same function. However when considering their cleaning efficiency: Tergitol is a 'vinyl cleaner' and so will perform much better at cleaning, in my experience. However, what I've found is that it takes a lot of rinsing to get it off the record, so, if you want a 'cleaner': Tergitol, but be prepared for extensive cleaning in several water changes. If you just want a solution to get into the grooves / or drain off of the record cleanly, then I'd choose Ilfotol. Hope that's not too confusing. Thanks for the question.

Thanks for the correction Andrew. I must’ve been having a ‘senior moment’. I have now edited the video to remove my mistake. Thanks once again for spotting the error!

Thanks for the feedback!