My ears continue to tell me that vinyl, at its best, can present the most realistic and satisfying portrayal of a musical event when compared to other formats, with the possible exception of open reel tape. My use of the qualifier “at its best” is very important here; I recognize that high resolution digital is catching up, such that, at its best, it can be very competitive these days. And mediocre vinyl, of which there is plenty, can be enormously disappointing and all of this is, of course, system dependent.
One of the most important aspects of vinyl listening is the cleanness of the vinyl. A really clean, contaminant-free LP is going to be much more convincing sonically than one that is not. The same is true, in my experience, with CDs and SACDs, although that is for another day.
I have spent more time than I care to figuring out how best to clean records. For a number of years, a vacuum-type cleaner was the standard, whether VPI or similar cleaners, or the string type, such as the Keith Monks or the Loricraft. The string type may have been better but the operation took longer and the vacuum-type cleaners can still be useful.
With the vacuum-type cleaners, the next issue became, what cleaning fluid, or fluids, to use. In my case, I eventually became satisfied that Audio Intelligent (AI) designed and manufactured the most successful regimen of cleaners – although I must confess that I did not try all cleaners on the market. One of the things that I liked (and still like, as will be discussed) about the AI products was that they made a fluid that contained a bit of alcohol (AI Super), which – whatever controversies there may be about alcohol as a vinyl cleaner – could clean some records in a way no other fluid could. However, AI’s “hardcore” enzyme cleaner, AI Formula No. 15, also did a darn good job, sometimes producing better results than the AI Super. Both, separately or in combination, followed by a good rinse using AI Ultra-Pure water, became my go-to record cleaning system for several years. The lesson here is that not all vinyl contaminants are the same. Some respond well to a water based cleaning solution containing a surfactant and a detergent, others respond better to alcohol or enzymes. The same record may well contain a combination of contaminants and require a mixed approach.
And then along came the ultrasonic machines.
I reviewed various iterations of the Audio Desk machine for this publication over the past several years. At the time, I thought it was a very effective machine. Ultrasonic cleaning seemed to beat vacuum-style cleaning hands down, at least in most cases. However, some older records resisted. I noticed that in these cases, a follow-on clean with my vacuum-type cleaner and one or the other of the AI fluids was necessary to finish the job. Even then, there have been those records for which I had to admit that nothing was going to get a really quiet surface. Nothing can fix a mediocre pressing, or vinyl with contaminants, or the most deeply ground-in crud.
As with vacuum-type cleaners, the issue of additives to the distilled water used for cleaning also became an issue. Some additives seemed to leave a residue on the cleaned LPs, which residue then came off on the stylus during play, unless one rinsed the records in question with – naturally – a vacuum-type record cleaner and rinse fluid. (I tried to solve the problem by obtaining a second Audio Desk ultrasonic machine for rinse-only purposes but found that it had to be emptied out on a regular basis in order to avoid residue build-up, a process that can become a bit tiresome.)
Eventually, I tried the AI version of ultrasonic cleaning additive, which seemed to do a very good job of cleaning and did not leave a residue.
But did ultrasonic cleaning require water with an additive? I assumed so. Yet, a local dealer acquired a KL Audio ultrasonic cleaning machine (more expensive than the Audio Desk) which was designed to be used with distilled water with no additive. As it happened, I had come into a large group of records around that time, and he and I worked a deal where he would clean and re-sleeve a large number of these records for a fair price, which freed up a significant portion of my time. He cleaned a group of them for my consideration, and I was surprised. With no additive at all, the KL obtained results that rivaled those I was getting with the Audio Desk plus additive.
This raised two questions in my mind: To what extent were all ultrasonic cleaners pretty much the same in performance (which I had assumed was the case); and, as noted, were additives really necessary?
Another issue began to complicate the picture: reliability.
Ultrasonic cleaning machines are complicated, REALLY complicated. In addition to performing the function of directing millions of tiny, tiny compressed air bubbles at or near your vinyl record, which is done on some sort of timed basis, and which may involve multiple intervals during which the record is slowly, or less slowly, spun by a motor in the machine, all of which is followed by a completely different (technology-wise) drying cycle, which also involves different speeds of record rotation (typically) and according to a different timed schedule. The machines must also automatically accept, and later, eject the records, before and after aforesaid process.
From my innocent perspective, it seems somewhat like mashing the mechanisms of a refrigerator compressor and dishwasher into the same box and insisting that they function without fault over and over for years. Not at all the same world as a vacuum-style record cleaner (my first of which did, indeed last for 10+ years before giving up the ghost).
In my case, my Audio Desk(s) each eventually developed pump problems (actually, three pumps over several years, out of four machines). These problems could not be repaired in the US. In each case, the distributor gave me a choice 1) a generous trade-in for a newer model, (and in each case, the newer models were improved) or 2) pay $1200-1300 to return the machine to Germany for repair which was estimated to take 8-12 weeks. The latest iteration of the Audio Desk is said to encompass a complete repair to the pump problem.
My friend’s KL had to be sent back for repairs once during this time as well. Like I say, these are complex machines. And, for that matter, as to LP cleaning, they represent a fairly new technology.
- (Page 1 of 2)
- Next page →
