Ultrasonic cleaner

[Swerd]

Earlier this fall I bought one of these ultrasonic cleaners. It has turned out to be a very useful tool.

It works with ultrasonic sound vibrations (42,000 Hz) in water. Microscopic bubbles rapidly form and collapse, creating a shearing action (cavitation) that very quickly suspends dust, dirt, and grime. It helps if you add a drop of liquid dish detergent to the water.

I got it because my wife has repeatedly bugged me about her dull & dirty looking jewelery. She had used an old toothbrush on them. When we got it, I hung her engagement ring on a length of dental floss (any string would work), dangled it in the bath (without touching the bottom) with the sonicator on, and moved it around until I found the sweet spot. In that sweet spot, I could easily see a poof of suspended grime come right off the ring. I could also feel the vibration through the string. It cleaned the stone in a fraction of a second. She soon tried it on all her jewelry, and she loves it.

For $26 its much cheaper than new jewelry .

I've also used it on eyeglasses and my watchband. I couldn't believe all the black gunk that came off my watchband .

So why am I talking about this at AH? The other day I tried cleaning the stylus from my phono cartridge. Again, hanging from dental floss, within one second of finding the sweet spot, it came clean. I rinsed it with clean water, and let it air dry completely. I can't say it sounds any different, but I've never tried cleaning it before. This method is gentle and easy.

The sonicator I have is large enough to hold eyeglasses. If you had one large enough to partially insert an old dirty vinyl record, it would probably work better than any of those ridiculously expensive vacuum contraptions. Just an idea.

 

[Alex2507]

For $26 its much cheaper than new jewelry .

Hmmm ... I think I still need to get the ring first ... right?

 

[Swerd]

The sonicator I have is large enough to hold eyeglasses. If you had one large enough to partially insert an old dirty vinyl record, it would probably work better than any of those ridiculously expensive vacuum contraptions. Just an idea.

The more I think of this, the more I like this idea.

The main source of dirt on vinyl records is dust and greasy fingerprints. When a pickup needle passes through a groove, there is briefly great pressure between the vinyl groove wall and the stylus. If there is dust and dusty grease present, it acts as an abrasive, wearing the vinyl surface.

Dust gets attracted to vinyl surface and grooves by static electricity, and anti-static treatment can help minimize that. But once dust is suspended in greasy fingerprints it cannot be so easily removed. Cleaning with brushes or velvet, even if wet with water or detergents, can make it worse by pushing the dirt deeper into the record grooves. Mechanical agitation, ultrasonic cavitation, in the presence of a mild detergent solution in water is the answer. The detergent solution will dissolve the greasy fingerprint oils with time, but the ultrasonic cavitaion will greatly speed up that process.

I'm thinking of an ultrasonic cleaner of roughly this size

The picture is of this device, which sells for $80. Kind of expensive for a plastic dip tank with some brushes, rollers and overpriced detergent and water.

If my cleaner is roughly 4"×6" and cost $26, how expensive would a sonicator large enough for a LP record be?

 

[Swerd]

This one costs $80 and is 10.4" long x 6.5" wide x 3.15" deep. Heating is probably not needed to clean records.

This costs $99, but I can't find dimensions.

Compare that to the various $400 to $1000 Nitty Gritty cleaners. I've never met anyone who had one.

Enough idle thoughts for tonight.

 

[Kem]

LP sonicator

I came up with exactly the same idea. My entire set of LPs was ruined when my landlord's washing machine overflowed while I was away for a month many years ago. Water seeped under the wall and soaked my living room carpet, and then unfortunately also soaked my records that were stacked vertically on the carpet. By the time I got back, all the records were glued to and dried their paper jackets and mold had formed ofcourse in every layer. I had the LPs "professionally cleaned" but they are still crap. I believe a sonicator is the only way to get the mold and hardened junk out of the grooves. Wish I could find one 12" long and 4" deep.

 

[Swerd]

I came up with exactly the same idea. My entire set of LPs was ruined when my landlord's washing machine overflowed while I was away for a month many years ago. Water seeped under the wall and soaked my living room carpet, and then unfortunately also soaked my records that were stacked vertically on the carpet. By the time I got back, all the records were glued to and dried their paper jackets and mold had formed ofcourse in every layer. I had the LPs "professionally cleaned" but they are still crap. I believe a sonicator is the only way to get the mold and hardened junk out of the grooves. Wish I could find one 12" long and 4" deep.

Maybe your landlord can buy you one . This one that I linked, at 10.4" might be large enough. Run a length of string through the hole in the record, suspend it in the tank, and gradually turn the record while the sonicator is on. It might take some time before dried paper gets wet enough to come off. Heat, cavitation and detergent will help.

The price for larger bath sonicators starts getting increasingly expensive.

12.8" wide 6 liter tank 300 watts for $260

11.8" wide 6 liter tank 380 watts for $279

Good luck, and if this idea works, please let us know here. You may be on the cutting edge of vinyl cleaning technology .

 

[slipperybidness]

First you are correct in suspending the items, if you let them rest on the bottom it will eventually burn out the motor on the sonicator. I learned this the hard way.

I would be very, very cautious with this method as those ultrasonic vibrations can deteriorate many materials. Not a problem with metal in general, but I don't know that I would wan to put a delicate stylus in there. Maybe if you had access to a microscope or maybe a jewelers loop to inspect it and be sure you haven't damaged anything.

Vinyl, I would proceed with great caution, try one out before you put all your records in there. I have experience doing testing on various materials for contamination and particle generation and I know that if you put latex in a sonicator then it will greatly speed up its degradation. Vinyl is somewhat more durable, but in all honesty if it were my records I don't think I would do it.

 

[Kem]

The 10.4" model would probably be OK for the length (a 12-inch record will go in the diagonal) but it is too shallow (need 4" depth to cover the grooved area). The $260 model might be best. I'm not worried about degrading the vinyl of the records. They are totally useless now. I don't get a shred of enjoyment listening to the static that drowns out what used to be beautiful classical music. Either this sonication process, done judiciously and at low temperature, will restore them to their 1960s condition, or the records will be headed for the trash heap anyhow.

 

[Swerd]

First you are correct in suspending the items, if you let them rest on the bottom it will eventually burn out the motor on the sonicator. I learned this the hard way.

I would be very, very cautious with this method as those ultrasonic vibrations can deteriorate many materials. Not a problem with metal in general, but I don't know that I would wan to put a delicate stylus in there. Maybe if you had access to a microscope or maybe a jewelers loop to inspect it and be sure you haven't damaged anything.

Vinyl, I would proceed with great caution, try one out before you put all your records in there. I have experience doing testing on various materials for contamination and particle generation and I know that if you put latex in a sonicator then it will greatly speed up its degradation. Vinyl is somewhat more durable, but in all honesty if it were my records I don't think I would do it.

Sonication is actually a lot more gentle than you think. I use to work in a biochemistry research lab, and a bath sonicator was a commonly used tool. It took a lot of time in the sonicator before tissues would break up and cells became fragmented. Vinyl LPs and pick up styluses are more likely to get damaged by brushes than by sonication.

 

[3db]

Sonication is actually a lot more gentle than you think. I use to work in a biochemistry research lab, and a bath sonicator was a commonly used tool. It took a lot of time in the sonicator before tissues would break up and cells became fragmented. Vinyl LPs and pick up styluses are more likely to get damaged by brushes than by sonication.

True enough..but you may want to have a vacuum attachment to suck the cleaning fluid off the album surface after the sonificiation.


About the dry brush and even wet brush techniques..I have albums that are older than dirt...like my Led Zeppelin collection and all I ever used was the disc washer brush. These albums still play very clean with hardly a pop or tick. My friends are amazed at how clean they sound for an album over 30 years old that must have seen in teh vicinity of a hundred plays. The only time I use the liquid is when I buy a used record.

If I can keep my records sound this good for this long, then I can't help but think that the brushes such as the old disc washer brush are getting at the dirt and lifting it out instead of pushing it into the groove even deeper. I'm just sharing my experience.

 

[Whitey80]

those are nice and cheap! I paid $900 for mine.

It is a medical grade unit though, little bit different.

Tips on use: use distilled water and a powder product called "Alcanox" in it....unbelievable cleaning


I have actually dropped in carburetors from motorcycles that have been sitting in the elements for 50+ years and they came out looking and working like new. Of course, then they need a trip through the autoclave as well after being in that ultrasonic. nasty.

 

[slipperybidness]

Yeah, if it's sonicate or trash the records then you have nothing to lose.

Yes, Alconox is a quality product, and that is actually used in many labs as an all-purpose detergent, so I would think that may work well and not leave residue.

I've worked in labs for over 10yrs and sonication is by no means a gentle process. It is a quite vigorous process that I would take great care with anything delicate.

 

[Swerd]

Yes, Alconox is a quality product, and that is actually used in many labs as an all-purpose detergent, so I would think that may work well and not leave residue.

As with any detergent, use as little as possible. Alconox, when used as intended makes the solution rather alkalline (pH of 9.5). That could loosen the glue on a record's paper label.

Rinse it well.

I've worked in labs for over 10yrs and sonication is by no means a gentle process. It is a quite vigorous process that I would take great care with anything delicate.

I guess it depends on how powerful a sonicator you use. Those I've used were very gentle. All the models I linked above are not large industrial sonicators and are likely to be very gentle.