DIY Ultrasonic album cleaner

SteveRB · « **Reply #120 on:** 9 Jan 2017, 06:08 pm »

Quote from: S Clark on 9 Jan 2017, 06:01 pm

Yep, my scrubbing days are over. The vacuum is just used to dry and remove fluid.
Wait... Are you saying they don't use any surfectant? Just water?

Depending on the hardness of your water, you may not need anything else. Start with plain (filtered/distilled) water and check your results. That was his advice to me.

Folsom · « **Reply #121 on:** 9 Jan 2017, 07:37 pm »

So you don't have to use a vacuum cleaner to dry? I thought that was one of the key ways to make sure it sounded good?

SteveRB · « **Reply #122 on:** 9 Jan 2017, 07:38 pm »

Quote from: Folsom on 9 Jan 2017, 07:37 pm

So you don't have to use a vacuum cleaner to dry? I thought that was one of the key ways to make sure it sounded good?

Drying is up to you. I'm simply commenting on the operation of the US tank.

Folsom · « **Reply #123 on:** 10 Jan 2017, 08:10 pm »

It's just I thought SClark said without vacuuming his, they didn't play as clean.

S Clark · « **Reply #124 on:** 10 Jan 2017, 09:28 pm »

Quote from: Folsom on 10 Jan 2017, 08:10 pm

It's just I thought SClark said without vacuuming his, they didn't play as clean.

I find that my cleaning fluid does suspend crap from the records, and actually pretty quickly - perhaps 10-15 cleanings. Vacuuming pulls it off the record before it can end up back in the groove. So, I'm a big advocate of vacuuming after USC. Why just let the fluid evaporate when you can pull most of it off?

hifi12002 · « **Reply #125 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 12:02 am »

When I use an ultrasonic cleaner, there is usually a “line of debris” that adheres to the record after cleaning, so I have found it necessary to rinse and vacuum the records as well. You might ask, “Is it worth the trouble to use the ultrasonic cleaner and the vacuum?”… And yes it is! I ran a test when I first started using the ultrasonic cleaner and placed a record I had cleaned first with the vacuum and then put it in the ultrasonic cleaner. There was still a lot of particulates liberated from the record (as evident from the line of debris) after using the vacuum first.

mgalusha · « **Reply #126 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 06:03 pm »

I haven't been on AC in a while and happened across this thread, I built one of these recently as well. Since I have a home machine shop I took advantage of it. A 90* worm drive motor from fleabay and the standard 40kHz tank. I had the rest in various bins. Very happy with the results thus far.

rlee8394 · « **Reply #127 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 07:10 pm »

Mike,

Most elegant DIY solution I've seen. Maybe you should think about making a few more for sale. I'm sure there are more than a few who have the same US cleaner (Me) and would like the same setup.

Ron

Nick B · « **Reply #128 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 07:39 pm »

Hi Mike,
If you are up to it, I would be interested if you could do a few units.
Best wishes,
Nick

Folsom · « **Reply #129 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 07:41 pm »

Wow, that really does look simple and effective.

S Clark · « **Reply #130 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 08:35 pm »

That's pretty much the way mine is set up...except Mike's looks professional and mine was thrown together out of scrap plywood, soda straws, a pencil, and hot glue.
Fortunately, they both work, and work great.

poseidonsvoice · « **Reply #131 on:** 11 Jan 2017, 08:38 pm »

^^^^^What they said!

You might have too much on your platter already Mike, I know you are a busy guy...

Awesome work!

Anand.

SteveRB · « **Reply #132 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 02:01 am »

main point is to not get caught up in the details. Ultrasonic cleaning LPs is a marked step beyond vacuum machines.

mgalusha · « **Reply #133 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 02:05 am »

Thanks for the kind words. Certainly wasn't expecting any requests. I'll think about it, my machines are not CNC but once set up it's pretty quick to cut all the pieces. One thing I am going to change is the motor, the one in the photos is 8 RPM at 12V DC, I am running it of some old Casio 5V power brick I found in a box, so perhaps 3.5 - 4 RPM, which is OK but I ordered a 2 RPM unit and it arrived yesterday. It's also 12V, so if run on 6V it should be 1 RPM, either way, I think a little slower is better. The downside is that it's considerably smaller and will require a new mounting plate but I have a lot of 1/4 AL plate so not a big deal. It will also need a different size shaft coupling, 6mm vs 8mm but that's easy enough.

I'll think about what materials will cost, if I make some mounts you would have to source the motor, of course that's easy on ebay.

Folsom · « **Reply #134 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 02:24 am »

If you were setup to quickly produce them, a couple cuts and a few holes, you'd be miles ahead of these people 3d-printing stuff at a huge premium of time and tool use.

It's not like there's any need for it to be fancy.

rlee8394 · « **Reply #135 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 02:37 am »

+1

What Folsom said!

Ron

Hank · « **Reply #136 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 06:15 pm »

+1 I'm interested.

lokie · « **Reply #137 on:** 12 Jan 2017, 07:57 pm »

JDUBS · « **Reply #138 on:** 17 Jan 2017, 02:36 am »

Same! Definitely interested.

-Jim

Batman Basmati · « **Reply #139 on:** 17 Jan 2017, 03:07 am »

Quote from: Folsom on 10 Jan 2017, 08:10 pm

It's just I thought SClark said without vacuuming his, they didn't play as clean.

Who is SClark???