New ultrasonic vinyl cleaner in the works: Humminguru

kvetcha said:
@polypetalous I promise we are not normally this malicious but there's just something about this dude.
Click to expand...
dansomeone said:
I asked him, "Why don't you just take some new or used records that have surface noise and do a before and after?"
He replied, "I don't own any records that have surface noise because I take care of my stuff."
To his credit, he responds to questions, but that pretty much told me all I needed to know.
Click to expand...

I saw his response to the YouTube question about just trying "normally dirty records," and wanted to call BS....
I mean " I have no records with surface noise".... really?
Am I crazy to think that is an impossible statement, assuming you have more than 25 records???
I guess he just has a super curated collection... I dunno seems far-fetched and a bit "attitudinal" (for lack of better term).

I do think its funny how many people praise his reviews and methods, I got a TON of kick-back on my first video for putting "dirty records" (used, naturally dirty from environment) through the HG. I never even thought to empty my vacuum and rub it into the records, for the process.

I really need to film a follow-up video... I kinda feel like I started this tide of "bad reviews." (probably not, but just feel that way).
I HAVE now found success and I think decently so with the HG.... even though my process is a bit more involved and definitely longer, than I initially wanted.

As for being malicious... no worries you all are very civil (in my opinion) and as well you cant make YouTube videos and expect nothin' but love.. aint gonna happen on the 'net.

Ben
 
polypetalous said:
I saw his response to the YouTube question about just trying "normally dirty records," and wanted to call BS....
I mean " I have no records with surface noise".... really?
Am I crazy to think that is an impossible statement, assuming you have more than 25 records???
I guess he just has a super curated collection... I dunno seems far-fetched and a bit "attitudinal" (for lack of better term).

I do think its funny how many people praise his reviews and methods, I got a TON of kick-back on my first video for putting "dirty records" (used, naturally dirty from environment) through the HG. I never even thought to empty my vacuum and rub it into the records, for the process.

I really need to film a follow-up video... I kinda feel like I started this tide of "bad reviews." (probably not, but just feel that way).
I HAVE now found success and I think decently so with the HG.... even though my process is a bit more involved and definitely longer, than I initially wanted.

As for being malicious... no worries you all are very civil (in my opinion) and as well you cant make YouTube videos and expect nothin' but love.. aint gonna happen on the 'net.

Ben
Click to expand...
I don't think you started the tide of bad reviews at all. I think it would be interesting for ya to film a follow up video especially if your view on it has changed and you found some helpful tips to share with users.
 
folsom_lives said:
Everyday he becomes more beard and less man.
Click to expand...

Oh fuck you’re right! I just googled to see what he was upto and from the videos on his front page on youtube 6 years ago he had a normal beard; 3 years ago it was the ridiculousness he has when he did the rant video, that he had to take down, calling us all shits and now he’s a Wookiee!
 
MikeH said:
Mixed up my tergitol +distilled water. Gonna give it a test run today!
Click to expand...
Definitely will want to learn of your impressions. I'm hesitant to go this route, even though I've been thinking a lot about it, partly because I don't want to try to fix what ain't broke, but even more because I'm not sure what improvements it might offer that I actually would be able to detect. What I have done, though, is order a Zerostat 3 off of ebay. I'm hopeful this will eliminate the little bit of crackle I get occasionally that I don't think is the fault of the cleaning process beyond its potential for creating static.
 
Russ I said:
Definitely will want to learn of your impressions. I'm hesitant to go this route, even though I've been thinking a lot about it, partly because I don't want to try to fix what ain't broke, but even more because I'm not sure what improvements it might offer that I actually would be able to detect. What I have done, though, is order a Zerostat 3 off of ebay. I'm hopeful this will eliminate the little bit of crackle I get occasionally that I don't think is the fault of the cleaning process beyond its potential for creating static.
Click to expand...
i think the zerostat is a fantastic investment. I'm trying to decide what i should try to clean with the tergitol to find what actual difference it may make. I might try to find one record that is visibly clean but still crackles a little? i tried it on a fairly beat up zeppelin record but still has lots of crackle on it in quiet sections. it definitely wets the records much better though.
 
polypetalous said:
I saw his response to the YouTube question about just trying "normally dirty records," and wanted to call BS....
I mean " I have no records with surface noise".... really?
Am I crazy to think that is an impossible statement, assuming you have more than 25 records???
I guess he just has a super curated collection... I dunno seems far-fetched and a bit "attitudinal" (for lack of better term).

I do think its funny how many people praise his reviews and methods, I got a TON of kick-back on my first video for putting "dirty records" (used, naturally dirty from environment) through the HG. I never even thought to empty my vacuum and rub it into the records, for the process.

I really need to film a follow-up video... I kinda feel like I started this tide of "bad reviews." (probably not, but just feel that way).
I HAVE now found success and I think decently so with the HG.... even though my process is a bit more involved and definitely longer, than I initially wanted.

As for being malicious... no worries you all are very civil (in my opinion) and as well you cant make YouTube videos and expect nothin' but love.. aint gonna happen on the 'net.

Ben
Click to expand...
Yeah, someone who states that not a single record they have has any surface noise and implies that only people who don't "take care of their records" have records with surface noise is not someone I'm ever going to trust their opinion on anything related to vinyl tbh.
 
dhodo said:
Yeah, someone who states that not a single record they have has any surface noise and implies that only people who don't "take care of their records" have records with surface noise is not someone I'm ever going to trust their opinion on anything related to vinyl tbh.
Click to expand...
And if it were true, what would be the point of fucking around with the HumminGuru?! (or any other record cleaner, for that matter)
 
I'm not necessarily at liberty to share this (as I didn't ask to, but wasn't told I couldn't), but I thought I'd go ahead and share with you all (please keep this here only), some insight into "surfactant use etc." I got from one of our favorite "love him or hate him" audiophiles...
Really just for "fun" and more of a "general about ultrasonic cleaners, rather than specific to the HG" but helped guide my current process a bit:

Watched the first video. My advice there: you waited 13 minutes before doing anything related to the machine. Just a lot of talking! That drives me crazy! I'd open a video and use the machine FIRST then backtrack to the rest.

But that's just me....
  1. You do not want a "heated machine"! Cavitation creates heat. In fact, not knowing the water temperature can be a problem if you clean too many records in a row and the water gets too hot! 100 degrees MAX. I'd get a thermometer and test the vat water temperature!
  2. Distilled water is recommended by every cavitation machine manufacturer for very good reasons. You don't want "hard water" minerals in the cavitation process.
  3. Water and cavitation itself cannot clean a record If you were disappointed with the results that's probably why. I don't see how cavitation alone can emulsify grease from fingerprints (etc.). The Audio Desk and DeGritter have associated detergents.
  4. Audio Intelligent now makes a surfactant/cleaner it claims is safe for use with any cavitation machine. I just got it in and will try it. I suggest trying it yourself. It's non foaming and should not damage anything.
  5. The Kirmuss machine uses 40ml of 70% alcohol in the nearly 2 gallon vat. That acts secondarily as a cleaning agent but primarily to kill off live or dormant fungus. The rest of his process removes "baked on" record cleaners used on used records over the years. In my experience it really works but is time consuming.
  6. I use the Audio Deske with its fluid and afterwards I spray the record with distilled water and dry with a microfiber cloth (takes very little time). Why? The detergent on the wet record gets dried onto the record by the fan.
  7. So if you don't use some kind of surfactant/wetting agent (etc.) I don't see how just cavitation is going to remove oils and fingerprints etc. but if you do use such an agent and then dry the record with a fan, you dry some of the surfactant onto the record! So that's why it's a good idea to spray record with distilled water and hand dry.....
Michael Fremer
editor, analogplanet.com
Stereophile senior contributing editor


Ben
 
NateOEB said:
For people using a surfactant are you doing a water only second rinse?
Click to expand...
This wouldn't be feasible if the unit were being used for that second rinse, since it would involve removing the record from the unit, dumping the contents from the tank (which had been drained from the cleaning area prior to drying), refilling the cleaning area with fresh distilled water, putting the record (and tank) back into the unit, then running another cleaning and drying cycle. That's not a series of extra steps I'd be down for. Looknig at @polypetalous' post about Fremer's advice, a spray of distilled water and hand dry might be the most efficient solution.
 
polypetalous said:
I'm not necessarily at liberty to share this (as I didn't ask to, but wasn't told I couldn't), but I thought I'd go ahead and share with you all (please keep this here only), some insight into "surfactant use etc." I got from one of our favorite "love him or hate him" audiophiles...
Really just for "fun" and more of a "general about ultrasonic cleaners, rather than specific to the HG" but helped guide my current process a bit:

Watched the first video. My advice there: you waited 13 minutes before doing anything related to the machine. Just a lot of talking! That drives me crazy! I'd open a video and use the machine FIRST then backtrack to the rest.

But that's just me....
  1. You do not want a "heated machine"! Cavitation creates heat. In fact, not knowing the water temperature can be a problem if you clean too many records in a row and the water gets too hot! 100 degrees MAX. I'd get a thermometer and test the vat water temperature!
  2. Distilled water is recommended by every cavitation machine manufacturer for very good reasons. You don't want "hard water" minerals in the cavitation process.
  3. Water and cavitation itself cannot clean a record If you were disappointed with the results that's probably why. I don't see how cavitation alone can emulsify grease from fingerprints (etc.). The Audio Desk and DeGritter have associated detergents.
  4. Audio Intelligent now makes a surfactant/cleaner it claims is safe for use with any cavitation machine. I just got it in and will try it. I suggest trying it yourself. It's non foaming and should not damage anything.
  5. The Kirmuss machine uses 40ml of 70% alcohol in the nearly 2 gallon vat. That acts secondarily as a cleaning agent but primarily to kill off live or dormant fungus. The rest of his process removes "baked on" record cleaners used on used records over the years. In my experience it really works but is time consuming.
  6. I use the Audio Deske with its fluid and afterwards I spray the record with distilled water and dry with a microfiber cloth (takes very little time). Why? The detergent on the wet record gets dried onto the record by the fan.
  7. So if you don't use some kind of surfactant/wetting agent (etc.) I don't see how just cavitation is going to remove oils and fingerprints etc. but if you do use such an agent and then dry the record with a fan, you dry some of the surfactant onto the record! So that's why it's a good idea to spray record with distilled water and hand dry.....
Michael Fremer
editor, analogplanet.com
Stereophile senior contributing editor


Ben
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing! I trust Michael's advice.

This all makes sense to me, but raises the question of whether fingerprints are really worth worrying about (given this is the only category of imperfection mentioned as unlikely to be eradicated by cavitation)? For my purposes, I'm not finding fingerprints to be much of an issue, so apart from them, are distilled water and cavitation sufficient to remove dirt/dust? Based on my experience with the Humminguru, the answer is yes, though in some cases the cleaning/drying process attracts a bit of dust, and I'm working on eradicating that after-the-fact. I also concur that grease/grime is not likely to be removed, and, again, for my purposes, I'd be happy to address that separately (perhaps with a spray of cleaner and cloth) in the rare instances when it's an issue. I guess the bottom line for me is that I'm not going to follow a path that builds a "second step" into the cleaning process (i.e., HumminGuru with surfactant followed by spraying with distilled water and drying with a cloth) unless and until I'm convinced it's necessary. I know myself too well to pretend this wouldn't deter me from cleaning my records.
 
Russ I said:
That's not a series of extra steps I'd be down for. Looking at @polypetalous' post about Fremer's advice, a spray of distilled water and hand dry might be the most efficient solution.
Click to expand...
Totally agree on that being a lot of extra steps, I also don't want to do. I tried looking for an extra water tank online but no luck, thinking having a 2nd tank of just water could replace the surfactant tank as a second auto cycle but that would still likely leave at least a minimal amount of surfactant in the works. Hand drying kind of takes away the most appealing element, in the fan drying, of the HG to me too though. Maybe something like a quick scrub of the record with a distilled water/ surfactant mix and then only distilled water in the HG would mean minimal surfactant remains on the record but is there to help penetrate the grooves initially. OR buy a whole second unit and one is the surfactant machine and the 2nd is only water.

tumblr_o7v2xrrNZC1uo7myio1_540.jpg
 
NateOEB said:
Totally agree on that being a lot of extra steps, I also don't want to do. I tried looking for an extra water tank online but no luck, thinking having a 2nd tank of just water could replace the surfactant tank as a second auto cycle but that would still likely leave at least a minimal amount of surfactant in the works. Hand drying kind of takes away the most appealing element, in the fan drying, of the HG to me too though. Maybe something like a quick scrub of the record with a distilled water/ surfactant mix and then only distilled water in the HG would mean minimal surfactant remains on the record but is there to help penetrate the grooves initially. OR buy a whole second unit and one is the surfactant machine and the 2nd is only water.

tumblr_o7v2xrrNZC1uo7myio1_540.jpg
Click to expand...
There's so little surfactant in the tank to begin with (two drops for almost 400mL of water) that I can't imagine any significant level would remain after a second wash. I don't even bother with a rinse and haven't noticed issues.

Not that I fault anyone who decides to do a separate rinse.
 
Even though I DO have an extra HG water tank...
I too am NOT doing a separate "rinse cycle and/or distilled water only wash/wipe."
Which is kind of why I am currently using the Groovewasher G2 fluid in my HG, as it is specifically made to use with either rinse or no rinse.

Considering I used to just add the Groovewasher G2 (or back in the day D3/D4) directly to the record without a rinse, I can't say as I have ever had a residual residue issue...


Ben
 
polypetalous said:
Even though I DO have an extra HG water tank...
I too am NOT doing a separate "rinse cycle and/or distilled water only wash/wipe."
Which is kind of why I am currently using the Groovewasher G2 fluid in my HG, as it is specifically made to use with either rinse or no rinse.

Considering I used to just add the Groovewasher G2 (or back in the day D3/D4) directly to the record without a rinse, I can't say as I have ever had a residual residue issue...


Ben
Click to expand...
I did order some Groovewasher G-Sonic concentrate, looking forward to giving that a whirl. Seems to have gotten the official thumbs up from Humminguru.
 
kvetcha said:
I did order some Groovewasher G-Sonic concentrate, looking forward to giving that a whirl. Seems to have gotten the official thumbs up from Humminguru.
Click to expand...

That's the direction I'm looking to try next... I actually reached out to Groovewasher when I was first doing my review videos and just so happens they had a HumminGuru they were testing with at the same time....
They shared their results with me (no affiliation with Groovewasher, but they are an extremely friendly and upfront company)..
Here is what THEY were first seeing in their HG with Distilled Water ONLY:
After Distilled only Auto Clean:
Gsonic WO.jpg

And here is WITH One-drop G-Sonic added to HG bath (Auto Clean):
Gsonic W.jpg

Again, sharing this here ONLY as I didn't get permission to share, but all-in-all the G-Sonic sounds like a great approach.


Ben
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top