Vinyl Cleaning - The Dirty Truth Letter from Mat Weisfeld, VPI Industries

[Golucid]

On 19 April 2015 I emailed Mat Weisfeld of VPI Industries directly and this morning, 8:13 a.m. Pacific, I at long last received a reply.

Note: I've communicated with Mat over the years, so I still have his email address. Plus, I have talked with him on the phone a few times. Mat is personable, friendly and genuinely a helpful nice guy. Oh, and he's really busy!

Anyway, I sent Mat an email detailing my thoughts very blunt which I will not share here because it would not be appropriate. But, Mat does a great job summing it up politically correct and fairly sanitized. Yeah, a gentle letter but gets that point accross.

My thought: VPI is [and also, ClearAudio] are respected leaders in the industry. I personally find it interesting that they have both not embraced ULTRASonic vinyl care as a solo solution. Though, ClearAudio is using a vibration method...and noteably NON-ULTRASonic but facilitating an alternate sonic technique less aggressive.

Historical info: you can circle back to my recent tests here on AS about my experience using the VPI wet method and the two leaning ultrasonics currently available: VPI | Audio Desk | Klaudio: which RCM is right for you?


My findings are in line with Harry Weisfeld, VPI Industries. For me, arguing with Harry is every bit as fruitless arguing a point with Dan [Double-D]. I would embarrassingly loose.

LETTER FROM VPI INDUSTRIES. ALSO SEE PHOTOS FROM VPI


Hi David,

I'm not sure if I already responded to your email or if I have responded to this specific question so much that I'm loosing my mind

Harry ended up buying all the units out there and ended up not liking them because of the price points and the cleaning job they did. They did nice but not nice enough to justify needing to take out a loan to buy them! Here is a picture of Harry's lab for cleaning. He put together a DIY ultrasonic cleaning machine that cost him about $500 and cleans better. This DIY solution is the exact reason we will NOT be making our own ultrasonic cleaner because it just doesn't make sense and the ultra sonic really needs to be combined with a VPI cleaning machine to seal the deal.

Here is a link to Harry's thread on it all: Harry's Cleaning Process

Hope this gives more insight one how to get the best clean!


---
Sincerely,
Mat Weisfeld

 

[Myles B. Astor]

On 19 April 2015 I emailed Mat Weisfeld of VPI Industries directly and this morning, 8:13 a.m. Pacific, I at long last received a reply.

Note: I've communicated with Mat over the years, so I still have his email address. Plus, I have talked with him on the phone a few times. Mat is personable, friendly and genuinely a helpful nice guy. Oh, and he's really busy!

Anyway, I sent Mat an email detailing my thoughts very blunt which I will not share here because it would not be appropriate. But, Mat does a great job summing it up politically correct and fairly sanitized. Yeah, a gentle letter but gets that point accross.

My thought: VPI is [and also, ClearAudio] are respected leaders in the industry. I personally find it interesting that they have both not embraced ULTRASonic vinyl care as a solo solution. Though, ClearAudio is using a vibration method...and noteably NON-ULTRASonic but facilitating an alternate sonic technique less aggressive.

Historical info: you can circle back to my recent tests here on AA about my experience using the VPI wet method and the two leaning ultrasonics currently available: VPI | Audio Desk | Klaudio: which RCM is right for you?

My findings are in line with Harry Weisfeld, VPI Industries. For me, arguing with Harry is every bit as fruitless arguing a point with Dan [JDandy]. I would embarrassingly loose.

LETTER FROM VPI INDUSTRIES. ALSO SEE PHOTOS FROM VPI


Hi David,

I'm not sure if I already responded to your email or if I have responded to this specific question so much that I'm loosing my mind

Harry ended up buying all the units out there and ended up not liking them because of the price points and the cleaning job they did. They did nice but not nice enough to justify needing to take out a loan to buy them! Here is a picture of Harry's lab for cleaning. He put together a DIY ultrasonic cleaning machine that cost him about $500 and cleans better. This DIY solution is the exact reason we will NOT be making our own ultrasonic cleaner because it just doesn't make sense and the ultra sonic really needs to be combined with a VPI cleaning machine to seal the deal.

Here is a link to Harry's thread on it all: Harry's Cleaning Process

Hope this gives more insight one how to get the best clean!


---
Sincerely,
Mat Weisfeld

Harry and I disagree about this subject but if you visit the VPI forum, there is more discussion on this topic.

 

[Golucid]

Harry and I disagree about this subject but if you visit the VPI forum, there is more discussion on this topic.

Yes, I have been reading the 13 pages. But, In my own experience, and I have the three machines: VPI + AudioDesk + Kaludio. I get best results including the VPI in the cleaning process. Perhaps it's just isolated to my many thousands of LPs, 12", 10" and 7"s. All are a combination of USA, UK, German, Japanese and a few other countries of origin.

There's a quote I like that Dan [Double-D] recently stated, "Through the years we have come to the conclusion that we must agree to simply disagree about this topic and we no longer discuss it. Since his sound system only has to make him happy, who am I to insist his attitude is misguided. This is a classic case of live and let live."

Again, it's impossible to say my method is ideal for someone else. At the very least, I invite everyone to ask questions and that costs zero dollars!

 

[Myles B. Astor]

Yes, I have been reading the 13 pages. But, In my own experience, and I have the three machines: VPI + AudioDesk + Kaludio. I get best results including the VPI in the cleaning process. Perhaps it's just isolated to my many thousands of LPs, 12", 10" and 7"s. All are a combination of USA, UK, German, Japanese and a few other countries of origin.

There's a quote I like that Dan [Double-D] recently stated, "Through the years we have come to the conclusion that we must agree to simply disagree about this topic and we no longer discuss it. Since his sound system only has to make him happy, who am I to insist his attitude is misguided. This is a classic case of live and let live."

Again, it's impossible to say my method is ideal for someone else. At the very least, I invite everyone to ask questions and that costs zero dollars!

I can understand why. I really don't hear what HW is complaining about in the upper octaves with the US based machines. Maybe it was a quirk of what LP was used. In fact I hear just the opposite with traditional vacuum based machines with much of the result directly traceable to what RCF is used. But even the best RCF fluids still close in the upper octaves.

I do love like the brushes as used in the AD cleaner.

But the choice would be if one could or had to choose just one method and didn't want to spend 25 minutes cleaning one LP???

 

[Steve]

Sure, I will be mindful to change the water more often but I will continue to argue that the AD is more sympathetic of the US choices on the market because of what it employs in its design and operation.

 

[o0OBillO0o]

But the choice would be if one could or had to choose just one method and didn't want to spend 25 minutes cleaning one LP???

Myles- I think this is a notable point. There can be copious amounts of time and money spent on cleaning and cleaning accessories.

The vignette I see: "Oooh! I want to listen to [this] album." pull it from the storage shelf, remove the disc from the sleeve and glean the "tonearm light" off the surface to only find that some dust and stray fuzzies have populated the surface. "Okay I'll use a brush to knock off that unwanted filth." after a few rotations and delicate sweeps, the needle is dropped only to find that a greater effort must be placed in restoring the surface to acceptable playback standards. Now, at this point you 'may' decide to forgo the the listening session and find a cleaner or newer disc. However, determined to get the music playing the time of enjoyment is further delayed by [longer than you like time frame] spent cleaning with a Record Cleaning Machine (RCM).

Now, a method and discipline would be to set aside a queue with a four record capacity. When a record meets your criteria of dirty, place it in the queue. When the queue is full, spend the time to clean the four records [while you listen to other records ]. Of course the compromise is that this in not anticipatory record cleaning, but reactive. The reactive nature has a potential to be more efficient with your time. If anyone can crack that code of anticipatory record playing, you'd be a superstar.

Now to the real pie in the sky stuff: I suppose the easy way is to plan playlist, but that's no fun. Music generally runs and is sourced from moods / emotions and environment. What we need is robotic solution to clean ALL the records with a lower risk of damage that what we could do. Then we can let whatever that motivates us to play be ready to go. Oh and make it valuable and cost effective to time. For certain a robo RCM will cost lots of money.

Does anyone else have a suggested cleaning methodology and/or discipline? Please share because we can only learn from you.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I've owned the VPI 16.5, 1 Loricraft PRC3, 1 Loricraft PRC4, 3 Audio Desk Systeme's, and a few updates of the Klaudio.

at one point I had the PRC4, and Audio Desk, and the KLaudio at the same time.

now I just have the Klaudio.

I know that I could obsess about the minutia of combining machines and all that stuff, but going forward I simply don't think about it that much and just 'touch up' already cleaned Lps as needed with the Klaudio and do a double clean to 'new to me' used Lps. my Klaudio sits in the hallway outside the room; I can clean one record while I listen to another. so almost zero time spent cleaning and not listening.

I don't see myself in an acquisition mode again where I have lots of older Lps that need special attention. I've moved on to just enjoying them and find it's the right approach for me.

I respect that is not the right thing for everyone.

I do think that as a final clean to an already clean or new record, particularly when you consider ease of use and mechanical longevity, it's hard to beat the Klaudio as a one machine solution.

YMMV, only my 2 cents, and all that stuff.

oh, and btw....if the Lp sits on my shelf I know it already is acceptable to my ears to play. OTOH i'm one of those that easily listens 'thru' some noise and do not get twisted about it. but we are not all the same on that issue.

 

[Golucid]

I do think that as a final clean to an already clean or new record, particularly when you consider ease of use and mechanical longevity, it's hard to beat the Klaudio as a one machine solution.

I am all for the one machine solution. I dread having to go through the long cleaning process through three machines. I am eager to audition the ClearAudio Double Matrix Sonic. This machine on the surface seems to address the best of both worlds using both a traditional wet and a sonic [not to be confused with Ultrasonic] method to clean your vinyl. If this machine is capable of performing and delivery exceptional results, I will cheerfully dump the VPI, AudioDesk and Klaudio for that all-in-one solution.

"...i'm one of those that easily listens 'thru' some noise and do not get twisted about it. but we are not all the same on that issue.

Oh I wish I could let go just a little. The snap crackle pop and static... just hearing it once drives me nuts.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I am all for the one machine solution. I dread having to go through the long cleaning process through three machines. I am eager to audition the ClearAudio Double Matrix Sonic. This machine on the surface seems to address the best of both worlds using both a traditional wet and a sonic [not to be confused with Ultrasonic] method to clean your vinyl. If this machine is capable of performing and delivery exceptional results, I will cheerfully dump the VPI, AudioDesk and Klaudio for that all-in-one solution.

Oh I wish I could let go just a little. The snap crackle pop and static... just hearing it once drives me nuts.

I have approximately 8000 Lps. and maybe 30-50 that 'snap, crackle and pop'. certainly maybe 3-5-7% have some minor surface noise or a tic or two, but the vast majority i'd say are essentially noise free where no one's comfort zone would be alerted by noise.

those 30-50 that are really noisy have to be truly outstanding music and sound otherwise to have still earned their way onto a shelf spot.

when i'm playing vinyl it's so infrequent to notice noise it's almost a non-issue. I mostly touch up dusty records based on how it looks, not anything I hear.

so i'm simply not motivated to make record cleaning any more of an issue than I do now.

I did jettison approximately 4000 records a couple of years ago to cull the herd that I was not really listening to; that group required more attention as far as cleaning and noise to enter my regular use shelf areas. maybe one's reality on noise can be effected by the particular group of records you have.....or maybe even the performance difference between vinyl and digital in your system. if the vinyl does not smoke the digital then the toleration for noise from vinyl could be much more limited.

we all have our perspectives.

 

[o0OBillO0o]

I have approximately 8000 Lps. and maybe 30-50 that 'snap, crackle and pop'. certainly maybe 3-5-7% have some minor surface noise or a tic or two, but the vast majority i'd say are essentially noise free where no one's comfort zone would be alerted by noise.

those 30-50 that are really noisy have to be truly outstanding music and sound otherwise to have still earned their way onto a shelf spot.

when i'm playing vinyl it's so infrequent to notice noise it's almost a non-issue. I mostly touch up dusty records based on how it looks, not anything I hear.

so i'm simply not motivated to make record cleaning any more of an issue than I do now.

I did jettison approximately 4000 records a couple of years ago to cull the heard that I was not really listening to; that group required more attention as far as cleaning and noise to enter my regular use shelf areas. maybe one's reality on noise can be effected by the particular group of records you have.....or maybe even the performance difference between vinyl and digital in your system. if the vinyl does not smoke the digital then the toleration for noise from vinyl could be much more limited.

we all have our perspectives.

:goodpost:

Well, I am lame. I just started collecting records I have not spent money on 12,000 records, and hope to make each purchase a keeper 60% of the time- BUT my experience with noiseless records reflects yours.

 

[a.wayne]

I have approximately 8000 Lps. and maybe 30-50 that 'snap, crackle and pop'. certainly maybe 3-5-7% have some minor surface noise or a tic or two, but the vast majority i'd say are essentially noise free where no one's comfort zone would be alerted by noise.

those 30-50 that are really noisy have to be truly outstanding music and sound otherwise to have still earned their way onto a shelf spot.

when i'm playing vinyl it's so infrequent to notice noise it's almost a non-issue. I mostly touch up dusty records based on how it looks, not anything I hear.

so i'm simply not motivated to make record cleaning any more of an issue than I do now.

I did jettison approximately 4000 records a couple of years ago to cull the heard that I was not really listening to; that group required more attention as far as cleaning and noise to enter my regular use shelf areas. maybe one's reality on noise can be effected by the particular group of records you have.....or maybe even the performance difference between vinyl and digital in your system. if the vinyl does not smoke the digital then the toleration for noise from vinyl could be much more limited.

we all have our perspectives.

Wow Uncle Mike,

8000 lp's and only 50 crackle pop, that's pretty fantastic , I can't say I'm that fortunate from a total of 1500, quite a few from an era when I wasn't that careful about loaners ...


Congrats on the recent upgrades to the room and system........

 

[Mike Lavigne]

:goodpost:

Well, I am lame. I just started collecting records I have not spent money on 12,000 records, and hope to make each purchase a keeper 60% of the time- BUT my experience with noiseless records reflects yours.

thanks.

I've been collecting records actively since 1994; for the 1st 10-15 years at a crazy rate. the last 5-6 years at a much reduced rate until now it's only a trickle. hence my view on RCM's. I acquired about half those 12,000 from the purchase of three different collections (about $5k total spent on the collections), another likely 2000 from thrift stores for a dollar apiece over my first 5-10 years collecting. so the other 4000 were purchased new or individually used at retail values.

good luck with collection building. it's been great fun and very satisfying for me; I am emotionally connected to my records for sure.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Wow Uncle Mike,

8000 lp's and only 50 crackle pop, that's pretty fantastic , I can't say I'm that fortunate from a total of 1500, quite a few from an era when I wasn't that careful about loaners ...

most with considerable 'snap, crackle, pop' are discarded. my point was that I have kept a few (30-50) with considerable noise since I loved something about the record (could even be the art work).

I also said that 3-7% of my records do have some noise or occasional tics, but the vast majority do not.

many groups of records have noise; but you might have found that group from someone else's discards (even mine although I throw away the worst noisy ones). and no doubt some collections might be from a Library lending system where God only knows how they might have been treated.

Congrats on the recent upgrades to the room and system........

thanks.....it is really fun to listen right now. although I notice i'm not getting much done...I just want to listen.

 

[MusicDirector]

I'd love a one/two punch set up like a VPI and an ultrasonic as final step, but all I have is a VPI 16.5 and AI fluids. The US machines are just too expensive for me to run to and 400 records hardly justifies getting one at the costs they are. I can say though, that about 25 to 30 of my 400+ records have a crackle or snap someplace, I can't tolerate pops (not as good a ratio as 30 to 50 out of 8000, but not too bad either). None very loud, but still easily heard. The rest are nearly dead silent, but a run through an ultrasonic would finalize absolute black background to a degree.
Granted, it can take more than one pass on my VPI to get them good and clean, I've gone 3 passes in one sitting on occasion. Yes, it does take time and I totally understand why one would not want to spend all that time cleaning records, nothing wrong with that. We all have different patience tolerances. Personally, I don't mind, I figure it's just the nature of the game and the prize is sweet enough to do it.

As for those occasional noises on a few records, I grew up with vinyl and it's just the nature of the beast.

I think what we need is record cleaning robots! I'd probably name mine Jeeves if I could not come up with something better.

~Eric

 

[jdandy]

:goodpost:

Well, I am lame. I just started collecting records I have not spent money on 12,000 records, and hope to make each purchase a keeper 60% of the time- BUT my experience with noiseless records reflects yours.

Bill.......I'll play devil's advocate for a moment. There is no such thing as a noiseless record. There are extremely well pressed and quiet records but even those are not noiseless. Even a silent groove without any modulation cut in virgin vinyl is not noiseless. There are always micro irregularities in groove walls (not dirt or debris) coupled with the unavoidable contact friction and the inherent noise generated by dragging a dry diamond stylus through a groove in contact with two dry vinyl walls. Perhaps a contactless stylus, aka the laser stylus may eliminate those physical anomalies but that's a whole different subject.

At any rate, I am an advocate of quiet, clean vinyl. The elimination of aggravating levels of noise in vinyl playback is essential for me to be able to concentrate and be transported uninterrupted to the place great music reproduction takes us. I hate it when my imaginary performance bubble is burst by a pop or tic or worse when I had been effortlessly floating in a musical fantasy. Having said that, to listen to vinyl and enjoy the performances one has to train the mind to filter out a certain level of elevated background noise. Even with the best of equipment and perfectly clean and well pressed vinyl there is still no such thing as a noiseless record.

OK, I'll step down now.

 

[MusicDirector]

There's a quote I like that Dan [Double-D] recently stated, "Through the years we have come to the conclusion that we must agree to simply disagree about this topic and we no longer discuss it. Since his sound system only has to make him happy, who am I to insist his attitude is misguided. This is a classic case of live and let live."

Again, it's impossible to say my method is ideal for someone else. At the very least, I invite everyone to ask questions and that costs zero dollars!

:thumbsup: Right on! Absolutely!

 

[Golucid]

True. You can hear the needle travel through the groove walls. What makes me want to rip that lp off the platter is the snaps crackle pops and static. That's my objective, to remove those sounds. So far, I am reaching that goal with my OCD efforts.erfect:

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Bill.......I'll play devil's advocate for a moment. There is no such thing as a noiseless record. There are extremely well pressed and quiet records but even those are not noiseless. Even a silent groove without any modulation cut in virgin vinyl is not noiseless. There are always micro irregularities in groove walls (not dirt or debris) coupled with the unavoidable contact friction and the inherent noise generated by dragging a dry diamond stylus through a groove in contact with two dry vinyl walls. Perhaps a contactless stylus, aka the laser stylus may illuminate those physical anomalies but that's a whole different subject.

At any rate, I am an advocate of quiet, clean vinyl. The elimination of aggravating levels of noise in vinyl playback is essential for me to be able to concentrate and be transported uninterrupted to the place great music reproduction takes us. I hate it when my imaginary performance bubble is burst by a pop or tic or worse when I had been effortlessly floating in a musical fantasy. Having said that, to listen to vinyl and enjoy the performances one has to train the mind to filter out a certain level of elevated background noise. Even with the best of equipment and perfectly clean and well pressed vinyl there is still no such thing as a noiseless record.

OK, I'll step down now.

your perspective on noise and vinyl is all about your reference.

I recall my perspective on how noisy records inherently were, let's call it my reality, in 2002.

then I purchased the Rockport Sirius III Turntable.

I recall vividly my reaction when I played my first record on that turntable. my jaw dropped. and I realized that vinyl as a format is not noisy, but the imperfect execution of the format adds noise.

don't blame the format for the noise. or assume that an RCM is going to lower the noise floor of your turntable.

at some point in the future you may hear a record you know well have much less noise than you think it has and your reference for what is causing what will change and a light will go on.

cleaning records will only move the needle a little. the big step is elsewhere. and it is many things.

come over to my room and I can play you hours and hours of records with zero noise....other than the lead in groove.

i'm not saying that groove noise does not exist; but it's not a given.

 

[MusicDirector]

Bill.......I'll play devil's advocate for a moment. There is no such thing as a noiseless record. There are extremely well pressed and quiet records but even those are not noiseless. Even a silent groove without any modulation cut in virgin vinyl is not noiseless. There are always micro irregularities in groove walls (not dirt or debris) coupled with the unavoidable contact friction and the inherent noise generated by dragging a dry diamond stylus through a groove in contact with two dry vinyl walls. Perhaps a contactless stylus, aka the laser stylus may eliminate those physical anomalies but that's a whole different subject.

At any rate, I am an advocate of quiet, clean vinyl. The elimination of aggravating levels of noise in vinyl playback is essential for me to be able to concentrate and be transported uninterrupted to the place great music reproduction takes us. I hate it when my imaginary performance bubble is burst by a pop or tic or worse when I had been effortlessly floating in a musical fantasy. Having said that, to listen to vinyl and enjoy the performances one has to train the mind to filter out a certain level of elevated background noise. Even with the best of equipment and perfectly clean and well pressed vinyl there is still no such thing as a noiseless record.

OK, I'll step down now.

You make a very good point Dan!
I think that is partly how I "just live with" the slight occasional stubborn tick or whatever on a record, using my mind to filter. Growing up with vinyl helps make that easy. One learns to expect certain things. Also much of what we humans hear is through the filter of our perceptions anyway, not to mention our emotions, mood etc.

Yes, the laser turntable would be an interesting thing. I'm afraid though that manufactures are still afraid to invest in building them and if they did the price would be in the 6 digit area then they may sell one or two and call it a failure giving them the excuse of not finding a way to get units in more hands. That would be a shame.

 

[MusicDirector]

your perspective on noise and vinyl is all about your reference.

I recall my perspective on how noisy records inherently were, let's call it my reality, in 2002.

then I purchased the Rockport Sirius III Turntable.

I recall vividly my reaction when I played my first record on that turntable. my jaw dropped. and I realized that vinyl as a format is not noisy, but the imperfect execution of the format adds noise.

don't blame the format for the noise. or assume that an RCM is going to lower the noise floor of your turntable.

at some point in the future you may hear a record you know well have much less noise than you think it has and your reference for what is causing what will change and a light will go on.

cleaning records will only move the needle a little. the big step is elsewhere. and it is many things.

come over to my room and I can play you hours and hours of records with zero noise....other than the lead in groove.

i'm not saying that groove noise does not exist; but it's not a given.

Wait a minute, am I missing something? I too have a few records where you can't hear the track separations except for the lead in groove (in fact, I have a couple where you can't even hear that) or lead out groove at least with speakers. Headphones can tell a different story at times. No turntable I know will make an unclean record noiseless. A TT can not clean a record. Sure the stylus can dig stuff out of the grooves, but that's usually not a good thing in the end. An RCM on the other hand (in other words, cleaning the record) will "help" to lower the noise floor at least from the perspective of the record itself and it's interaction with the turntable, that's not an assumption. Also, TT set up is key as well I would think and if the TT is not set up properly, the cleanest record in the world will have more noise than you can handle.
If I understand you correctly, your saying an RCM has no effect on the noise floor native to any turntable. Well, obviously that's true as they are too different things. I'm saying that an RCM does have an effect on the noise you hear from a record because one has cleaned the record.
Not arguing, just trying to follow.