Thats because the prices for these units are so overpriced even the Spin Clean at 79 bucks is overpriced but it is the most reasonable costs to clean a record.

Indeed.. strange.. If you are comparing a $50 to a $5000 unit, would be good to know UP FRONT !

The record's biscuit contains plasticizers, stabilizers, liquefiers, stabilizers, fillers as well as pvc and the carbon element. When records pop out of the press, they do so through the stamping process. They come out hot. They pop out as there is a release agent that surfaces. Not a spray. Most record manufacturers never realized this. The record now cools, and dirt dust and contaminants around the cooling of the record get fused into this pressing oil. Cause of some of those unwanted pops. We can measure this by restoring the record by the Kirmuss using record ionization and not a cleaning solution whereby the effects of cavitation are attracted to the record. Removed in a before and after test, about 0.89 microns. To this pressing oil, the Shure Brothers in circa 1977 noted complaints from users and resellers alike. The needle was picking something up.. Rediscovered by chance by me only 4 years ago, well after the Kirmuss naming this coating a release agent, this Shure discovery saw the emergence of the first record cleaning machines. Unfortunately due to the Tribelectric table of charges that states where both water and the charge of the record are the same, with or without a soap added, ultimately saw the Shure Brothers in 1978 offer a brush with the sale of the V15 Mark IV. The needle was gouging something. .. the Shure Brothers saw this oil. Named it the pressing oil. Documented in the located diagram by Shure, seen on their archival site of a brush offered that mounted on the tone arm. The Kirmuss presentations using the Keyence VHX-7000 2D 3D 178,000 $ microscope supports this. One's ears as well as a signal analyzer hears the increased soundtage and imagery and registers on a new record 1.3 dB gain over floor with a 12% average increase in frequency response. With pressing oil, release agent removed, so is the pop caused by the fused particle in the cooling record. If one hears newer pops in a recently played record, it is where the heat of the needle has fused into this film surrounding dust. That is why the simplest action one could do is to use a 10 micron diameter brush to remove dust before play. We can also at some point in time review the su ject of outgassing of the plasticizer in a record's sleeve as another topic. Just as in car that "new car snell" that coats the windshield creating that hard to remove film, this can be related to a record doing the same in a record's sleeve. Stuck there with a paper, pvc, polyurethane sleeve for 20, 30, 40 years. Accounts for the 2 to 3 to 4 dB gain after using the Kirmuss process. Met many pressers where the mix of the biscuit which had recycled plastic taken from defective record's and thus was not correct, I am sure where one would agree where this accunts for the record not to always pop out. Indeed one does not spray Pam on the stamper in normal production, but the press operators in a such case has been seen in some plants to ooat the stamper with a metal polish to see the incorrectly mixed composition biscuits to be expressed. Of course processes vary.

@@kirmussaudio7578 This is a bunch of B.S.

Honest! It's a problem!

@@car-or-ock616 Is centring the spindle hole a problem or ...? Yes, offset centre holes are a problem. The stylus overhang alignment setup is based in-part upon the spindle hole centre point. A record whose centre is offset is out of alignment with this setup. The stylus plays the vinyl record, not the turntable's platter. You can see the effect this has by the amount of tonearm sway. Back and forth with every rotation. The more sway, the worst the record is out of alignment. Now, the cartridge stylus is shunted twice, back and forth every rotation, once in then out. 33 1/3 = 1 rotation every 1.8 seconds this happens. The stylus is out of alignment but for a split second, twice, with every rotation. This leads to inconsistent pressure on the groove walls, vertically and horizontally. Think of a good bobsled run vs a bad one. The smoother the run, the less friction. Same here, properly centred record holes yield smoother stylus tracing, less friction. Fidelity is better and dirt accumulation is less. Records with accurate centre holes wear less, and sound better. This is more obvious when comparing older records. Whew!

yeah, this has not been addressed. Where are the objective tests?

@@scottwheeler2679 Maybe for a clean or so its safe but I do wonder about long term Cav bubble damage since its well known that it exists. I use Cav on dirty LPs but only once then I vac if it needs it later.

@@kloss213 the word "maybe" is a deal breaker for me. I want to know before I clean my records. IMO the folks selling this "record restoration system" are full of crap. They are claiming to remove "mold release" which I think they are now calling "pressing oil." There is no mold release or "pressing oil" applied to the plates. The release agent is in the vinyl itself and the last thing you want is to be extracting part of the vinyl itself by cleaning. I'd like to see some real independent science on the subject.

@@kloss213 and it is not like anyone really needs to clean records this way more than once or twice in one’s lifetime. Sure some new records might need a lighting cleaning but most old records are fine after just one cleaning (some exceptions). So your rarely gonna damage one with any of the machines or processes.

@@scottwheeler2679 I worked in plastics and used mold release and I have found it on LPs seems old LPs may have used it and some new I do know some pressers say they don't use it. Not a deal breaker don't need Cav to remove it.

In plastics you use a mold release its silicon today.

@@kloss213 I work in molding and casting too. It depends on the materials. They DONT use it in pressing records. I know. I have literally asked people who run and operate pressing plants. The groove excursions in high frequencies at the lowest db levels in a vinyl groove are smaller than the shortest wavelength of visible light. It's so small you literally can not see it using light. What oil do you think would not obliterate such fine detail? Absolutely nothing is applied to the surface of the metal plates. It would destroy the detail of the grooves.

@@scottwheeler2679 thats not how mold release works its not oil

@@kloss213 again, you are talking to someone who works regularly with molding and casting for a living. I know what mold release is and how it works. No one is putting any mold release on the pressing plates. The mold release is a part of the vinyl formula. As such it needs to stay in the vinyl. It is part of the material that is the record. If it were extracted it would distort the form of the record. You can't remove physical material from a cast product without distorting it some how. It either leaves a void or shrinks the form. All material takes up space.

@@1Hiprascal That would absolutely obliterate any low level information on the disc

Did he really say "gain"? I understand his point as to gain some amount of dB in signal to noise ratio, what makes sense to me after eleminating some noise sources off the surface.

@@heinzb8219 Yes, he really did say gain. He did not say increased SNR

$4k for a cleaner? I don't think so A vacuum system from Project costs $500 and its more than enough.