PART 1: Review of the Kirmuss Ultrasonic 'In the Groove' Record Restorer (Upscale Audio Edition) 

Very illustrative demonstration of the Kirmuss Ultrasonic machine, the accessories and the whole process. Thank you for taking the time!

Chemistry and Physics aside, I've owned a Kirmuss Unit for almost a year. I bought mine at Axpona 2023 in Chicago. I've run close to 200 records through the machine and what I hear after cleaning, tells me that the cleaning process works. I've never been in a Pressing Plant, but after cleaning 20 or so new (Read; sealed/unopened) records, the material left in the water shows that something was removed from the surface. Older recordings definetly benefit from this machine. A pressing of Fat Matress' first release was horrible sounding when I brought it home from Goodwill and after a thorough cleaning it sounded like a different record. It's not cheap, it takes time to do the process properly and it is noisy, but it works very well. Great review and some great discussion in the comments section. One more thought: I leave the top unit on the machine, unplugged while I Degas the bath. and cover the slots with a towel to keep the noise down. My cat appreciates it....

great demo...yes the process does look time consuming as you mentioned, however that record did look perfect and brand new after the cleaning session. just looked immaculate from here. for certain lps in a collection the process is probably well worth the time

I've owned one of these for about three years. It's an amazing cleaner and it is one of the best cleaners that I've ever owned. It's pricey, but it really works well. It's far better than products like the Spin Clean. Using my KVARC cleaner, my records sound very much better.

Fantastic video! Saved me lots of time getting mine ready to go. High quality audio and video. Well done!

Very informative. Thank you!

The main purpose of the "surfactant" used is to change the charge of the record to attract the cavitation as you alluded to. It does also help with static of course. The "surfactant" (or as I like to call it "atomic charge changer" as well) has both a positive and negative charge itself. The properties are temperature sensitive as well. It is best used in ultrasonic cleaning and the like over other surfactants that have both a hydrophobic and hydrophilic charge or indeed only a hydrophobic charge as found in items such as dishwashing liquid. Ethylene Glycol is a water absorber basically, it doesn't leave behind a "forever" residue. Dish soap on the other hand is opposite. It's surfactant(s) are designed to leave behind a residue that repels items making your dishes easier to clean next time. As for "mold release agent": I have also recently heard Dr. Kirmuss (I will reveal here that I know him well) state that there is plasticizer that is also removed and needing removal in the process. Most folks, including most audiophiles have a vision of products such as Pam being sprayed on the stampers, but that is myth. There is a release agent mixed into the pellet mixture along with plasticizers, etc. which is melted down to create the pucks for stamping. (Otherwise the record would stick to the mold until completely cooled or do so regardless of temperature. Pressing machines need to be able to press records quickly, so there is not time to let the record cool to the point where it releases on it's own, if that happens). Some of this "release agent AND plasticizer ends up coming to the surface of the record (which includes in the grooves). In and of itself, it is not a problem, but as we know, record pressing plants are not laboratory clean rooms like electronic chip manufactures. They are some of the dirtiest places around so what happens is the pressed record (still quite warm/hot) is set on a spindle device with non-stick paper between each record to air cool and all the contaminates around land on the record and in the grooves. The "release agent" and plasticizer that has come to the surface in the pressing process is like a cooking oil or some sticky oil and suspends the contaminates that have fallen in/on it. Think of new records that you get and put on the turntable straight away, you will hear all kinds of pops and clicks, etc. Even if one surface cleans the record beforehand and then plays it, will still hear pops and clicks and noise. Not as much as before perhaps, but still very much audible. That is from the contaminates embedded in the "release agent" and plasticizer that is still sitting on the surface. This can not be removed by any other type of cleaning other than ultrasonic and keep the record intact. One could use excellent enzyme based cleaner such as Audio Intelligence Vinyl Solutions and a vacuum RCM, but it would take a hundred cleanings and a lucky day to get it. If you took your thumb nail and pressed it into the record, say on the outside edge or lead in, you would see an imprint! (I have done this in my studies). The imprint is from and in the plasticizer and "release agent" which is soft. I like to also point out that plasticizer is one of the most important components of the mix, Were it not for that records would be pieces of plumbing and unable to hold grooves where the music data lives. They would also be very brittle. So we do NOT want to remove or leach out all the plasticizer, but we do want to get a thin micron layer that contains the contaminates off the surface without removing or leaching any more out. Some ultrasonic RCMS can remove too much plasticizer rendering your record into a piece of plumbing, which not only raises the noise floor, but one day the record can fall apart in your hand! Standard records are about 120 gram weight and dynaflex and the like is about 80 grams! This is far thinner than PVC plumbing. So with certain frequencies and temperature combinations one can leach most of if not all the plasticizer in a record with relative ease. The good thing about the Kirmuss machine in part is the frequency of the transducers and the temperature control. I have heard many an audiophile say that the frequency of the transducers used in the Kirmuss machine make the bubbles too big to get into the grooves and be affective and that higher frequency transducers are needed so the bubbles are smaller to get into the grooves. That is not the case. When one understands how cavitation works, one sees the picture clearer. Bubble size corresponds with time. The smaller the bubble, the less time in the bath, but the "cleaning" function remains the same. The frequency of the transducers is low enough on the Kirmuss machine that it would take a record constantly running through the machine about 6 months to leach out enough of the plasticizer thus destroying the record. These machines that tout 100kHz or 120kHz transducers and temperatures above 93/94F running into 110F to 120F will not only warp the grooves in short order, but leach out most of, if not all the plasticizer as well in relatively short order! (The record is already ruined with the warped grooves).

This looks like a great method for creating "needle-drop" transfers of records for which the master tapes are missing. I can picture someone finding some private-press garage rock 45 and giving it this treatment before ripping it for a compilation. That surfactant really seems to be the key. You get a pretty good idea if the record needs another spin based on whether or not the white film is appearing.

The demonstration is very thorough and detailed which is great. What I didn’t hear you say however is how effective the Kirmuss methodology is in terms of the record restoration? Specifically, did the process banish surface noise completely, improve sound etc., and in this respect did it do a better job than the KL Audio? I own a KL Audio unit and my interest in the Kirmuss has been piqued. Michael Fremer in an article he wrote for Analog Planet some time ago was glowing in his praise of the Kirmuss process as a restoration procedure. You did not comment on the efficacy of the ‘ritual’ in terms of restoring a vinyl record. I would like to hear your observations on that. I enjoyed the video nonetheless as an invaluable instruction on how to use the Kirmuss unit.

Good one, that record was pretty clean after 5 min. You could tell the water came right off it. Dirty disks the water pools and doesn’t come off quickly. It’s a good system. It will reveal how crappy most modern disks are. Mid 80s pressings are much better. Yes can run multiples at same time. Stagger by about 2 min. Note: klaudio is about 6 times the cost of the kirmuss. If you want a real clean…. Get the kirmuss. He says you can get 1-2db back. I have the upscale audio version too

To eliminate static, use a aerostat or a Milty.

Great video... odd where where peers do not publish signal gain over floor or increase in frequency response after one uses a cleaning system or process. Hmmm.

Thanks for the video. Question. How realistic is it, to clean multiple records at once? To go through the process I just watched you do, but with multiple records as to fill all slots in the machine, it seems like the cleaning agent could begin drying onto your first record by the time you're still swirling both sides of say the third record. I imagine you would want to get the cavitation going immediately after putting that solution on. Curious of your thoughts on that.

So many questions totally unrelated to cleaning. 1. What speakers are those? They look incredible!!! 2. What's in the safe?

Good review but I have to admit I have minimal patience with this method and with Dr. Kirmuss himself. Many of us have seen Professor Kirmus. His long and rather excruciating diatribes are some of the best antidotes for sleeplessness. In fact, it has been reported that the makers of Ambien are extremely worried and considering a law suit for infringing on their territory...

For those interested in hearing the results of the Kirmuss restoration process: 1. Restoration of a Frank Sinatra Record. Mexico City Nov 2023 KirmussAudio event. Before restoration: Lots of noise. Crackles abound. Sound Muddled. The record was processed before in a 120 KHz ultrasonic. Processed 5 times. Before in a vacuum based cleaning system, so I was told. Video Before Kirmuss Processing: ru-vid.com/show-UCq6s2TT2s7SgZu_7F1D37SQ Video After Kirmuss Restoration: Increase in signal and frequency response, pops gone. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_RZ50MIPtVA.html 2. From our record restoration event in Mexico City in front of Billboard Magazine and with an invitation only meeting of Discos two weeks ago held at the Margules factory, very nice of him, a record that was brought in that was processed prior with a vacuum cleaning system saw these results: Before Kirmuss; ru-vid.com-L2gIqQ3nok After Kirmuss: ru-vid.com_6_fhGWMBjM

I’d be interested in you testing for any sonic improvement of a record previously cleaned by the Klaudio machine that was still a bit noisy that later went through the Kirmuss process.

wondering if one uses the same processes, surfacants and brushes from Kirmuss on a HumminGuru, that the results could be the same? seems the process is more important than the machine itself.

I'm a little confused about a specific part of the cleaning process. Surfactant/goat hair brush/milky white film. What I mean is I have watched some of your other videos regarding products and machines used to clean vinyl and this step is not addressed. What I am curious about, as an example, after using the 3 Mofi cleaning products that you used, what would happen if you then used the Kurmas solution? Would a milky white film appear? Does my question make sense?

Some clarifications: 1)To restore a record with the Kirmuss, not just surface shine which other systems do by leaving a film, we need to use several cycles. The spray changes the charge of the record to be opposite to that of water in the tank. Restoration removes films from prior cleaning methods left by air, vacuum or spin drying. We then remove the film of the outgassing of the record while in its record's sleeve. Finally, the release agent which allowed the record to pop out of the stamper, where when cooling, sees dirt and dust around the cooling record be fused into the pressing oil, cause of those unwanted and nasty pops. 2) Cavitation creates heat. Evey 5 or so records, one needs to remove the cover assembly, disconnect it, and use one pulse/degas cycle of 1:36 to remove air that gets introduced into the water. This slows down the heating. 3) Correcting the statement made as to stop the machine every 35 minutes to allow the transducers and water to cool down (do this when the small red light flashes), you can empty the tank of the hot water, returning the water to the plastic gallon jugs used, and then pour in fresh cool distilled water, add the 2 shots of 70% IPA (used to kill fungus), do the prescribed two de-gas/pulse cycles of 1:36, and you are set to go. Leave the caps off of the gallon jugs of hot water to allow the water to cool down. We do 40 plus records at a trade show in 8 hours. 4) Restoration offers 1.3 to 9 dB or more signal improvement over floor, with 8 to upwards of 28, sometimes seen 32, even 38% increase in frequency response. Many cleaning systems leave severe coatings on the record, which we remove. 5) A quick surface clean is a 2 minute cycle. Records will not come out dry as only the Kirmuss restoration system and the described process restores records. Per the Tribelectric table of charges, PVC and water have the same charge, that is proof of a record being restored. 6) Average time to restore records: New records (or records seen with huge sheets of water after the first 5 minute cycle in the machine with ionizing spray applied, sees the use of four 2 minute cycles, followed by a 5 minute cycle. Most records see three 5 minute cycles. Determined by the rapid dissipation of the colorant when the ionizing agent is brushed into the record. Also whereas restored records come out virtually dry. 7) If one wants to play what the stamper actually pressed, only restoration and not record cleaning will allow your analog system set up n ow allow the needle pick up all the detail. That is why we guarantee with measurements what restoration does. Once restored, one does not have to process the record as demonstrated. Just a 2 minute cycle to remove any fingerprint oils etc. as determined by the user. 8) The Upscale Audio Version can process three LP's at a time, plus a 45.

Oh my days i use a baby hair brush and fine tooth brush with dish washing liquid ..save u dollars i get excellent reesults with no bs and the record sounds absolutley quiet .so longs as u get deep in the groove u good to go ...cheap as chips dont believe the hype.

So…you spray this stuff on the record, spread it around until this gunk comes up…and then turn the record over and use the same brush that you used on the first side? You’re just spreading that crap around, and it probably came from the stuff you sprayed on the record in the first place.

I have some records that have calcium carbonate in the grooves that does not come off with deep cleaning and ultrasonic cleaning have you heard of using white vinegar mixed with distilled water soak and scrub that might help remove?thanks

Very well done, was thinking about a Degritter, but this is less $ and may be a better option as I don't mind cleaning records. As far as the "mold release agents", I get records that have a visible white film on them, even RTI presses, I couldn't remove it until I started using Tergikleen and then Alcohol in distilled water, that removes whatever it is. So my two cents is - something is causing this, and release agents are most logical.

Please delete my unintentially multiple comments. Having trouble deleting it myself. Thanks.

You've spent 20 (4 cleaning cycles) minutes plus 2 degass cycles. So you've spent close to 25 minutes on one record. And you can only run it for 35 minutes at a time. Completely useless process for getting through hundreds to thousands of records. Recommend no more than 10 records per tank. But it would take you all day and with the breaks needed after 35 minute use max, you'd likely have to continue the next day to get through 10 records. Which means a a new tank of water after just cleaning a few. What a dumb process. I've cleaned records with a VPI 16.5 and 3 step Audio Intelligent Vinyl solutions fluids and the records come out perfectly silent. No gunk on the stylus. Does the Krimuss clean deeper? Possibly but if my method, I can't hear it or see it, whats the difference?

This is beyond neurotic. The amount of unnecessary steps being used here to achieve the result could be omitted just by adding surfactant to the water and running the machine for 20 minutes. Another note is that the surfactant isn’t “pulling up” gunk from the record, you are agitating it and creating a film almost like what happens when you wash your hands and rub the soap between your hands and it creates suds. It feels like I’m being lied to by a snake oil salesman when you use that explanation. There was zero point in keeping the two goat hair brushes separate. You were using the surfactant spray on both. Not only that but this talk of mold release agents leaving a residue on the surface on a record and you are introducing a chemical to the final step of this “process” On the topic of mold release agents… I work in a pressing plant. I’ve pressed literally thousands of records over the years. The pvc comes in as pellets, they are then sent into a hopper that goes into a heating barrel before being pressed into a puck. We take that puck and the two labels and nothing else (unless there’s splatter or something) and put it into the press. It presses for like 15 seconds at a high heat generated by steam, then opens. The records are very hot coming off the press, still quite maliable and are easily removed. The reason they come off the press is because pvc doesn’t bond with the metals used to make the stamper. Now to quell any argument about a release agent being on the stamper itself, before each job starts, we clean each stamper thoroughly. Not only that, but a particularly large job will have us stopping to clean a few times throughout to keep the stampers clean. There is zero possibility that there could be any release agent involved. If you’ve ever seen a record get pressed, you’d understand what happens when you introduce liquid of any viscosity or amount to the process. Liquid on the stamper or on the puck will get baked into the record leaving a very ugly and noticeable mark or smudge that looks like someone smeared a booger across the surface. Release agents are absolutely not involved. This is a hill I will die on. Invite me to that zoom call and I’ll gladly dispel any rumour involving that. For that reason, all these steps are pointless. This system is a waste of time, energy and money.