Keith Monks discOveryOne Redux and discOvery micrOlight

tima

Industry Expert
Mar 4, 2014
1,576
1,084
230
the Upper Midwest
#1
Apparently these budget Monks RCMs were announced at CES 2017 and went largely unnoticed(? ). Until this review recently at TAB it/they were off my radar. I say budget relative to the famous original Keith Monks circa 1969 which spun off from the ones Monks made for the BBC. Iirc the originals were automated (fluid on, fluid off). These are manual.

https://www.vinyldiscovery.com/discoveryone

Anyone tried or bought one?

Discoveryone Redux - my guess: its a take off or relauch of their earlier Discoveryone.
Monks discoveryone.png

Discoveryone microlight
Monks discoveryone microlight.png

Anyone seen one of these - the KM Prodigy?

Keith Monks Prodigy.jpg
 

cuntigh

Well-Known Member
Dec 20, 2014
216
5
50
FRANCE
#3
The motor of my old « classic » went off a few weeks ago after 15 years and thousands of records properly cleaned. This old motor is not built anymore and I didn’t succeed to find a nos one.
Maybe I will try one of these new machines.
 

jfrech

VIP/Donor
Sep 3, 2012
1,654
45
145
Austin
#4
I have a Monks Omni. It's been cleaning records for I guess about 7 years now. I will say I used about everything else before this. A VPI, all sorts of fluids, scrubbed, didn't scrub.

After using this machine and his fluid I was done with the merry go round. For a vinyl lover, this is a smart investment. I have friends that bring over their records. Some love their ultrasonic machines. We listen to their record. We put it on the Monks for a few spins. Play it again. It's like a different record.

I don't have any experience with the newer models. But if they perform anything close to what I have...it's a no brainer.

The discovery one pictured above looks to be about the same as what I have. The only possible difference could be the suction pump's power and I'm not ever sure this is a sonic change that you can hear.
 

TLi

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2016
166
184
58
#5
I use the original Discovery One for a few years now. It works perfectly for me. My preference is on this type of wet and vacuum system over the ultrasonic bath.

The abrasion of groove information is higher with ultrasonic bath. Vinyl will wear away once you manipulate with it. Ultrasonic tends to wear or flatten the micro ridges more which leads to dimming of treble and microdynamics. Keith Monk also wears groove but tends to wear the bigger bass modulation which is less detrimental to the sound.

Vinyl is thixotropic material, shear thinning. If it is shaked, it becomes softer. Records that is cleaned with ultrasonic bath has to rest for a few hours before the normal property is resolved. Otherwise the sound will be dimmed because the record disc is softened. The resting time is less with Keith Monk system because vinyl is less disturbed, usually 30 minutes will be fine. Another advantage for Discovery One.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 26, 2015
4,806
753
220
Eastern WA
#6
The abrasion of groove information is higher with ultrasonic bath. Vinyl will wear away once you manipulate with it. Ultrasonic tends to wear or flatten the micro ridges more which leads to dimming of treble and microdynamics. Keith Monk also wears groove but tends to wear the bigger bass modulation which is less detrimental to the sound.
Prove it.
 
Likes: Mr Rickz

TLi

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2016
166
184
58
#7
If you google ultrasonic cleaning, wikipedia will tell you ultrasonic works on creating cavitation, small air bubble which has high energy. It polishes any surface, hence the cleaning effect. The last thing you want with your groove is to have it polished. The size of cavitation is very small. The sharp edges of treble modulation is first to be flattened.

My friends has done A/B test with two identical records. The one cleaned with ultrasonic bath has dimmer sound than with Keith Monk. One of the reasons was the records were not rested enough and the comparison was made too quickly. But I have a feeling that even after enough waiting, the loss of information is more with ultrasonic.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 26, 2015
4,806
753
220
Eastern WA
#8
Your feeling vs everyone else who says pish-posh, including The General? .... I doubt it’s it makes any difference unless you’re cooking it at the same time.
 

tima

Industry Expert
Mar 4, 2014
1,576
1,084
230
the Upper Midwest
#9
It [cavitation] polishes any surface, hence the cleaning effect. The last thing you want with your groove is to have it polished.
I don't think "polishing" is the right word.

A lot depends on the frequency of the cavitators, temperature of the water, cleaning solution, and length of exposure time.
You can damage almost any material with ultrasonic waves if you don't know what you're doing, if you use parameters outside the scope of what is safely effective for the material being cleaned. The idea behind the USC RMC is to dislodge dirt and grease, etc. without damage and that can be done. This is not a comment about point-nozzle machines like the Monks.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high-end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. A place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss existing and new audio products, music servers, music streamers and computer audio, digital to audio converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel to reel, speakers, headphones, tube amplifiers and solid state amplification. Founded in 2010 What's Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing