@antinn , 20 years is a long time. Averaging 2 records/day = 14,600 records played at 0.0002" = 2.92". On bristles that are only 1/2" long I think that would be noticeable:-) I know, that assumes each bristle loses a fragment at every play but I certainly would have noticed a 16th of an inch. I had two of these arms one brand new in it's box unused. It is unquestionable that an occasional fragment of brush broke or abraded off but this never presented a noticeable problem.
I think that is the Kuzma record cleaning stand over a US tank with an elaborate filter scheme. Very nice. I don't buy used records. If I were to buy a unit I would clean individual records before play and put a sticker on the inner sleeve to indicate that it was cleaned. Used like this the Degritter is fine. The overriding question is whether of not this would improve the experience. I am very much on the fence with that one. If I had a buyer set up for the Degritter ahead of time it would be an easy choice. Anybody want a brand new lightly used Degritter? 15% off retail. |
@antinn, For the occasional record your method is fine from all angles. But, If I bought an estate collection which had been managed in the standard fashion, cleaning that many perhaps thousands of records would be daunting at best. I would definitely buy a machine probably a Degritter.
As for Carbon brushes. There was one particular sweep arm I used for 20 years. I would lose an occasional bristle but I assume nothing else. If fibers were breaking leaving very small fragments in the grooves I would expect that over 20 years the bristles would have gotten noticeably shorter. That did not happen. I went to a different arm because I liked the design better. |
Thanks antinn, you mentioned that you were worried about the carbon fibers breaking leaving debris in the groove. The carbon fiber brushes I have had over the years have only broken the fibers at the attachment point leaving a long solitary fiber that sits on the surface of the record. But I think there is more to it than just fiber diameter. With the record spinning the fibers are going to surf on the surface of the record and it is unlikely that any of the fibers will even get 1/2 way down. The groove will just kick them out. It would be an interesting thing to film close in and watch. The brushes would probably be more effective slowly turning the record with your left hand while holding the brush in your right. Brushes are for removal of surface dust and discharging the record. If the record is so dirty you are worried about stuff deep in the groove (because your needle comes away with gunk on it after just one side) I think a popper washing would be in order. Check out antinn's method. It is anal-retentive to the max but it also probably cleans records better than anything else. I shudder to think what cleaning 3000 records that way would be like. Trust me, you want to get paid by the hour. |
Very interesting idea. antinn and I were reviewing a paper he found comparing the effectiveness of a grounded brush vs ionization vs both together in neutralizing static on plastic film. The brush was not touching the film but 1/16th of an inch off. It did lower the charge but it was not as effective as ionization. However they worked best together. So, a grounded metal bar or rod suspended over the record will work but it would have to be very close, so close that the slightest warp would stop the entire show.
What you are doing with your grounded brush is fine. I recommend wiring these brushes to ground all the time as just holding them does not do much good. The thing is you do not want to use it on a spinning record. Move the record under the brush by hand slowly. None of these brushes will get deep down into the groove. They will only remove surface dust. If the record starts out clean and your record hygiene and environment are good this should be all you need to do.
|
@dover , I use these https://www.sleevecityusa.com/diskeeper-audiophile-inner-sleeve-50-pack-p/312nrps.htmI believe these are the same sleeves antinn refers to above. They are suspiciously like the MF sleeves. I have had no problems with them. They are sturdy and slip into the cover nicely without crimping or folding. Anti static sleeves is a misnomer. They do not remove static, they just will not donate electrons to PVC. If you put a charged record into any of these sleeves you will get the same charge when you pull the record back out. The record has to be discharged by some method. Even a very slight charge on the record will collect dust and all you have to do is look at a record funny and it will collect a charge. The reason that paper is so bad is that it loves to donate electrons to PVC. Shows you how cheap the record companies could be! Classical records like Decca, London, DGG, Erato and many others always used appropriate plastic sleeves. But, popular music, paper. It seems in the eyes of the record companies popular and jazz music lovers are second class citizens. You can make a very sensitive qualitative static measuring device by tying some wool thread to the end of a wooden skewer leaving about 2 inches hanging. Negative charging will pull the thread towards the charge. Positive charging will repulse the thread. Wool is at the opposite end of the triboelectric series. It is very good at donating electrons and will maintain a positive charge. You can get a feel for how strong the charge is. The thread will pick up very low charges, charges that you would otherwise not know existed. Just playing a record in low humidity conditions will create a small charge on the record. Whether or not this is the stylus doing this is open for debate. The charge is so small you would not notice it. But, the effect is cumulative. Playing the record several times will add enough charge that it will become noticeable. This effect essentially does not happen in humidity's over 30%. |
Yes, it was only $12.00. I have not had a static problem in at least 40 years. 10 years of that was in Florida and Alabama, not exactly dry environments. But, I have been back in New England for over thirty years and in the Winter houses can easily drop to 20 %. My house is humidified and I can maintain 35% without flooding the windows. Last Winter I turned the humidifiers off to let it drop so I could experiment with static.
It is an interesting problem with too many solutions.
In short, records that are routinely discharged will not build a problematic
static charge as long as they are kept in the appropriate sleeves and you don't rub them with toilet paper. How you do the discharging is a matter of taste and convenience. Platters should always be grounded. You can use an ionizer or a conductive brush or sweep arm, they all work to one degree or another. If nothing is done the collection of charge is cumulative and in a dry environment you might get into trouble.
I will soon know if the candle lighter does anything. |
I just took a look at DS Audio's Ionizer. The marketing is suspect.
It assumes the static is coming from the stylus rubbing the groove which as we know is not entirely correct. It generates both positive and negative ions? First of all, it only needs to generate positive ions to neutralize the negative electrons collected by the record. If it makes both charges they will simply neutralize each other and diminish any effect on the record.
|
@antinn, for certain your cleaning process is the most comprehensive I have ever read about and for heavily contaminated records probably the only decent approach to the problem.
You are right about the voltage drops I miss-read the next table. It is ionization and the brush together. However, the article specifically says the brush "was placed in close proximity" to the substrate and 1/16th of an inch is mentioned twice. That voltage drop is not with the brush touching the substrate but a 16th off. There must have been a reason they did not want it touching the film. Perhaps there was a coating they did not want removed or maybe the brush would have damaged the film. A metal bar may have worked just as well in this application. If a brush touching the substrate drops the voltage enough it will remove particles.
I have been using a conductive sweep arm for decades and these are my observations limited as they are. The brush definitely drops the voltage to low levels which are barely measurable by wool thread. The brush definitely picks up visible dust because I always have to clean it off. I have no easy way of knowing what happens with smaller particulates.
Will ionization make a noticeable difference? I'm hoping to find out. The candle lighter was only $12.00 and operates with considerably more gusto than the Zerostat or at least it looks like it does. It lights candles great. Try that with a Zerostat:-) |
@antinn , Much appreciated. Even if you could even totally neutralize a record, it will develop a charge almost immediately especially if the humidity is less than 40 %. At 20% RH just playing the record will develop a small charge. I wish I could calibrate my wool thread with a meter to be able to estimate the voltage. Rough guess would be 1 kV which is barely enough to notice. At higher humidity I can not measure any additional charge by the crude method I am using.
The brush in this experiment was not touching the nonconductive film.
I would have loved to see the voltage drop with the brush touching the film. Not touching it dropped the voltage from 10 kV to 500 V. Touching one would have to assume it would be at least a little better. My take away is grounded brushes do work but Ionization and brushes together work best. Will devices like Zerostats and electronic candle lighters work well enough to neutralized a heavily charged record? I have a candle lighter to play with and will get back with my impression.
I think the most important take away is nothing will entirely neutralize static electricity on records. They will always be charge if only slightly. Any charge is enough to attract dust and other contaminates. Records should never be left out and except for transfers should always be under cover. Using well grounded conductive brushes to minimize the charge and collect incidental dust are useful. Ionizers can also be useful for static control but do not remove any dust. Control of the environment with humidification in the Winter, use of high efficiency filters in air handlers year round and powerful exhaust fans in cooking areas will assist in keeping records clean.
Antinn's paper is the most comprehensive review of record cleaning I have ever seen and should be on the reading list of every record collector. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/viewer.html?pdfurl=https%3A%2F%2Fthevinylpress.com%2Fapp%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F03%2FPAC-Vinyl-Records_2021-03-01_pdf.pdf&clen=5630483&chunk=true |
@lewm , I have not had the chance to deal with it. I am in the process of building a bar and built in cabinet and am up to my eyeballs in sawdust not to mention I have no turntable at the moment. I will get around to it. |
I hate to be a PITA but this is heading off topic. Mats will never entirely discharge a record as the side that was played last will always have a charge unless you purposely discharge it. Electrons do not like turning sharp corners. I do believe that the charge will equilibrate over both sides eventually. I should try and test for that but it will probably require a more sensitive measuring device.
It is important I think to avoid the worse case scenario which is records stored in paper sleeves and played repeatedly on an improperly grounded turntable in low humidity conditions. The single best way to discharge a record which should be done before and after play is with a conductive brush wired to ground. For this project I used a Pro-Ject brush
drilled a small hole in the metal casing and attached a 24 gauge wire with a sheet metal screw. This is a very simple project (again) and requires only a drill and bit. Another approach is to use a conductive sweep arm wired to ground which is just a miniature version of the above. |
@lewm The hypothesis is based on the fact the every single record that you neutralize both sides, label and PVC will develop a small charge within 30 minutes, PVC going negative and the label positive. This is with the record hanging on a wooden dowel touching nothing else I did is not coming home and no well but air. The only sure fire donator of electrons is the label. So I think it is a safe assumption that electrons are moving from the label to the PVC. It is however not proof. Removing the label on a record and stabbing what it does after neutralization is an interesting experiment to try. I will see if I can do it by cleaning off the label with the bench plane. Shure's remark about charges redistributing is very compatible with the above finding and I think you are right in assuming that charge redistribution is causing the snapping you hear. Electrons move!
@slaw , Grounding the platter may be useful but only if there is a path to ground. This would work better with a conductive mat. I cannot run that experiment because I do not have a conductive mat at this time and with my new turn table the mat is a vital part of the vacuum mechanism.
@Elliotebnewcombjr, Others are giving you good advice! Keep that demagnetizer away from everything but your R2R's heads. The mythology surrounding de-magnetization is dangerous and possibly destructive to certain items like cartridges.
I will report back about the label removing experiment. I will try to remove the label from both sides of an old record and then I will thoroughly discharge it, hang it from the wound dowel and see if it develops a charge. If no charge develops I think we have safely proven that the electrons are being donated by the label.
|
@antinn, I have said repeatedly that I did not have a static problem the way I was caring for my records. I was wrong. I did not have a noticeable static problem would have been the more accurate way to describe it. Is that just as good? For all intents and purposes, yes. This is the situation you have. Your records are charged, just not at very high voltages. You are managing to drain enough off to keep things from getting out of hand.
The mat design you are using seems very intelligent. There is one interesting hook in it. Static electricity is a surface phenomenon. The record has two surfaces, PVC and paper. The paper donates electrons to the PVC. Even if you thoroughly discharge the record within minutes a charge differential will develop between the two. At equilibrium the voltage in not high enough to be easily noticed. Your system pulls electrons from the PVC but hands them back to the paper. Will this change the equilibrium voltage? We would need a static field meter to determine that. But if the records seem static free that is enough. If my turntable did not have a vacuum system I would certainly try your mat and method. I bookmarked your link as it is an excellent suggestion for those with a static problem.
And antinn, thank you for the compliment:-)
@slaw , you should try antinn's mat material and let us know what you thinK. |
@lewm I did not measure that but I certainly can.
I'm not sure but I think Rauliruegas can do that! |
