And after 7 years, the beat goes on.
Does the MAPLESHADE STATIC DRAINING BRUSH work?
After hearing the DRAMATIC improvement in dynamics, clarity, and the blackest background ever from vinyl LPs while listening to my buddy's modest analog system I had to try the MAPLESHADE STATIC DRAINING BRUSH for myself. Yep. This plug in device really works. EVERY LP that I have played after brushing it with this device sounds dramatically better. Where I thought I was hearing ticks or surface noise in the vinyl (like between tracks and quiet passages in the music) I was mistaken. The noise was due to static OR magnetism because in EVERY instance where I had heard noise or ticks -- there was dead and I mean dead quiet silence.
Michael Fremer commented on an LP demagnetizer a couple of years ago saying that there are properties inherent to vinyl that can become magnetized. Problems in sound quality could vary but some issues are noisy vinyl, smearing, loss in dynamics, etc.
Well, Michael is right! After using the Mapleshade Static Draining brush every record has sounded much more alive, dynamic, and the noise floor is much blacker.
(We) spend hundreds or thousands of dollars buying cables and AC conditioners and cable elevators, etc. to avoid static but aside from using a Zerostat gun or antistatic brush (which actually adds static) it seems like a no-brainer to at at least give this device a try. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard the black and white difference for myself.
Has anyone else experienced similar results?
Michael Fremer commented on an LP demagnetizer a couple of years ago saying that there are properties inherent to vinyl that can become magnetized. Problems in sound quality could vary but some issues are noisy vinyl, smearing, loss in dynamics, etc.
Well, Michael is right! After using the Mapleshade Static Draining brush every record has sounded much more alive, dynamic, and the noise floor is much blacker.
(We) spend hundreds or thousands of dollars buying cables and AC conditioners and cable elevators, etc. to avoid static but aside from using a Zerostat gun or antistatic brush (which actually adds static) it seems like a no-brainer to at at least give this device a try. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard the black and white difference for myself.
Has anyone else experienced similar results?
25 responses Add your response
Are you gonna say you do this process each time you play a record ? Maybe I’m lucky, but I have no idea what the OP is talking about, I rarely use even a Zerostat Gun as I don’t have static issues with every LP. Carbon fiber brush all the time. Vinyl demagnitizer is interesting, but the metal is in black vinyl formula (to make it black), this is the reason why Analogue Production using UHQR vinyl now and it’s not black. Anyway, I’m fine with my vintage vinyl collection without any special devices, except for carbon fiber brush and zerostat gun. |
My experience with the occasional shedding of a tiny wire strand mirrors Stringreen's. As a result I don't use the Mapleshade brush preemptively-- rather only on occasions when static is an identified condition. On the positive side, this brush is far more effective and simple to use than the old Zerostat gun. |
It seem my problem mentioned on another thread may have been answered here. That is, the magnetic particules that have attached themselves to the cartridge body on (some) of my cartridges (I haven't checked them all). I have been using a static-draining brush (with drain wire) for years. It may be the brush is the source of the ferrous particles attaching themselves to my cartridge(s). I believe I bought it from Acoustic Sounds quite a few years ago, now. Regards, Dan |
Lewm, I knew you were too smart to be just a medical mechanic! ;-) Do you have something you use as a "control", so you know for sure that DE-magnetization has occurred?I've used the device to intentionally magnetize, de-magnetize and re-magnetize needles and paper clips. This is easy and repeatable. One could tape a paper clip down next to the LP when using the device, then test it afterwards to ensure it's de-magnetized. I haven't bothered, but that would be a reasonable procedural control. |
I have been using a Mapleshade brush for about a year. It has some good points and some bad. It is currently on my workbench while I try to get access to the remains of the ground wire still embedded in the handle. As many times as I have stepped on & broken the little wire, I really wish it had been implemented with some kind of pin and jack that disengages pulled too hard. On the other hand, though, it does a really good job of cleaning up grundge when used immediately before wet-cleaning on my Nitty Gritty. This one-two punch has made many of my older recs give up their pops and tics even after multiple cleanings with just the NG had failed. Also, it is useful for cleaning dust from surfaces that are really delicate. For users of the Boston mats, which are built of soft graphite material sealed with a thin, hard coating to prevent wear, it can be a big help. I also get a cleaner sound from CD/SACD playing when lightly brushing them and the open tray before playing. |
Doug, Although my dad WAS a surgeon, I am not now, nor have I ever been a surgeon (or a member of the Communist Party). However, I am guilty of being an MD who used his degree and post-graduate training as an Infectious Disease specialist to work as a scientist. Ergo, not rich. The "beauty" of the Furutech is that you can just put your LP into it and shut off your brain; it does the job for you. If you use a free hand demagnetizer, you do have to be careful that you are actually achieving your desired goal. Do you have something you use as a "control", so you know for sure that DE-magnetization has occurred? |
Lewm, It's true that improper use of a de-magnetizer can (will) have the opposite effect. However... 1) any such undesired effect is easily reversible; and 2) proper use is hardly difficult. A discussion of one inexpensive de-magnetizer and how to use it was posted here. Fully agree that the Furutech DeMag's $2500 price tag is a show stopper for most, including me. There's no danger of my being that foolish! Fortunately, inexpensive de-magnetizers work just as well, as reported on that thread by someone who compared them. Why not try it? Trust me, it won't challenge the brains, dexterity or income of a surgeon! Stringreen, That's scary!!! Thanks for a good warning. |
I had the Mapleshade brush and it works as described...HOWEVER.....be very careful. After awhile the little metallic hairs can break which attach themselves to the very powerful magnets on (MY) cartridge. I removed those hairs with great trepidation (very difficult to do without harm) and tossed the brush. The ground wire is extremely thin and broke twice even with the absence of any force at all....I spliced it together, but ....I guess I'll pass. |
| Post removed |
I'm a believer in some of the Mapleshade philosophy. The slabs and brass footers are under most of my gear-table,CD,speakers and sub. I tried the brush and and NO results other than bristles from the brush getting picked up by the cart. Their customer service is good so they gave me a postage return label and I sent that POS back. I REALLY wanted to believe the hype. Just my personal experience. YMMV |
Doug, You're talking about magnetics and the benefits of de-magnetizing? I am an agnostic. I have never tried it. The reason I stay away from it is that improper use of a standard demagnetizer can easily result in an opposite effect; the object can be magnetized inadvertently. With that in mind, I would only use the Furutech, one device that seems rather fool-proof, and I take the word "fool" very seriously. I gather that the Furutech reduces or eliminates the possibility for human error. So far as I know, the Furutech costs $2500. There's the rub. Is there anything less expensive that works as well? |
But none of this has anything whatever to do with magnetism or demagnetizing an LP, the need for which is still a controversial topic, at best.There's no controversy among those who've actually tried it - at least not about the need. The benefits are clearly audible and have been verified by multiple listeners in multiple systems. Why these benefits occur does remain controversial, in the sense that hypotheses regarding the precise mechanism involved have not been rigorously tested. Those willing to enjoy a demonstrable sonic improvement prior to receiving proof of just why it occurs may be naive, but aesthetically satisfied nonetheless. :-) |
I live in a dry climate plus have wool carpeting. The battle with static has been ongoing. I noticed an improvement when using the Mapleshade brush but it pailed compared to the difference that occurred when I ran a ground wire from my TT main bearing to the ground in a wall socket. This eliminated almost all of my ticks and pops. |
What Geoff said. No one would doubt that LPs are prone to develop a static charge on their playing surface, and most good brushes are designed or make claims to avoid exacerbating the problem, but most brushes cannot eliminate the charge that may be induced by the simple act of pulling an LP out of its sleeve or your fingers touching it after you've walked across a wool carpet. For that we have devices like the Zerostat gun. The Mapleshade brush may or may not be able to drain off static charge via its ground wire. I've never tried it. But none of this has anything whatever to do with magnetism or demagnetizing an LP, the need for which is still a controversial topic, at best. |
