Dealing with Static on LP palyback

@spatialking You might want to explore an arts & crafts store like Michael's to see if they might have something that could serve as an acceptable dust cover.  You could also have one custom made but I'm sure that isn't exactly inexpensive.  As for possible resonance issues related to a light dust cover, I think this might be easily resolved by gluing a thin strip of foam insulation around the perimeter of the dust cover base.

As a few others have mentioned, I also use a record brush (i.e.  AudioQuest carbon fiber with conductive contact) before AND AFTER every play before returning records to their sleeves.  I also clean my stylus before AND AFTER every play, as well (i.e.  MoFi #9 solution at the start and end of every listening session + Onzow before & after every play).

Regarding the Roy Gandy theory of the stylus just pushing dust & debris out of the way, there is a funny story about this.  Can't remember where I read or possibly saw the video about this, probably Analog Planet or one of Michael Fremer's many videos.  As best I recall, Mr. Fremer was visiting the Rega factory in England and was later invited to Mr. Gandy's home.  Upon discussing this idea that the TT stylus just pushes dust & debris out of the way, Mr. Fremer suggested putting this to the test by playing a succession of records without brushing and without a dust cover in place.  It wasn't long before enough dust & debris had accumulated at the stylus tip that it lost contact with the record grooves and ultimately started skipping around on the record.  I wonder how Mr. Gandy plays his records now.

Dear RB, You do not have to "beg" to disagree with me.  You are free to do so, but I have no "opinion" with which to disagree.  I was curious about the role of stylus/vinyl friction in causing static charge on the LP surface, even after having read the Shure white paper on static where they report no effect but without data, as you were so quick to point out. So I bought the ES charge meter off eBay and did the experiment I reported above (for the second time on Audiogon).  I also said I have repeated the experiment several times with similar results. In addition to all that, back when we had this argument/discussion the first time, someone else on the thread who also owned a meter also reported similar results.  In a reasonably controlled experiment, the stylus does not induce significant static charge on an LP surface.  I use the word "significant" to satisfy your prior insistence that the difference between -100V (0.1kV on my meter) and -200V (0.2kV) is important.  I hope you would agree that the difference between -11,000V, measured after yanking the LP out of its paper sleeve, and either 0.1 or 0.2kV is very significant. In my subsequent repeats of the experiment, I found that the before vs after readings are typically within -100V of each other and it can go either way. I have no "opinion". You, however, do have a strong opinion that seems to withstand the barrage of facts. 

I guess in response to my hypothesis about why the stylus does NOT appear to cause ES charge buildup on an LP surface, you posit the following:

"When a record spins, air near its surface is thrown sideways by centrifugal force, so a constant supply of fresh air is drawn down.  I say fresh, but it will contain microscopic dust particles, some of which have a positive charge. Meanwhile the diamond stylus is busily traversing the entire record, and knocking stray elections into the vinyl.  If one attracts a charged dust mote, the mote sticks to the vinyl with incredible force but there is no net negative charge for @lewm’s meter to measure."

That’s as reasonable a hypothesis as mine, but neither of us has any data to support it.  Furthermore, if what you posit is completely correct, then I am also correct: the stylus/vinyl interaction does not cause accumulation of negative charge (insert reason here).  Neutralized charge is no longer charge at all.

After having posted above about doing an experiment using a cartridge sans generator, I did think about whether it could be done with an optical cartridge, but I did not know whether optical cartridges do their signal generating work inside the cartridge body (which would  mean they have the potential to generate EMI) or in the downstream amplifier. If what you say is true, then why don't you buy an inexpensive ES charge meter and do the experiment with an optical cartridge? The prediction is that the optical cartridge would generate ES charge on the LP.

@lewm 

I did not know whether optical cartridges do their signal generating work inside the cartridge body (which would  mean they have the potential to generate EMI) or in the downstream amplifier

Current DS Audio optical cartridges contain three Light Emitting Diodes (LED).  One is there as a visual cue to the user that the cartridge is receiving DC power.  The other two LEDs emit constant infra-red which shines onto two photo-receptors. This is essentially the technology used in the fibre-optic cables so loved by audiophiles for galvanic isolation, but without the fibre.

The groove modulation is transferred to two shade plates which partially block the infra-red path, thereby causing the photo-receptors to create a nominal 70-mV AC signal at audio frequencies.  This is entirely analog - no nasty digital hash.

All other processing is done at a distance in a phono stage, which has to process position-dependent rather than velocity-dependent input.  There is nothing magnetic in the cartridge.and nothing to cause EMI,

then why don’t you buy an inexpensive ES charge meter and do the experiment with an optical cartridge? The prediction is that the optical cartridge would generate ES charge on the LP

My prediction is that any diamond stylus will generate electrostatic charges on any vinyl LP. If such a charge attracts a positively charged dust particle, the combination becomes electrically neutral.  No charge measuring device will detect a difference because there isn’t one.  However the dust particle will be effectively glued in place, causing a tick or pop when next played.  It can be removed in an ultrasonic cleaner by being ’blasted’ out, but is rarely dislodged by the stylus. The ticks are there every time the record is played, but can sometimes be removed by an ultrasonic clean.

the stylus/vinyl interaction does not cause accumulation of negative charge (insert reason here).  Neutralized charge is no longer charge at all

Oh, at the microscopic scale both the positive and negative charges are real and are still in place.  There is no net charge to be measured on the macro scale, but the incredible force of electrostatic attraction remains.  (I am glad that this time around you have not ridiculed the disparity between gravitational forces and electromagnetic forces - one of the greatest mysteries in modern physics)

You, however, do have a strong opinion that seems to withstand the barrage of facts

There are no relevant facts in the quoted Shure "White Paper" which is actually a handout prepared for a road show, as far as I can tell.  Even your own measurement goes in the wrong direction to support your claimed ’fact’.  I bothered to read the Shure stuff because your interpretation flew against the known physics, and it turned out the physics was upstanding.

The charge of a single electron is tiny, and the techniques used to first measure it using the Oil drop experiment - Wikipedia by Millikan and Fletcher are still taught in university experimental physics classes.  Millikan won a Nobel physics prize for this exacting work.

Your cheap charge meter stands as much chance of detecting a few electrons as eyeballing a record has of seeing micron-sized dust particles.  You need a scanning electron microscope for the latter!

Maybe a physics experiment using a needle probe just above the groove could react to the presence of a dislodged electron.  I doubt it, and you would need a full lab setup. To show whether the electron was dislodged by the stylus, you would need a probe before and after the stylus.  All that to show that the triboelectric effect is real!

Your explanation for why my meter measures no net charge increase on an LP surface and mine are different in phenomenology but not different in that the net result is no net increase in negative charge on the LP surface after playing a record.  Once again, it is only the results of my experiment that convince me.  You don't seem to realize that you need not give up your conviction that the stylus may give off electrons or negative ions to the LP surface.  I am allowing that maybe this happens, but for some reason the net charge on the surface remains neutral.  I offered one hypothesis to explain that, and you offered another.

You wrote, "Your cheap charge meter stands as much chance of detecting a few electrons as eyeballing a record has of seeing micron-sized dust particles.  You need a scanning electron microscope for the latter!" I cannot contend with such bullheadedness.  Where did I say I see electrons or that it is even possible to see them, even by the way under any electron microscope known to man? The meter measures electrostatic charge.  Electrostatic charge of the magnitude of a few or several thousand Volts is what we are worried about.  That much the meter can do easily and demonstrably does do. Once again, I do not and did not say that diamond does not give off electrons to vinyl; I say only that a resulting negative charge does not accumulate. Neither of us know why that is the case.

@richardbrand I have a Micro Seiki TT, with an external motor in a cast iron base, the TT itself is a 12 lb solid brass platter on a cast iron base.  The base and platter is grounded to earth.  The unit also has a vacuum system that sucks the record onto the brass platter, but unfortunately my ex-wife's cats clawed the gasket sealing material and that is no longer available.  Consequently, I use a TT mat.  I have several that I have used in the past - a thick Sorbathane that sticks to the record and platter, a white acrylic one currently in use, A thinner orange mat made of a soft rubbery substance, very much like Sorbathane but of a different brand.  They all produce static, except when the record was sucked onto the brass platter back when I had the vacuum in use.  

The belt that drives the platter is a single silk thread.  I do plan to upgrade to a different belt.  Silk does generate static for sure, but both ends are earth grounded - the platter and the spindle end.  I doubt the silk thread is a static problem.

I do have carpet in place, although I rarely notice static build up when walking on it and touching a doorknob.  It does happen occasionally, but rarely.  I'm not sure of the carpet material, but I'd bet it is a synthetic.