Dealing with Static on LP palyback

@richardbrand,

Sorry, but I have found ChatGPT to be wrong so many times WRT to very technical that I dismiss it a valid source without cross examination of each reference.

Otherwise, the nature of the Triboelectric series is fairly well understood, with technical data such as Quantifying the triboelectric series - PMC and The Triboelectric Effect Series - AlphaLab, Inc.  Glass is one the most positive (gives up electrons) materials on the Triboelectric series.  The article showing the very high power generation from the sliding of a carbon like diamond material against glass is positive evidence for me that diamond is very negative on the triboelectric series which then supports why the diamond be dragged (slid) against PVCa record material produces no static electricity. 

As far as micron particles in the groove, and the stylus with a high static pressure (stylus vertical tracking force divided by stylus surface area) causing the dust particle to be embedded in the groove, that is a very weak theory.  The basic composition of the particle can be of almost any composition with the very worst be being silica (glass) type (Sahara sand), but most will just be pulverized under the pressure, if not just blown up like when you walk through very dry snow.  Also, large particles are subject to kinetic energy from the impact with the stylus, and the basic equation is mass times velocity squared, so a large enough particle at the outer groove will cause a greater pop (where the velocity is 50 cm/s) than at the inner groove (25-cm/s). 

One of the confirmed causes of static like noise in vinyl records is a poor pressing that the stylus essentially gouges.  But it is very easy to confirm if the noise is static, hold the record above your arm, and do the hairs reach up to the record and some people use a piece a toilet paper for the same purpose.  

However, you are free to accept whatever analysis you wish, but for the record, I do not agree with it, so we agree to disagree.

Take care

Neil

@antinn 

If possible, I prefer to use Wikipedia, which is also a major feed for ChatGPT.  But what can really be trusted these days?  The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which is publicly funded and required by law to be independent, recently reported that Wikipedia has about 250,000 volunteer human fact checkers.

I think users of ChatGPT should follow Peter Walker's advice about his electrostatic speakers "If you don't like what comes out, pay more attention to what goes in".  The questions are as important as the answers.

Your first reference Quantifying the triboelectric series - PMC looks at about 50 polymers, with the other material being liquid mercury.  Vinyl is the sixth most affected polymer listed, but I could find no mention of the other material, such as diamond.  It takes two surfaces for the tribo- to tango.

Your second reference The Triboelectric Effect Series - AlphaLab, Inc looks at the effect of rubbing against wool.  None of the materials tested was glass, nor is diamond mentioned.  There are notes about how metals compare with wool, but neither glass nor diamond is a metal.

As far as micron particles in the groove, and the stylus with a high static pressure (stylus vertical tracking force divided by stylus surface area) causing the dust particle to be embedded in the groove, that is a very weak theory.

Well, whether it is weak or strong, it is not my theory!  I am saying that a charged particle is clamped in the groove by electrostatic attraction between a dislodged electron and a positively charged bit of dust. The closest chemical bond analogy might be welding.

I am certainly not saying that all bits of dust are charged, or all static is caused by the triboelectric effect.  As you say in your book, Zerostats are very good at charging records, both positively and negatively, and it takes operator skill to try and leave the record neutral.

Your own textbook indicates that a significant portion of analysed dust retrieved from records was made up of diamond, and I am putting two and two together and guessing this comes from stylus wear, which like the triboelectric effect, is caused by friction.

The way I try to confirm if the noise is caused by adhered particles is to see if specific clicks or pops are removed by ultrasonic cleaning.  Often they are.  I don't think static discharge by itself is the problem.  If it were, once discharged there would be no repeated clicks or pops from the same spot on the record.

Recently I have been playing just a few sides, moving from a Garrard 301 with an aluminium platter to a Holbo, also with an aluminium platter.  Subjectively, surface noise seems to increase at a faster rate on the Holbo.  The Garrard came standard with a rubber mat, which I replaced with a 5-mm thick Funk Achromat mat made from vinyl - essentially made from the same vinyl as records.  The Holbo comes with no mat and has a black colour to its very finely finished aluminium platter, but whether this is anodized, painted, or something else, I don't know.

The Holbo cannot take the 5mm thick mat and the supplied puck - the spindle is not quite long enough to centre the puck.  But I will get a 3-mm Achromat to try.

One brand new record would not play on the Holbo - it continually skipped at one specific point.  When I tried it on the Garrard, at twice the tracking force, whatever caused the skip was mitigated (bulldozed, maybe), and that section now plays properly on either table.

@antinn 

"As far as micron particles in the groove, and the stylus with a high static pressure (stylus vertical tracking force divided by stylus surface area) causing the dust particle to be embedded in the groove, that is a very weak theory.  The basic composition of the particle can be of almost any composition with the very worst be being silica (glass) type (Sahara sand), but most will just be pulverized under the pressure, if not just blown up like when you walk through very dry snow.  Also, large particles are subject to kinetic energy from the impact with the stylus, and the basic equation is mass times velocity squared, so a large enough particle at the outer groove will cause a greater pop (where the velocity is 50 cm/s) than at the inner groove (25-cm/s)."

These are the most salient remarks of any passage posted in this thread since I’ve been following it.

Learning new term like "triboelectric series" and beating it like a dead horse as has been done here to rationalize your inaccurate assumptions, really isn’t very convincing. @mahgister went on a jag like this over the term "anthropomorphization" in his post in another thread like he invented the word, repeatedly, in every possible context that he thought was valid. To me it doesn’t make him seem any smarter.

You’re basically rambling on about a problem that doesn’t even really exist at least in the context you’re claiming it is. Antin’s statement above actually shines some light on the issue!

To quote what posted earlier upthread -

"The crackling you hear during playback is the result of surface contamination and groove damage due to improper handling or improper stylus maintenance or tonearm setup. The inevitable electrical charges that accumulate on the records surface do not affect the sound in any way."

 "When the stylus encounters foreign matter as the record plays it pushes it out of the way."

@richardbrand 

"Any recommendations for a salon that can do a micro-line fingernail profile?"

Yawn!

@faustuss 

You managed to authoritatively quote your own first post in this thread, in which you state that static (electrical charges that accumulate on the record's surface) does not affect the sound in any way.

"The crackling you hear during playback is the result of surface contamination and groove damage due to improper handling or improper stylus maintenance or tonearm setup. The inevitable electrical charges that accumulate on the records surface do not affect the sound in any way."

Does anybody here really believe that?