|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
63.140.99.204
Just measured the resistance on the new Audioquest brush and re-measured the old Audioquest brush.The new brush has a gold colored metal strip on the side in the usual place that one would place their fingers. The resistance between this gold strip and the carbon fibers was consistently 4 ohms.
The resistance between the sides of the old brush and the carbon fibers varied all over the surface, but was never better than 1000ohms. Sometimes, I got no continuity at all in several spots on the side of the handle. Curiously, there was one spot high and on the end of the side that measured 21 ohms. However, a person's hand would normally never touch the handle in this location.
Anyway, the new brush is vastly improved and I would think that it should be good in a dry, cold climate. Cannot wait for next winter to see if it really helps with the static.
Edits: 05/11/17Follow Ups:
Mine has a metal U-shaped handle that is attached to the main body of the brush only at each end, just like the brush in your photo. Thus you can rotate it around the long axis of the brush, making contact with the bristles along the way. This alone might discharge the brush, and the charge transferred to the handle may be drained away from the handle when the user touches inevitably touches it. I don't know this to be the case, but it makes some sense.
static electricity could be transferred from the old brush bristles to the brush body or handle due to the extremely high resistance. Actually, when I tested the continuity between the bristles and the rotating plastic handle, it read infinity.I retested the entire old Audioquest brush again, and I obtained 1000 ohms or more between the bristles and some points along the side of the aluminum body. Most of the time there was no continuity along the side, except for the very ends of the brush. Curiously, I was able to obtain as little as 13 ohms if I touched the very top of the aluminum body(top of the U shape). However, a person's hand would never be in that location while holding the brush on the record surface. This doesn't make much sense to me. If the top of the aluminum measures well, why doesn't the rest of the aluminum body measure low resistance. As you can see, I scratched the aluminum body to make sure I had good contact.
Edits: 05/12/17
Hi, alaskahiatt,
How the brush is held can make a difference. I'm an exception to your assertion that a person's hand would never be in that location while holding the brush on the record surface. I removed the plastic fiber guards on my Audioquest brushes so that I hold onto the brush body directly while using the brush. I don't notice as much static as when I held onto the plastic guards but I still want to try the new anti-static design.
Regards,
Tom
assumed that people's hands would normally be touching the side of the aluminum body, but not the top.
However, the continuity of the new brush is so terrific, that it is a vast improvement over the old brush.
Tom
If you take the old brush apart you will see that the aluminium part is only a thin cover over the black plastic handle underneath which actually holds the fibres in place.
There is an electrical connection between the fibres and the aluminium cover by means of a small ( brass ?) pin that protrudes from the black plastic handle connecting to the underside of the aluminium cover. However the cover is hot glued to the plastic handle. The brass contact point only protrudes by a mm or so and the thickness of the hot glue can exceed this. So the electrical connectivity from fibre to aluminium cover is actually determined by the thickness of the application of the hot glue and it appears perfectly possible for no contact to be made at all.
probably changed along with the pin making intermittent contact. That pin must also be near the top of the aluminum "U" shape. When the top is pressed with a probe, contact is being made. However, when the side is pressed with the probe, little or nothing happens.
Thanks PAR for destroying your brush, so these phenomena could be explained.
" That pin must also be near the top of the aluminum "U" shape."
Yes it is, or at least the point of contact is.
" Thanks PAR for destroying your brush".
Actually it just fell apart one day. As that was after at least 20 years of use I am not complaining. I just replaced it with a new one ( or two, I keep one for cleaned discs , the other for those yet to enter the cleaning regime, I think that's as close as I get to being obsessive - no, I also keep a stylus timer).
Hi, PAR,
There's nothing obsessive about keeping records clean and reducing wear on a stylus.
I use two Audioquest brushes for sweeping (one in each hand) and then swipe the bristles against each other to clean out the dust picked up by the brushes. Works great, obsessive or not. '-)
Regards,
Tom
by the fact that you and some others have achieved such a detailed understanding of the construction of the original Audioquest brush. I have always assumed that there in fact would be static electrical charge remaining on the LP after I brushed it, which is why I always follow up with a Zerostat zap.
In my other system, I use an old Groovemaster brush, which has a radioactive element at its base said to dispell the static charge from an LP while brushing. My completely subjective impression is that it works. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately for our environment, the Groovemaster is no longer manufactured.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: