Options for ridding records of static electricity

If any of you are interested in a anti-static brush, I have several for sale.

@suneone,

If you read the MSDS for Hepastat 256 - its an alkaline cleaner with non-ionic surfactant and cationic surfactant - the quat, and ethanol (alcohol) and other ingredients.  Why add Triton X100 non-ionic detergent?  Why add alcohol - what are they doing?  Otherwise, the likely reason you are experiencing continued anti-static performance its because the quat - the cationic surfactant left a thin film  These quats ( Quaternary ammonium cations) aside from killing viruses, have as a film absorb moisture from the air and form a thin water film on the record that changes the record to dissipative - ergo anti-static.  They will wear away eventually.  However, be careful, once you have cleaned with a cationic surfactant - if there is a film and you apply an anionic surfactant - any dish detergent - the anionic surfactant and the cationic surfactant are not soluble and a sticky paste can form.  Being in the groove you are unlikely to see it - but you will see a buildup of gunk on the stylus.  Personally, as I have written in the paper Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Record (you can download a free copy here -  https://thevinylpress.com/precision-aqueous-cleaning-of-vinyl-records/), I am not a fan of any cleaning process that leaves a residue.  But, as my paper says - its A way, not THE way - just make an informed decision, and know and accept any associated risk.

Neil

@mijostyn,

"I would like to get this settled once and for all"  My only response is good luck.  There are so many variables.  The ambient humidity; the various ground potentials, the record material (which is a complete wildcard), the record mat, the record liner, you - what is your hydration level; just to name a few.  If there was an answer, I would like to think the RCA engineers from years past would have figured it out - they spent quite a bit of effort developing anti-static records with carefully bended formulas.  But, one always has to admire those that try.  But, there appears to be a significant risk with just removing the record from the sleeve and lifting it from the platter mat.  So, there 'could' be an accumulation effect from the end of play platter lift-off to sleeving; and this will be influenced by the ambient humidity and the hydration status of the human.  Personally, I do not have any major static issues - but dust/lint that is only visible with black-light is often in the air.  Use of room HEPA filter can help.  Otherwise, all my records have been deep-wet cleaned and anit-static sleeves are used, and I have good luck with the  Kinetronics Anti-Static Microfiber Cloth, Tiger Cloth wetted with about one drop of atomized DI water (from a nasal spray device).  

Neil

The original zerostat gun (red) by discwasher is an effective tool, as well as a leather mat. Also the audioquest carbon fiber brush with the brass colored metal in the handle (newest version) seems to be effective. Also the use of anti static record sleeves is a good start. 

Lewm, they called it the Magnetic-Kinetic interface. The Medallion was the last version. Both transformers always drove all the panels. With the 2+2s they used one interface but with the 3+3s and 4+4s they used two.
The 4+4's were about the same size as your 845s.
The two transformer idea originated because it was imposible to get the entire frequency range out of one transformer without saturation. I intensonally had a large transformer built that sacrificed bass for high end because I have always used subwoofers. Boy did that work. Now depending on the length of the wall you have the 845s on, you will need multiple subs. A 16 foot wall requires 4 subs. If you do not like playing over 95 dB and do not care about the bottom octave 10" drivers will do. Otherwise you have to stick with 12" drivers. In sealed cabinets they are not that big and because they are right against the wall and in corners they sort of disappear. But there are other serious considerations when matching subs to ESLs we can talk about another time as we are hijacking this thread.
Antinn, I really do not think they thought of it as an important issue compared with all the others. You are right there are a number of variables that can alter the results. I have some control of humidity as we use AC. It was 54% this morning. My records have no static at all to start. That part is easy. Spinning a record all night with the dust cover open resulted in no noticable static charge. So I think we can say that just spinning a record at 54% humidity will not cause static build up. My mat is not conductive. Tonight I am going to play a record without the sweep arm to see if a charge developes. If it does we can safely say that something about playing a record creates a static charge and since creating a charge requires "intimate contact" we can safely assume it is the stylus rubbing. If no charge developes it gets a bit more complicated. Most likely the stylus rubbing does not create a charge but there could be something about my turntable or environment that is keeping the charge from developing. I have been using a conductive sweep arm since the early 70's and have not had an static build up records. So, I have not thought much about it. The only records I have ever had to clean are the ones I had before sweep arm use. Again, I do not buy used records but they certainly should be cleaned before play.
Triton X100 is a surfactant. Water all by itself is "anti-static" Triton X100, distilled water with a touch of alcohol make a woderful record cleaning solution. Out of the bath the records will be totally discharged and all the solution will evaporate.  Any substance that stays on the record is bad news antistatic or not.