Felt, Acrylic, Wool, Cork, Silicone, or Rubber?
Register to hide this ad
johnjhazel
PhxJohn
I like the Rega wool. For some reason, mine do not cling to my records. I put a Rega wool mat on my AR 77-XB. It makes it look like a baby LP 12.
tubewade
Super Member
I don't know how you avoid the static. My Linn has a felt mat, of course, and it sticks to the record in the wintertime. Maybe the difference in felt and wool. I'm OK with rubber mats.
Wool is actually conductive and felt is usually (but not necessarily) wool so perhaps not recommended. Leather, cork and rubber are better. I don't have a static problem where I live so my personal experience isn't of the greatest value though... much like most of my opinions. 
timmy.timmy
Well-Known Member
Here's some thoughts; 1° static builds up (+) and it's conductive (-). Electrons are passed from on surface onto the other.
That proportionally in regard of the materials and their surface areas while in 'friction' where electrons are passed on give & take.
A soft 'nylon' brush (+) sweeping a record surface (-) will build (pick) up the static. A record platter mat is preferred static free.
Evidently the same rule applies to the record's surfaces (-) on a light mass mat (+) that will to stick to the record when pulled-off.
Either way a heavier mass (+) mat or a light (-) mat should help to prevent that. To discharge the mat and the record help as well.
One can use an even more negative charged material than vinyl for mat or 'under' mat to counter that static transfer into the vinyl.
2° my need for a soft 'landing' surface made me opt for a leather mat as a compromise between that but mostly for it's sonic signature.
I believe that felt is bellow leather in that static chart. But sonically like many I do not like it for platter mat. Cork IME is... OK both ways.
Rubber is there as well in the "OK" zone. Often credited for it's dampening and non-static properties. More so than for it's sonic merits.
While some privilege sorbothane mixed materials (Herbie) for their platter mat, others truly dislike their sonic signature. Give them all trials.
That proportionally in regard of the materials and their surface areas while in 'friction' where electrons are passed on give & take.
A soft 'nylon' brush (+) sweeping a record surface (-) will build (pick) up the static. A record platter mat is preferred static free.
Evidently the same rule applies to the record's surfaces (-) on a light mass mat (+) that will to stick to the record when pulled-off.
Either way a heavier mass (+) mat or a light (-) mat should help to prevent that. To discharge the mat and the record help as well.
One can use an even more negative charged material than vinyl for mat or 'under' mat to counter that static transfer into the vinyl.
2° my need for a soft 'landing' surface made me opt for a leather mat as a compromise between that but mostly for it's sonic signature.
I believe that felt is bellow leather in that static chart. But sonically like many I do not like it for platter mat. Cork IME is... OK both ways.
Rubber is there as well in the "OK" zone. Often credited for it's dampening and non-static properties. More so than for it's sonic merits.
While some privilege sorbothane mixed materials (Herbie) for their platter mat, others truly dislike their sonic signature. Give them all trials.
Last edited:
I've used felt mats since 1985, preferring to use one even on a turntable designed not to use a mat (my Well Tempered Record Player simply sounded more expressive and engaging when forgoing the record clamp and using a Linn felt mat). The only time I've had issues with static was when using the brush on an M97xE cartridge. Shure's response to my enquiry was:
"Sorry, there is no solution. Like you, I use a felt mat and the M97xE. The mat does cling to the record as you describe but I still use the brush for the cleaning, the stabilization, and the de-static action on the played side of the LP. I used two sided tape to adhere the felt mat to the turntable platter. When I remove the LP, I wipe both side with an anti-static cloth made by 3M."
I opted to simply not use the brush. The static charge in my records I took care of by cleaning them with my Nitty Gritty.
Andre Garcia
“WITHOUT MUSIC, LIFE WOULD BE A MISTAKE”
static is not the only issue. changing your mat you will change the sound too, Therefore find a middle ground or have few different mats, depending the music you are playing.
AG.
AG.
Andre Garcia
“WITHOUT MUSIC, LIFE WOULD BE A MISTAKE”
nothing sound the same specially during the opening.
AG.
Just got an anti static felt mat from China. I ordered a silicon mat but...anyway. I install the mat and started getting loud pops every couple of sides. This continued even after I put a rubber mat over it. I think it was storing static and then pop! I took it off and everything is fine. Evidently it wasn't draining through the spindle until a charge had built up. I really like the silicon mat on my other table. That's what I get for trying to cut out the middle man.
sqlsavior
Lunatic Member
My ancient Discwasher D-Stat mat (conductive felt) works well against static build-up on my Teac TN-400 Magnefloat, which has a grounded aluminum platter.
My Technics SP-25 had an awful static build-up problem, I think until the new thrust pad wore through and let the platter ground. The best way to combat it that I found while it was at its worst was a spritz of Pfansteihl Phan-Stat anti-static cleaning fluid on an old-style Discwasher brush before use.
My Technics SP-25 had an awful static build-up problem, I think until the new thrust pad wore through and let the platter ground. The best way to combat it that I found while it was at its worst was a spritz of Pfansteihl Phan-Stat anti-static cleaning fluid on an old-style Discwasher brush before use.
beat_truck
Addicted Member
I like rubber mats the best. Two of my 'tables came with chintzy felt mats, and they went straight in the garbage. I made a cork mat for one of them, but I didn't like it because it was a static magnet. Sometimes it would actually come off stuck to the record when I'd lift them off the platter.
I put a used Technics rubber mat on the other.
I put a used Technics rubber mat on the other.
TobascoKid
Active Member
The problem is their secondary effects.
Dust falls inside open pore mats. Because they are on turntables, our mats are negative charged. In opposition, records are often positive charged so when we drop records on, the dust is attracted to our record grooves. Then our styluses grind the dust in. The dust builds up so we hear the contaminants as crackle sounds.
Bad mats are often good insulators. As we drag styluses through grooves, they strip off electrons to build up static. When we build up a large enough charge, the lightning jumps through our cartridges and are heard as pops & snaps. Adding humidity to our sound rooms are Band-Aid approaches.
Closed pore mats are way better. Rubber mats are easier to clean. Good rubber mats had carbon added to negate our record’s positive charges so no man-made lightning.
I don’t know about modern mats. They are not talked about. Are silicon mats grounded?
And now some people insist their mats must to add their voice to the record’s choirs. They are ‘our ears know best’ match-game money-makers.
The best mats I ever used sits on the old JVC QL-Y7 turntables. They were a thick & dense rubber-mix of flexible carbon-impregnated material that really isolated records. Must be a secret because I’ve never seen anything like them.
Dust falls inside open pore mats. Because they are on turntables, our mats are negative charged. In opposition, records are often positive charged so when we drop records on, the dust is attracted to our record grooves. Then our styluses grind the dust in. The dust builds up so we hear the contaminants as crackle sounds.
Bad mats are often good insulators. As we drag styluses through grooves, they strip off electrons to build up static. When we build up a large enough charge, the lightning jumps through our cartridges and are heard as pops & snaps. Adding humidity to our sound rooms are Band-Aid approaches.
Closed pore mats are way better. Rubber mats are easier to clean. Good rubber mats had carbon added to negate our record’s positive charges so no man-made lightning.
I don’t know about modern mats. They are not talked about. Are silicon mats grounded?
And now some people insist their mats must to add their voice to the record’s choirs. They are ‘our ears know best’ match-game money-makers.
The best mats I ever used sits on the old JVC QL-Y7 turntables. They were a thick & dense rubber-mix of flexible carbon-impregnated material that really isolated records. Must be a secret because I’ve never seen anything like them.