Tungstone Needles and Record Wear

[broso252]

I have often heard that tungs-tone needles wear records at a greater rate than steel needles. When I found some tungs-tone needles in jammed in the motor of a 2-65 portable I decided to test them. I started only with records that said for best results use tungs-tone needles. I let the needle run in the run out groove for a few seconds then placed it at the beginning of the record. The first play seemed to have slightly more wear than a steel needle but each subsequent play seemed to result in no wear on any subsequent records. The results were not the same with a 50s record I tried but I don't think there's any good way to play on of those on a heavy pickup machine.

I didn't share these results as the only quantitative result I had to back up my claim was the amount of record dust on the tip of the needle after a play but I recently found a note in the victor meeting minutes that compared their then, in-development chromium needles with Tungs-tone and steel needles. it claimed that of the 3, the Tungs-tone needles resulted in the least record wear.
It is likely that they improved the chromium needles later on but I don't know if they ever improved them beyond the tungs-tone needles.
They may have as they recommended to use only chromium needles with the wear prone 33rpm records.

[KCW]

This is great to know. I use them almost exclusively on my VV 8-9 and Vic V. I’ve always worried though that perhaps I was doing damage by being lazy and not just using a new steel needle with every play.

[gunnarthefeisty]

I have been told that tungs-tones are excellent for records that aren't worn, but they will absolutely make worn records worse. I have a few and haven't tested, as I'm a bit scared of ruining records!

[AmberolaAndy]

I have tungstone needles but I’m scared to use them!

[epigramophone]

My understanding is that the abrasive content of the record wears the needle, not the other way round.
A steel needle which claims to play multiple records must, I assume, be of a harder composition than a standard needle and therefore more likely to wear the record. For this reason I never use them.

[broso252]

My understanding is that the abrasive content of the record wears the needle, not the other way round.
A steel needle which claims to play multiple records must, I assume, be of a harder composition than a standard needle and therefore more likely to wear the record. For this reason I never use them.

I would not trust a steel needle that claims to play multiple times but the tungs-tone needles are shaped and function differently than standard steel needles.

I can speculate as to the reason for the results of the tests but I am inclined to trust Victors own internal tests as to how their needles wear records. I trust that the report was accurate as it was never meant to be viewed by the public and therefore free of any marketing manipulation.

My theory as to why the tungs-tone needles wear less is that they form to the grove in the first play (leading to more wear) and as long as subsequent records have a similar record grove shape the record should have plenty of surface contact to distribute the weight of the needle (leading to less wear as the needle perfectly fits the groove). Because the tip of the Tungs-tone needle is a thin wire instead of the taper of a steel needle, the tip does not become wider as the needle wears down and therefore does not start to become too wide for the groove. As soon as the tungs-tone needle is completely worn, the surface of the shank supports the wight of the soundbox leading to distorted output and giving alert that the needle is worn almost immediately allowing the user to immediately cease use of the needle immediately before damage is done.

I also don't know if I can trust them on anything other than victor records.

I can see how they may wear worn records excessively as worn records probably don't have very a consistent groove shape leading to both excessive wear on the needle and the record.

[CarlosV]

My understanding is that the abrasive content of the record wears the needle, not the other way round.
A steel needle which claims to play multiple records must, I assume, be of a harder composition than a standard needle and therefore more likely to wear the record. For this reason I never use them.

I agree with Roger. I mostly utilize fiber needles, and in the occasions when I need to resort to metallic ones, my choice is for the gold-plated Laubscher needles (I bought a large amount of NOS packets years ago in a record fair). Gold (2.5 mohs) is much softer than any of the other metals that are used to make needles, so their wear to records is minimal. As to the abrasives on the record groove, it was only present up to the late 30s/early 40s on most USA-made records, so playing them with steel needles and heavy pickups will rapidly erode the groove. European records kept the abrasive up to mid-50s, and can be played on gramophones with no significant wear.

As to tungstones/tungstyles, I have some HMV and Victor in their nice little tins, but only used it once to test it and never more. I do not buy the advertisement that they do not wear records, as the principle is the same as the steel needles: they wear out as they run in the groove - as it loses its roundness and sharp edges are created the needle will eat away the groove, irrespective of the metal being steel or tungsten (it does not help that tungsten is harder than steel - 7,5 versus 6.5 Mohs - and is also brittle). There may be some improvement made in the metallic composition that resulted in the tungstone needles that made them gentler to records, but my point is that I do not need to risk eroding my records as better alternatives are at hand. The only positive side of the tungstone is that they don't need to be replaced after each play, but this does not bother me, as I have to replace the record and wind the machine up after each play anyway.

[epigramophone]

Surely the very thin gold plating on some steel needles will be worn away in the first few grooves of the record.