Record wear article

[orthophonic]

Electronics Illustrated did a good article/test on record wear in the Nov 1959 issue,
bit dated due to higher tracking forces, but they did an update in 1968.
Cleanliness of the record along with lower tracking forces had the greatest impact on low wear with cleanliness being the number one factor.

You can find it at World Radio History, worth reading.

 

[RayParkhurst]

Electronics Illustrated did a good article/test on record wear in the Nov 1959 issue,
bit dated due to higher tracking forces, but they did an update in 1968.
Cleanliness of the record along with lower tracking forces had the greatest impact on low wear with cleanliness being the number one factor.

You can find it at World Radio History, worth reading.

Thanks, I had not read those articles. I love looking through the old Electronics magazines. 1959 and 1968 are so different! Quite improved photos in 1968.

I've stated that I consider record cleanliness to be of secondary importance based on the SWS3 and SWS4 testing. That said, my dry brushing technique is actually quite good, and it's all I use for my own listening. I've seen only marginally-improved, and sometimes marginally-degraded, results when wet vacuum cleaning. So I suppose what I mean to say is that going to the trouble of US and/or wet vacuum cleaning doesn't seem to make any difference vs a careful dry brushing in terms of stylus wear. I am not sure if it changes the record wear rate, as that was not my focus. Indeed during SWS3 it was hypothesized that wet cleaning (US or vacuum) may actually remove beneficial surface coatings that reduced stylus wear, but I'm sure @Thomas_AA will counter that with data on reduced friction after US.

 

[cafe latte]

May be the funniest exchange I’ve read all year. The very law that excludes area, but we’ll just ignore that force bit. Not changing the laws of physics here. Good lord.

Putting people down, who would so that, Ah yes JP us here...

 

[flavio81]

I've yet to wear or damage a record. And some of them i play a lot, like Abbey Road.

People worry way too much.

 

[Doug G.]

When I was young, in the nineteen seventies, I worried too much. It got to be to the point of worrying about tenths of a gram, etc. Then, as I grew older and had records years, and even decades old that still played fine, I got a lot less "particular" and have stayed that way and those same records still play fine. Not careless, by any means, just not so neurotic about tracking pressure or related issues.

Doug

 

[Mr Boochie]

This was busted as a thing about 2 decades ago.

About the "creator" of that YouTube video...

 

[Enophile]

so, flash melting is real?

No.

Stupid theory.

 

[cafe latte]

About the "creator" of that YouTube video...

This shows with the invention of AI and also unscrupulous people on the net who scraped Ray Parkhursts wear threads cherry picking bits to make it look like a particular stylus profile will destroy your records and adding some AI generated pictures of people looking in horror at their records and lots of click bait ads that we need to be more careful what and how we post.
Rays thread was supposed to clear up misinformation but now it has been scraped and bits stolen it will give much more misinformation than it cleared up. Not at all Rays fault but how the net has become.
Chris

 

[OBMG74]

When I was young, in the nineteen seventies, I worried too much. It got to be to the point of worrying about tenths of a gram, etc. Then, as I grew older and had records years, and even decades old that still played fine, I got a lot less "particular" and have stayed that way and those same records still play fine. Not careless, by any means, just not so neurotic about tracking pressure or related issues.

Doug

I'm in my early 70's and this becomes less important every year.
It's like putting uncomfortable and ugly car seats in your car, thus preserving the seats for the next guy.

I take reasonable care of my records and stylus' but I don't obsess over it any more.

 

[Doug G.]

About the "creator" of that YouTube video...

Methinks this guy's self-perceived knowledge is far greater than his actual knowledge.

He talks about records living on borrowed time. I guess quite a few of mine are living on 50+ years of borrowed time.

Doug

 

[loudnoises]

Methinks this guy's self-perceived knowledge is far greater than his actual knowledge.

He talks about records living on borrowed time. I guess quite a few of mine are living on 50+ years of borrowed time.

Doug

It's the instant expert effect.

Somebody reads a bunch of unvetted "studies" on something, and without having any experience to apply, acts like an expert. It's what AI is incredibly good at.

 

[Mr Boochie]

Methinks this guy's self-perceived knowledge is far greater than his actual knowledge.

He talks about records living on borrowed time. I guess quite a few of mine are living on 50+ years of borrowed time.

Doug

When I open YouTube or whatever social media site, and there's a BIG clickbait piece on the first page as you open it — with a splashy title, a talking-head guy blabbering like Joe Expert about Hi-Fi or whatever (but there are few or no audio examples, just him talking the whole 20 minutes)...

Red flags go up immediately. Caveat emptor, to infinity and beyond!

 

[Ken Boyd]

That article is based on a long thread on Steve Hoffmans site. And I went thru the entire thread and completely dismiss it based on an entire life of actual experience spinning vinyl. Some where the OP of the Steve Hoffmans thread which is pretty much the same as the one on VE has errored somehow when making the claims he has stated. First red flag in my mind was he started with a record that was already damaged and figured somehow that wasn't a problem as he would just measure and photo and more damage to the existing damage, I looked at that as very strange approach.

Everyone can follow these threads all they want but I won't be changing out my expensive MC carts anywhere near the 400 hour mark. And I sure as hell won't be going back to a dry brush dusting for my cleaning routine.

 

[RayParkhurst]

Your dismissal is noted and dismissed.

The SWS3 study was published on VE, though linked to on SHF for reference to folks who had followed the earlier study. SWS3 was primarily a sequential data collection, so I'm curious what claims you think are in error. It's very different from the guy who claims Conicals damage grooves. In his case it's all claims, no data.

The VE study started with a new record to test for groove damage and found that the VM95ML REV (for REView sample as sent by AT) caused visible damage on the very first play. That first data point should probably have terminated the study, since the VM95ML really should not be damaging grooves.

After sharing the data with AT, they replaced the VM95ML REV with a newer production VM95ML, but the new one also caused groove damage. That one is now with AT being analyzed in Japan.

 

[cafe latte]

Your dismissal is noted and dismissed.

The SWS3 study was published on VE, though linked to on SHF for reference to folks who had followed the earlier study. SWS3 was primarily a sequential data collection, so I'm curious what claims you think are in error. It's very different from the guy who claims Conicals damage grooves. In his case it's all claims, no data.

The VE study started with a new record to test for groove damage and found that the VM95ML REV (for REView sample as sent by AT) caused visible damage on the very first play. That first data point should probably have terminated the study, since the VM95ML really should not be damaging grooves.

After sharing the data with AT, they replaced the VM95ML REV with a newer production VM95ML, but the new one also caused groove damage. That one is now with AT being analyzed in Japan.

And you found a Sas which is basically a micro ridge that did not do this to the groove. I dont see this rate of wear or groove damage neither do others.
There are a lot of variables with styus wear it is why Shure abandoned their studies as they were not able to get repeatable data.
Arm bearings, friction, compliance, even music played and many other variables affect wear.
It is good to see you are trying another cartridge type for the next test, I will be interested to see how it goes. That said it is a test with the gear you use with the variables it has. The results are not going to be a line in the sand for these tips wear, just an interesting study which I applaud you for doing, but eliminating the variables is almost impossible without lots of different cartridges with the same stylus on different tables with many replications.
Results in these studies cant come to stylus wear, stylus is bad type conclusions especially when the results dont make sense.
When unexpected results happen the question is why? The answer could be compliance or like the suspected suspension issue.
When I brought the possible suspension issue up on the thread I was shot down for putting thr study down but not at least my concerns have been listened to.
As I said at the time, if a tyre wears in a test quickly is it the tyre that is bad or is it the suspension or wheel alignment that is faulty or even the car is too heavy for the tyre?
We cant just decide it is the tyre, all other variables need to be checked first, the same goes for a study if it holds any water at all.
I have said this before but I thought it should be said here too.
Enjoying your study but it is just a study fun as it is and I love the pics.
Chris

 

[Ken Boyd]

Your dismissal is noted and dismissed.

The SWS3 study was published on VE, though linked to on SHF for reference to folks who had followed the earlier study. SWS3 was primarily a sequential data collection, so I'm curious what claims you think are in error. It's very different from the guy who claims Conicals damage grooves. In his case it's all claims, no data.

The VE study started with a new record to test for groove damage and found that the VM95ML REV (for REView sample as sent by AT) caused visible damage on the very first play. That first data point should probably have terminated the study, since the VM95ML really should not be damaging grooves.

After sharing the data with AT, they replaced the VM95ML REV with a newer production VM95ML, but the new one also caused groove damage. That one is now with AT being analyzed in Japan.

I dismiss it based on my lifetime of spinning records and the wear time on the carts I have used ever since the early 1970's. And the fact I have yet to wear out a record from untold number of plays from every record I own that was purchased, over 50 years ago new by me.

What condition is your tone arm in? Many users have much better tonearms than the one listed in your study, including myself. But it really just comes to results, I have never had a cart wear out that early. I have sent in carts using AT's program with many more hours on them and used the trade in program and they looked at my carts that I returned and claimed they had many more hours left on them. They had no incentive to claim that as they keep the trade ins and throw them away.

I also have many records that I own that are decades old with many play hours on them and I can compare them to new reissues and if the old ones were worn out the evidence would be in the playback comparison.

I am not in the camp that records don't wear or stylus don't wear out, but I dispute the fact that a good ML stylus set up correctly on a good tonearm is worn out to the point of bottoming out at 400 hrs and is ruining a record, and It won't wear out a record to the point that when listening to it is obvious.

It's all good though many people work hard to try and help us to have easy numbers of when to establish best practices, but really there are so many variables to this that a hard number is going to be impossible to set. And the fact to determine when a cart or record has considerable wear requires equipment most people don't have access to and even that is a bit subjective.

 

[RayParkhurst]

And you found a Sas which is basically a micro ridge that did not do this to the groove. I dont see this rate of wear or groove damage neither do others.
There are a lot of variables with styus wear it is why Shure abandoned their studies as they were not able to get repeatable data.
Arm bearings, friction, compliance, even music played and many other variables affect wear.
It is good to see you are trying another cartridge type for the next test, I will be interested to see how it goes. That said it is a test with the gear you use with the variables it has. The results are not going to be a line in the sand for these tips wear, just an interesting study which I applaud you for doing, but eliminating the variables is almost impossible without lots of different cartridges with the same stylus on different tables with many replications.
Results in these studies cant come to stylus wear, stylus is bad type conclusions especially when the results dont make sense.
When unexpected results happen the question is why? The answer could be compliance or like the suspected suspension issue.
When I brought the possible suspension issue up on the thread I was shot down for putting thr study down but not at least my concerns have been listened to.
As I said at the time, if a tyre wears in a test quickly is it the tyre that is bad or is it the suspension or wheel alignment that is faulty or even the car is too heavy for the tyre?
We cant just decide it is the tyre, all other variables need to be checked first, the same goes for a study if it holds any water at all.
I have said this before but I thought it should be said here too.
Enjoying your study but it is just a study fun as it is and I love the pics.
Chris

It's nice to see you repeating the same baseless claims yet again on another forum!

The SAS did do a lot of shaving of HF grooves on first play.

I have an open offer for anyone to send me the same type of record I used in my experiment, played on their TT and cartridge, to check for damage. If they send the cartridge or stylus I'll do a wear evaluation on it as well, all for free. So far only one person has done this, and the results confirmed my data, showing that his VM95ML also caused groove damage and wear.

So I have data from four VM95ML, played on three different TTs, that all says the same thing.

My current TT, while for sure not high-end, is competent and almost new, and is working properly. I've used it to play one VM95C for 500 hours, and another VM95C for 1000 hours, with only light wear. I've also showed that a VM95C and a VM95SH cause no record damage, but a VM95ML played same time caused the same divot damage seen in the SWS3 study. It seems unlikely that this TT is highly selective of only the ML stylus type for damage. It also seems unlikely the TT has mechanical problems given the extremely long life in the Conicals.

I am not in the camp that records don't wear or stylus don't wear out, but I dispute the fact that a good ML stylus set up correctly on a good tonearm is worn out to the point of bottoming out at 400 hrs and is ruining a record, and It won't wear out a record to the point that when listening to it is obvious.

I've never said the ML was ruining records, nor that the groove damage is obvious during listening. The VM95ML I tested did indeed bottom out pretty quickly, but hitting bottom doesn't mean it is ruining records. Did you get this misinformation from the AI article?

 

[Ken Boyd]

It's nice to see you repeating the same baseless claims yet again on another forum!

The SAS did do a lot of shaving of HF grooves on first play.

I have an open offer for anyone to send me the same type of record I used in my experiment, played on their TT and cartridge, to check for damage. If they send the cartridge or stylus I'll do a wear evaluation on it as well, all for free. So far only one person has done this, and the results confirmed my data, showing that his VM95ML also caused groove damage and wear.

So I have data from four VM95ML, played on three different TTs, that all says the same thing.

My current TT, while for sure not high-end, is competent and almost new, and is working properly. I've used it to play one VM95C for 500 hours, and another VM95C for 1000 hours, with only light wear. I've also showed that a VM95C and a VM95SH cause no record damage, but a VM95ML played same time caused the same divot damage seen in the SWS3 study. It seems unlikely that this TT is highly selective of only the ML stylus type for damage. It also seems unlikely the TT has mechanical problems given the extremely long life in the Conicals.



I've never said the ML was ruining records, nor that the groove damage is obvious during listening. The VM95ML I tested did indeed bottom out pretty quickly, but hitting bottom doesn't mean it is ruining records. Did you get this misinformation from the AI article?

I would think that if you allow a stylus to wear to the point it is dragging the bottom of the groove, the record would be pretty much ruining. I might be wrong but is not the goal of changing out a stylus to replace the cart/stylus prior to that point as if you're waiting that long to change it certainly seems like some real damage has been done.

But really the ML should be the least wearing stylus, I think something must have been missed in your set up, the ML profile has the best profile for least wear. IT allows for the best tracking, the least pressures on the contact surfaces, something is up here.

Anyhow keep up the hard work as it seems as you're trying very hard to address everything that you can. My approach has been pretty much not based on any evidence other than what I think I hear. My hearing probably has quite a bit a loss so perhaps I am just happy with my results because I can't hear any damage. Let everyone make their own conclusion and I don't wish to affect other's opinion so let that be said my opinion is just mine based on my experiences. I try to change out my stylus at around 1000 hrs, I have a stylus timer but sometimes I mess up making sure when I turn it on or off, so hours are proximate. I tried to buy one of those timers that attach a magnet to your rim and has a sensor, but the company doesn't seem to respond to emails and has no outlets or dealers to buy from. Plus, I am not sure it would work as my main table the edge of the rim is slanted. And I mostly used MC carts with ML stylus.

 

[loudnoises]

I would think that if you allow a stylus to wear to the point it is dragging the bottom of the groove, the record would be pretty much ruining. I might be wrong but is not the goal of changing out a stylus to replace the cart/stylus prior to that point as if you're waiting that long to change it certainly seems like some real damage has been done.

I don't see how it could get that low without cutting the walls of the grove away.

I think the goal is two-fold. One is to not damage the record, the second is to hear all the music. Not damaging records is pretty easy if you keep your vtf under 2g and use conicals.

Any product with that sort of failure rate is an outlier. Maybe there is a design flaw. Maybe the wrong rubber was used. Hopefully there will be answers.

 

[RayParkhurst]

I would think that if you allow a stylus to wear to the point it is dragging the bottom of the groove, the record would be pretty much ruining. I might be wrong but is not the goal of changing out a stylus to replace the cart/stylus prior to that point as if you're waiting that long to change it certainly seems like some real damage has been done.

Anyhow keep up the hard work as it seems as you're trying very hard to address everything that you can. My approach has been pretty much not based on any evidence other than what I think I hear. My hearing probably has quite a bit a loss so perhaps I am just happy with my results because I can't hear any damage. Let everyone make their own conclusion and I don't wish to affect other's opinion so let that be said my opinion is just mine based on my experiences. I try to change out my stylus at around 1000 hrs, I have a stylus timer but sometimes I mess up making sure when I turn it on or off, so hours are proximate. I tried to buy one of those timers that attach a magnet to your rim and has a sensor, but the company doesn't seem to respond to emails and has no outlets or dealers to buy from. Plus, I am not sure it would work as my main table the edge of the rim is slanted. And I mostly used MC carts with ML stylus.

I don't see any reason hitting bottom would cause damage to the groove. That said, I have seen badly-damaged groove bottoms, but I think they were due to really fast needle drops as the damage was in a limited area. I've also seen styli that have been riding bottom for thousands of hours, with huge chisel-shaped tips, but I doubt these really do all that much damage, just glide over the tops of the HF grooves. Their owners were adamant that they still sounded great!

My gut feel is that ML/MR's are in general fine, but so far I have not tested one that doesn't cause some level of damage. I have a VM740xML on order and will test it for groove damage before using it for SWS5, assuming it does minimal damage. I'll be using the same TT that showed long life for the Conicals and no damage on Conicals or Shibata. If I do see excess damage, I'll likely test a few other TTs to see if any of them give a better result.

I'd really like to see more folks do the testing themselves, on their own equipment, so we can gather more data especially on the ML/MR profile. It would be a surprise if the profile itself turns out to be inherently damaging to vinyl, but stranger things have turned out to be true.