Toxic chemicals have been found in some guitar strings that have no business being used to marginally improve your playing experience.
Many of you who read my articles know me as a pretty opinionated content creator. I’ve managed to get myself into disagreements with everyone from Gibson to Silvertone. Time to add some string manufacturers to that list. What you may or may not know is that this whole time I’ve also been working on my PhD in chemical oceanography. Well, as I celebrate five years of guitar journalism, I’m also poised to graduate from that PhD program after 5 years of studying something called PFAS.
What is PFAS? Well, it’s a family of man-made chemicals that we have used in so, so many things. Why is your rain jacket waterproof? Because of PFAS and their water repellant characteristics. Why does food not stick to your cooking pan? Teflon is the answer, which is made from PFAS. Even though Teflon itself is harmless, the process of making it requires the use of and disposal (usually unregulated) of lots of bad PFAS.
So what does this have to do with the guitar? Well, these PFAS have also been found in guitar strings of all places, because that water and grease and oil repellent nature of them can coat your strings and make them last longer. Thus, coated strings.
Make no mistake PFAS are bad for you, they get into you through food, water, inhalation, and can be passed down from your mom during birth and breastfeeding. They have a myriad of negative human health impacts (read more about that here) but even worse, they don’t go away. PFAS are called forever chemicals because they don’t just break down quickly or easily. In fact, some PFAS can stay in your body for around a decade. So why in the world do we need to use this in guitar strings of all places? Good question.
Many of us in the scientific field have argued for something called the essential use principle. This means we will reduce the amount of PFAS produced, used, and released to the environment to harm us. We will reduce that amount by only using it where it is absolutely, completely necessary. For example, a teflon pan isn’t necessary when cast iron or ceramic ones exist. And rain coats can be crafted without water proofing PFAS treatment, why not use natural waxes to treat them instead? So yeah, your coated guitar strings are not essential. If you know, work for, or have any connection to string manufacturers, point them my way, and let’s work together to figure out if Teflon or other PFAS-based chemistries are involved in your coated string processing.
Even if they make up only a small amount of the total PFAS production and use, it is something you can do right now to make a big difference. Stop buying them, spread the word, buy regular old un-coated guitar strings, and lets get PFAS out of the guitar industry for good.
EDIT: It seems that Stringjoy is making coated guitar strings using enamels that are free of teflon and other volatile chemicals of concern, so for your coated string needs go check them out!
EDIT: D’Addario confirmed via email that they do use PTFE (teflon) in their XS Series strings and declined to discuss the topic further with me. Personally, I will be avoiding their coated strings, though please note their uncoated strings do NOT have PTFE. They also reported their XT coated strings “do not contain PFAS”.
The opinions presented here are entirely my own, and not representative of URI, STEEP, or any other academic and research institutions that I am a part of.
-Matt Dunn, Guitars For Idiots editor & 5th year PhD Candidate at the Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Wanna learn more about how I measure PFAS in the environment with these little tubes? Check out some of my research translation writing for URI’s STEEP Superfund Center!
Discover more from Guitars For Idiots
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hello Matt, what about using string cleaners for uncoated strings? Do they extend string life?
LikeLike
Im sure it does to some degree, though now I wonder what is in string cleaners in terms of chemicals?
LikeLike
I think it’s just minerals but good idea for a new article?
LikeLike
Hello, could you name a specific guitar string manufacturer who makes coated guitar strings containing PFAS?
LikeLike
Are XS strings by D’Addario using these compounds or just Elixer?
LikeLike
I will have to check on that! I don’t know
LikeLike
Yeah, it seems to be some kind of “Teflon” type coating.
LikeLike
Ahh if it is teflon indeed, then definitely some concern is warranted regarding PFAS
LikeLike
Sorry for the additional comment. I wanted to add that their XT strings are “treated” vs coated, and what they mean by “treatment” is an electroplating of nickel or tin on the wrap wire. Other “treated” strings in the past have been done with fluorochemicals, so the terminology is misleading. I’m curious how the Martin Lifespan 2.0 are done, whether with a plating, chemicals, or something else. The 1.0 were fluorochemicals. 😦
LikeLike
I’ve been doing research on this too. I’m NOT a chemist, just a really freaked out consumer. Not all the strings are “created” equally or in the same manner.
For instance, D’Addario XS has a coating, which I am now pretty freaked out about. Meanwhile, the XTs have a thin nickel or tin electroplating. That is much less scary. They refer to it as treated rather than coated, but it is still a coating…
Martin Lifespan 1.0 (the old ones) were called “treated,” but they used some kind of fluorochemical, patented by Cleartone. The 2.0 strings, I can’t find any information about. I’m guessing it’s something more like the plating that XTs use, but until I know for sure, I’m not going to use them.
I like Martin Retro/Monel strings, and D’Addario Nickel Bronze (which is phosphor bronze with a nickel coating), because they last a long time and don’t use any treatment or fluorochemical, etc. Other brands also make a monel string (a naturally-occurring nickel/copper alloy). But it does sound like D’Addario XT are safe as well.
Any new info these days? I wish I could find out about the Martin Lifespan 2.0s and what the process is.
LikeLike
Hi, Matt and fellow readers. I’ve been trying to figure out for sure if D’Addario XS are coated in a way that involves PFAS. I’ve been trying to get an answer from the manufacturer. No meaningful reply yet. I have the same question regarding Stringjoy. Matt – might there be a future article from you dedicated to explicitly indicating which coated strings are PFAS-involved and which are not? thanks, by the way, for your work with both guitars and the environment.
LikeLike
So D’Addario just reached out to me to confirm that they do use PTFE (teflon) in the XS strings. While PTFE is harmless itself, the production of PTFE is a major pathway for PFAS use and release into the environment.
LikeLike
Thank you so much for this article. I’ve been using Elixir strings with their “Optiweb” coating for quite a while now and a comment in the Thomann webshop drew my attention to this PFAS topic and your blog was the the best source of information I could find.
I must say, I am absolutely no expert in chemistry but I am eager to do what I can to reduce environmental harm (or supporting the fight against it) where ever possible through my decisions what I buy and what not. And if that means buying from a different string-manufacturer, then I’m willing to do that.
Thanks again!
LikeLike
HI there, PhD in computer science and hobby luthier here. Really happy to have found this website.
I intended to use a graphtech ghost piezo system on a new claro walnut tele. I knew about PFOA etc. coated strings by daddario and elixir, but I was unsure whether graphtech also uses teflon / PFOA for the ‘friction-free’ saddles. If that is the case, I will have to look for an alternative.
Do you have any info on that or do you have already tested the TUSQ / Nubone and Graphtech material for saddles?
With best regards,
Maurice
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great question, I will look into this!
LikeLike