advertisement


What’s the deal with vintage MM cartridges ???

Jico are very cagy about their compliance specs, which is annoying. Same with output specs. I suspect they are different to the Shure originals in many ways across cartridge ranges. As an example their various M44 styluses are apparently far lower output than the Shure originals suggesting smaller magnets (and lower tip mass). I wish there were some proper specs/reviews where one could really assess exactly what one is buying.

My impression is my Shure V15/III with the VN35HE stylus couldn’t be happier, there is no post-warp ‘bounce’ etc, it seems absolutely rock-solid in the fixed S2 Imp. I’ve no intention of moving it unless I conclude the Jico stylus is playing by very different math as changing arms on the 124 takes little longer than changing headshells and rebalancing. It would actually be a lot quicker if I didn’t need to swap arm-leads! Having both available and ready kind of justifies holding onto the S2 Improved too. It is an interesting 1970s context for an old 1960s deck. My gut feeling is I just prefer the M44/M55E in the heavy arm though. There’s a chance the Jico Basie may change that, so worth pursuing.
 
I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if the suspension on the Jico styli is less compliant? I'll put my Shure VN35HE on when I have a bit of spare time and see how it compares.

I've actually got another type 2 improved fixed but haven't felt any need to swap them as yet.

Perhaps a more logical long term plan is to run a slightly less compliant cartridge on the TD124 and one which will give me a different perspective/flavour. An M44 perhaps? It'll need to be happy with 400-500pF loading as I have both decks connected to the same phono stage with a source selector switch to switch between them.
 
Mike P said:
Perhaps a more logical long term plan is to run a slightly less compliant cartridge on the TD124 and one which will give me a different perspective/flavour. An M44 perhaps? It'll need to be happy with 400-500pF loading as I have both decks connected to the same phono stage with a source selector switch to switch between them.
Click to expand...

I think my goal at the moment is to find a way to make the M44 with 55E stylus long-term sustainable as hunting down genuinely good old styli is a real crap shoot with lots of disappointments. I’ll definitely be investigating the Jico option. I’d definitely recommend trying one.

PS If you need a M55E body let me know, they are piling up here (M44 & M55 bodies are identical bar the writing on the front)!
 
Tony L said:
PS I speculated upthread that if Shure made V15/IIIs again they’d sell them by the container-load. In hindsight I’m not sure that is the case as I’d not factored in how high compliance they are and that they aren’t really that suited to modern arms. That said I’ve seen them installed in 3012s before now, and that would have been a very bad match on paper. IIRC the 3012 has an effective mass of about 15g! The fixed-shell 3009 Improved I’m using is 6.5g!
Click to expand...

The V15s work fine in my Technics DD Turntable with it integral arm. Main effect is a lower LF resonance. But doesn't seem to be a problem with warps.
 
In most cases arm/compliance math seems pretty forgiving, though on paper a 30cu cartridge like a V15/III should perform best in a low mass arm. That said what a V15/III started off as and what it is now may well be very different things. I have a VN35HE in mine at present and my hunch is it has stiffened-up a bit. This vintage Shure diversion is going to prove both expensive and time consuming as I can’t base any opinion on a single sample.

PS Annoyingly it looks like Thakker.eu are yet another company who won’t trade with the post-Brexit UK. Annoying as they have the Jico Basie MRB II listed which is sold-out elsewhere.
 
After thinking on this some more I‘ve just swapped-out my ultra-low-mass nylon headshell screws for more typical stainless steel allen bolts thinking I may be running with too little mass if the suspension is a bit stiffer than it should be due to ageing. This change has added just over a gram in mass as the bolts needed for a V15 are long and the nylon ones weighed next to nothing. 0.65g each for the steel, 0.10 for the nylon. Given how low-mass this combo is that’s a fair change. With everything rebalanced (even the lateral balance!) and playing again I think it has woken it up a little. It is still not kicking like the M55E, but it doesn’t sound as over-polite as it did. I’ve only played a couple of very nicely recorded things so far, but it is sounding better than it has so far. Maybe it would be better in the heavier 3009, I’ve no idea. I’m not going to move it, not yet anyway. Logically it belongs in the arm it is in. As stated upthread I hate soldering headshell leads so this particular V15 body is staying where it is! If I assess further in the other arm I’ll use another body (there is a chance I’ll end up with several!).
 
I've just got my M44-7 setup, bog standard Tonar replacement stylus, just something to get some noise from the thing, cost £20. Anyway, I eschewed my SME 3009 and decided to set it up on something a bit more upmarket, the SME V-12/Garrard 401, they make a great match according to http://korfaudio.com/calculator . The sonics are very promising, I must admit that I can't wait to try my M55E out om the same combo😀
 

Anyone for a wooden cantilever? Seems a bizarre idea, but I’d love to hear one! Available for the V15/III and also the M44, both of which seem well liked by Jico.

I still wish they’d publish full specs for their various styli, e.g. compliance, output level etc. Both vary so hugely across the original Shure M44 and M55E range to the extent they serve different arms and phono stage gain. I’m also curious if their V15/III styli have dialled-back the original Shure’s exceptionally high (30cu) compliance figures at all. I suspect they may have done, but I can find no figures.
 
Tony L said:

Anyone for a wooden cantilever? Seems a bizarre idea, but I’d love to hear one! Available for the V15/III and also the M44, both of which seem well liked by Jico.

I still wish they’d publish full specs for their various styli, e.g. compliance, output level etc. Both vary so hugely across the original Shure M44 and M55E range to the extent they serve different arms and phono stage gain. I’m also curious if their V15/III styli have dialled-back the original Shure’s exceptionally high (30cu) compliance figures at all. I suspect they may have done, but I can find no figures.
Click to expand...
My late mate Steve, who spent the last decade of his life living and working in Japan, long ago told me how revered Shure cartridges were over there. Steve was a gifted muso and spent a lot of his free time in the 'horny cafes'. If one looks at the original audio-technica AT-1, one can't help but see the Shure M3D. Component tonearms too started out as copies of American greats. The original Grace arm, for example, was a virtual clone of the Gray, an arm that was standard issue in the US military base radio stations around the world (yes, 'Good Morning Vietnam' had it all wrong with their SME SII shod Garrard 401 decks as props).

It would be interesting to hear a wooden cantilevered cartridge, especially so, should all else be equal to a well known classic. After all, cactus needles always had better 'tone' than steel (despite one being lucky to get more than one 78 play before having to resharpen or replace, cf steel which got one closer to 50 sides). Yes, a bit of wood with a decent modern diamond on the end would be interesting.

@Chris might have something to say on the subject, as his A&R P77 has been lumbered up by a gent in Italy (although the suspension is no longer comparable to standard).
 
I did ask him but he prefers the M75. He did in fact do a copy of my suspension and tip on an M75 and said it is a clone of my P77but it had no takers and I quote him “ noone understands the quality”. Mind you, he drives a Lenco.
 
Tony L said:
As an example their various M44 styluses are apparently far lower output than the Shure originals suggesting smaller magnets (and lower tip mass)
Click to expand...
It is annoying that more powerful magnets for a given size and mass are available these days.
 
53421484932_5a92d43f3f_b.jpg


I spent the afternoon killing cables; a rather manky 1970s SME and a vdH C5 ‘The Bay’ died, and this was born.

The reason being is for reasons I can’t begin to explain all the original SME 4 pin cables I have, which is quite a number, give entirely different capacitance readings left to right, and given I’m using MM carts this matters! Anyway this cable went together really nicely and is very low capacitance. My preamp seems to give all the capacitance the V15 wants. This cable only applies to the fixed-shell 3009 Improved, the pre-Improved has an RCA conversion and a fancy SME vdH 501 cable. I just wanted to give the V15 the best chance and whilst this isn’t as fancy (i.e. expensive) as on the other arm it is certainly fresh and gives the same capacitance reading left/right now!

I’ve only just stuck it in and it is all sounding very nice so far. I’m still figuring out what I make of the V15. It is exceptionally good in some regards, really clean, pulls out loads of information, remarkably deep bass, tacks stunningly well, but there is a slight reticence/politeness that I’m trying to figure out. It may actually just be a lack of compression or resonance, but there is something I miss about the visceral punch and slam of the M44/M55E. The strange thing is where there are real dynamics it does them really nicely. I’m currently listening to a nice early-70s US pressing ofMiles Davis Someday My Prince Will come and its sounding seriously good. It certainly has bite and punch, but in a different way.

PS Note to self: in (x) years time when you try to record something on the Akai 4000DB open reel and get no level at all, this is where the cable is.
 
I find the V15III has the traits you describe (however, I use a Dual 701 direct drive) and yes, it is slightly polite, especially when compared to an AT VM740ML I have on the 1229 idler drive and which sounds exceptionally good with no flaws whatsoever.
 
Tony, I agree that the V15iii can produce really great dynamics when required by the recording. I've noticed that too.

At the risk of endlessly repeating myself I really do recommend you try a Jico SAS. I have no idea how many hours are on my original Shure VN35HE but my Jico SAS/B really does sound quite a lot more engaging to my ears. I've already offered to let you borrow one of mine for a week if you want to try one without committing.

My EAR834P phono stage has an ECC83 on the input, so about 190pF of inherent Millar capacitance but even so I use an original SME 4 pin cable plus an extra 100pF or so of Audioquest IC between my turntable selector switch box and the phono stage. That adds up to about 450pF, which is bang in the middle of the manufacturer suggested loading.
 
Mike P said:
At the risk of endlessly repeating myself I really do recommend you try a Jico SAS. I have no idea how many hours are on my original Shure VN35HE but my Jico SAS/B really does sound quite a lot more engaging to my ears. I've already offered to let you borrow one of mine for a week if you want to try one without committing.
Click to expand...

I may well take you up on that at some point. I move pretty slowly and I’m certainly not done with the V15, this whole Shure exploration will likely take me the majority of next year!

The capacitance thing is interesting and a variable as I don’t know for sure what my preamp has, my best guess is over 300pF given how truly awful it sounded with a 2M Black and a low capacitance (<100pF) arm cable. Both Shures sound tonally very good. Doing a very quick and dirty full-system pink noise octave test using HFS69 I get a gently falling response from about 50Hz (i.e. what most describe as a ‘target response’) with a bit of a saddle/BBC dip, which is just the nature of 15” Tannoys. It certainly isn’t over-bright/over-dull. The whole reason I’m deep-diving these old Shures is purely that they seem to suit my preamp well, and I really like my preamp! That and the fact that the iron 124 platter is just crazy better than the alloy one, but rules out many MCs and Deccas.

The annoying thing is I found a Jico Basie MRB II V15 stylus at Thackker (it is a limited edition and out of stock everywhere else bar some vastly overpriced flipper on eBay), but I can’t buy it as they refuse to sell to the post-Brexit UK. I even used their help and tried to buy outside their site. They just won’t sell to Little England. Regardless there are other options including the SAS, non MR Basie, even crazy wood cantilever variants. The problem being option paralysis. I have a line on a potentially NOS Shure VN35E, so I’ll buy that if it is as described, as I’d like to fully understand exactly what the Jico alters. I need a baseline to understand that. It will take time, but I don’t mind stockpiling styli for a cart I’m likely to use a fair bit.
 
It is certainly sounding very good, I think its woken things up a bit! I thought on paper it looked like a decent tonearm lead, plus it isn’t too fat so is reasonably manageable. It was 1 metre, so shorter than either the SME or the SME/vdH 501 RCA lead which I think are both 1.20m, but it is long enough to easily reach to the preamp. Very pleased with it so far.

The whole thing is a very interesting experiment/tangent as I’ve not done the real low-mass/high-compliance thing since about 1982! Having a record cleaner is making this attempt far more successful, it is tracking so solidly at just 1g! Last time I did that was with a M20FL in a fluid-damped AT1120 on an Ariston RD80! My current system is in a whole different league though.

PS For some reason this combo loves Tone Poets, they really work well!
 
Rexton said:
Interesting clainms that the M44 and the M55 are the same internally but differing mV outputs ??
Click to expand...

The body is identical (and also the same generator as the V15/I), the different output comes from the size of the magnet which is part of the stylus assembly. The M44-7 and M44E are heavy trackers and kick out a crazy high output, I suspect this is much of the reason they are such great fun. The M55E is basically a V15 Mk1 stylus, it has a far lower tip-mass as a result of needing to track far lighter and having a much smaller magnet to achieve that aim. Cartridges are all a compromise between tip mass (lower is better) and output (higher is better). No right answer, just design decisions that lead to different outcomes.

PS Whilst it is conceptually in reverse you can almost think of it in electric guitar strings; thicker = higher output, but also higher mass and harder to play (higher tracking force).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top