the home of the turntable

Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

the thin end of the wedge

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby dualhead » 11 Nov 2011 16:26

Thabnks, broke after the cart purchase though.
dualhead
member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 23 Jun 2008 02:33
Location: Maryland

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby dualhead » 12 Nov 2011 19:33

OK, so I shot low on the VTF (3 grams) and dialed it up by ear. Definitely around 5 grams. Before I get lost in failed attempts at articulating sound experience let me say that I , like the OP, experienced the characteristic of this cart that kept me wanting to spin more records. Nothing in particular, I just was listening to music more than my system. I liked that. So for the sound, I noticed several things compared to the AT that previously inhabited this setup. First, the sound was more forward, but it was not shallow. In fact, on Michael Hoenig's "Exit Northern Wasteland," the ghostly out of phase stuff in the periphery was more evident and the space was wider. Second, on 90125 by Yes the change of textures on "Owner of a Lonely Heart," were accurate and all the little imaging gymnastics on the guitar solo were were panned well and sounded confident not hazey. On both LP's, there was zero noise. On Dire Sraits S/T LP the vocals were detailed and had an "in the room" quality. Especially "In the gallery," where you could here the attitude in his voice really well. All in all, I liked the cart! Early to call it definitively, but so far a positive experience. Some of the subtley of the AT may be missing, but the fun factor kind of makes up for this. I don't find myself missing much.
dualhead
member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 23 Jun 2008 02:33
Location: Maryland

Re: Shure SC35C and JICO SAS ?

Postby audiopile » 13 Nov 2011 06:53

I realize this is a little off topic - but I've got one of these bodies lying around and am curious if any one has tried the JICO SAS out on a SC35C ?
audiopile
senior member
 
Posts: 367
Joined: 11 Feb 2010 07:48
Location: Milwaukee ,Wi. USA

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby dlaloum » 13 Nov 2011 12:21

Keep in mind that the Jico SAS and the Jico SAS are not necessarily the same...

What I mean by that is.. I have the Jico SAS N97xE, VN5MR and VN5xMR - all 3 SAS styli have measurably different cantilever resonance profiles... each designed to match with the cartridge inductance and original cartridge load specifications from Shure.

An M97xE can be run with a VN5xMR SAS stylus (designed for the V15VxMR) but due to the differing design, the loading needs to be adjusted to balance.

The end result (assuming that you adjust the loading) is very very very close to V15VxMR performance, and better than you can achieve with the N97xE... the V15V versions are designed based on a higher cantilever resonance frequency combined with lower inductance and capacitance - so the electrical frequency response is very flat with a very slight rise at the top followed by a dop - which nicely balances out the cantilever resonance.

The N97xE is designed around a much larger electrical resonance and a steeper HF dip, which in turn requires a cantilever resonance at a much lower frequency to balance things out.

The "Quality" of the sound is the same as the cantilevers and needles are identical - BUT... the suspension and damping are tweaked individually for the particular model...

I am certain it would sound excellent!
dlaloum
contributor
 
Posts: 3019
Images: 186
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 06:21
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby Ldg » 13 Nov 2011 18:34

dlaloum wrote:...The end result (assuming that you adjust the loading) is very very very close to V15VxMR performance....!

There's much more to performance than just frequency response profile......

By the time one has a new JICO stylus tip, cantilever and suspension, dozens of non-ideals will have changed. And it doesn't resemble an SC35C any more, so that's a bit of a miss, by accounts. It's the original that gets fave reviews. And to sub in a Jico seems to defeat the point here.
Ldg
member
 
Posts: 4784
Images: 389
Joined: 25 Jun 2009 14:12

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby flavio81 » 14 Nov 2011 03:41

UPDATE:

I mounted the SC35C on another arm, a Linn Basik Plus (10gm eff arm mass not including cart). This one has decent arm bearings. The distortion problem didn't seem to appear (as it did with the Lenco arm). So all points out that my DIY arm bearings (on the lenco arm) were the culprit of IGD (at loud cut levels).

With this arm it tracks with no problem at 4gm and you might get away with less VTF, although i wouldn't do this.

Another UPDATE: To me it's very evident that the SC35C transfers way more energy to the arm base (because of the low compliance). When i put my finger on the arm base, i can definitely feel the music vibrating on it (with the SC35C), where as doing the same with a N97xE stylus mounted (high compliance) will give far, far less vibrations.
User avatar
flavio81
contributor
 
Posts: 4553
Images: 32
Joined: 16 Sep 2009 23:45
Location: Lima

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby Laudanum » 14 Nov 2011 15:38

flavio81 wrote:
Another UPDATE: To me it's very evident that the SC35C transfers way more energy to the arm base (because of the low compliance). When i put my finger on the arm base, i can definitely feel the music vibrating on it (with the SC35C), where as doing the same with a N97xE stylus mounted (high compliance) will give far, far less vibrations.


Just asking ... are you comparing both styli at the same tracking force?
Laudanum
senior member
 
Posts: 324
Joined: 15 Jul 2011 14:30
Location: USA

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby dualhead » 14 Nov 2011 16:15

Confirmed on the energy transfer. Rush Bob Ludwig mastering is like the damn arm is gonna take off! Major vibration!
dualhead
member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 23 Jun 2008 02:33
Location: Maryland

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby flavio81 » 14 Nov 2011 17:47

Laudanum wrote:
flavio81 wrote:
Another UPDATE: To me it's very evident that the SC35C transfers way more energy to the arm base (because of the low compliance). When i put my finger on the arm base, i can definitely feel the music vibrating on it (with the SC35C), where as doing the same with a N97xE stylus mounted (high compliance) will give far, far less vibrations.


Just asking ... are you comparing both styli at the same tracking force?


How could i? One is intended for 0.75-1.25g and the other for 4-5g.
User avatar
flavio81
contributor
 
Posts: 4553
Images: 32
Joined: 16 Sep 2009 23:45
Location: Lima

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby Laudanum » 14 Nov 2011 23:31

I just wanted clarification in order to bring up a point/ask a question. With the higher tracking force, 4G, wouldnt it be usual to feel more vibration at the arm base compared to tracking at .75 - 1.25G, regardless of compliance?
Laudanum
senior member
 
Posts: 324
Joined: 15 Jul 2011 14:30
Location: USA

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby bauzace50 » 15 Nov 2011 02:47

HI,
the SC35C tracks at 4 -5 grams, sells for $39.00 and seems to have identical specifications as the M35X selling for $75.00 but tracking at 1.5 - 3 grams.
Although I've not seen the compliance specifications, my guess is that this is the difference between the two. Is this correct?

And why sould this alone make such a large difference in price? (Everything else seems to be identical).
Regards,
bauzace50
User avatar
bauzace50
senior member
 
Posts: 7510
Joined: 11 Jun 2005 15:48
Location: Guayama, Puerto Rico

Puerto Rico

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby dlaloum » 15 Nov 2011 04:47

The difference is in the rubber! (thinner for more "feeling".... ;-) )
dlaloum
contributor
 
Posts: 3019
Images: 186
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 06:21
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby flavio81 » 15 Nov 2011 18:48

Laudanum wrote:I just wanted clarification in order to bring up a point/ask a question. With the higher tracking force, 4G, wouldnt it be usual to feel more vibration at the arm base compared to tracking at .75 - 1.25G, regardless of compliance?


The difference is created by the stiffer compliance, but then, very low compliance carts almost universally require higher VTFs.
User avatar
flavio81
contributor
 
Posts: 4553
Images: 32
Joined: 16 Sep 2009 23:45
Location: Lima

Re: Shure SC35C... Highly recommended

Postby flavio81 » 15 Nov 2011 18:49

bauzace50 wrote:HI,
the SC35C tracks at 4 -5 grams, sells for $39.00 and seems to have identical specifications as the M35X selling for $75.00 but tracking at 1.5 - 3 grams.
Although I've not seen the compliance specifications, my guess is that this is the difference between the two. Is this correct?

And why sould this alone make such a large difference in price?


The M35X is overpriced then! For that price you can get a M97xE. I'd guess the DJ folks are willing to pay such prices for a M35X, and that's why the price is higher. And of course people are afraid of 4g tracking forces...

Yes, i'd say the only difference between the SC35C and the M35X is the compliance. Cantilevers have equal dimensions, styli have equal dimensions, coil system is the same.

The difference is in the rubber... Thinner for more feeling? I'd say "thicker for wilder action" :mrgreen:
User avatar
flavio81
contributor
 
Posts: 4553
Images: 32
Joined: 16 Sep 2009 23:45
Location: Lima

PreviousNext

Return to Cartridges and Preamps


Design and Content © Vinyl Engine 2002-2013

faq | site policy | advertising | hifiengine