Shure SC35C with JICO SAS

[thinker]

The current SC35C compliance is 5 µm/mN

http://www.shure.co.uk/products/dj_phono/sc35c


Thanks

[dlaloum]

And for an arm you should use a standard construction girder... (or a 2x4... the wood provides additional damping!)

[audiopile]

I will run the JICO SAS/SME series 2 improved across the resonance tracks on the HFN&RR test LP latter today - but pretty clearly we've gotta be lookin at something in the 20 something range in terms of compliance on the SAS ?Listened to this cart/stylus for a few hours last night -it continues to grow on me -at least on RnR this does a great job.

[dlaloum]

Jico quoted me compliance of around 22cu - but my measurements appear to indicate substantiall higher compliance than that!

Perhaps 22cu is worst case?

I honestly think you have built yourself a V15VxSAS - without the damper brush.

I wonder whether the damper brush styli will fit the SC35 body? - If I find one going for peanuts I may try the experiment...

[audiopile]

Just ran HFN&RR test LP. In a stock SME 3009 series 2 improved with stock SME headshell for that arm (9.5 gram effective mass) -resonance occurs around 10-12 hz. with the Shure SC-35C body and JICO SAS stylus.Still very impressed with both the sound and the tracking ability -this is definitely not a low compliance stylus assembly.
I don't at this time own any high mass arms -so won't be trying out the stock stylus for this body -since listening to a obvious mismatch of arm mass/stylus compliance isn't going to generate any useful information.

[dlaloum]

Be interesting comparing it to a V15Vx-SAS....

[kininigin]

Hi guy's,

I have had both the current SC35C and the 'vintage' SC35C (indicated with the words made in the USA,printed above the pins on the back).

I also have a nos stylus for it,which has the word shure,printed in white.The current run,being in black.

If you have a 'modern' SC35C then imo,it's not worth getting the Jico SAS.The reason being that the vintage and the modern are worlds apart.The vintage wipes the floor in every detail and there is simply no comparison.It seems that when they moved to mexico,something had changed,what i don't know.

I have also wondered about getting the jico SAS,but honestly the 'vintage' cart and stylus is so good i haven't felt the need to get one.

[dlaloum]

The question when using the SAS is whether the body internals have changed...
The delicate process of hand manufacturing and aligning styli definitely took a nosedive when Shure shifted to Mexico, but the if using a SAS stylus this is of no concern...

The only issue then is the much simpler and more easily mass produced cartridge body construction....

The stylus is such a critical component of the final performance that it is not surprising that the older SC35C performs very differently. - But then the stylus is what we are replacing with the SAS...

[kininigin]

When i had the 'modern' SC35C,i bent the ccantilever and replaced it with a jico.
This was meant to be just as good as the white shure stylus.So when i got the 'vintage' SC35C,i tried the jico in it.It was good not quite as good as the originals imo,but did the job nearly as well.

I also tried both the original and the jico in the current SC35C,there was still a massive difference,so it is a bit more than just the stylus making the difference imo.

[audiopile]

Got curious about the DCR balance of my carts last week - so measured what I had mounted up on headshells . My later SC35C (presumably Mexican?): L-.906kOhms, R-.974kOhm. Before this gets blamed on Mexican production - the hands down winner of anything I measured was the definitely Mexican made M97xE : L-1.365kOhm , R-1.366 kOhm ( asked a buddy to measure his 97xE :1.365/1.375kOhms). As long as you use a DVOM - this is a pretty safe measurement to make on any cartridge and is at least interesting ?

[dlaloum]

The hand picked AT20 body I have is the most tightly specced one I have measured... both channels measure an exactly identical 453 ohm (I measured a number of times just to double check!)

To really know how identical the two channels are you also need to measure the inductance... the resistance affects overall level balance, but inductance varies the frequency response, and therefore an inductance imbalance leads to a minor tonal imbalance between the channels - the AT20 measures 474mH and 477mH - which is the closest of any two channels on any cartridge I have measured.

365/366 ohm's is exceptionally good, you have scored one of the best bodies out of that factory... and yes it is shear luck - Shure do not appear to do much in the way of hand picking cartridges...

I have measured three V15V's - 328/320ohm 312/317 ohm and 349/334ohm

That body you have is up there with the best (at least in terms of balance)

[Ldg]

Got curious about the DCR balance of my carts last week - so measured what I had mounted up on headshells . My later SC35C (presumably Mexican?): L-.906kOhms, R-.974kOhm. Before this gets blamed on Mexican production - the hands down winner of anything I measured was the definitely Mexican made M97xE : L-1.365kOhm , R-1.366 kOhm ( asked a buddy to measure his 97xE :1.365/1.375kOhms). As long as you use a DVOM - this is a pretty safe measurement to make on any cartridge and is at least interesting ?

On the premise that coil resistance depends directly on length of wire, and that length of wire depends directly on number of turns, and that cartridge output (and inductance) depends directly on number of turns, 906R/974R equates to about a 0.6dB channel imbalance. Which seems not the end of the world, perhaps even swamped by other contributions.

But basis for such premises isn't necessarily safe. For example if the coils are wound randomly, length of wire per turn might vary. Coil wire from different batches might vary. Such things might compensate, could go either way.

So personally, I wouldn't read too much into coil dc resistance. A close match might be just luck, and/or it might well not matter. Inductance meaurements are probably a better indicator, but handheld dmms quite possibly don't measure anything accurate or useful about cartridge inductance, because of their method.

Other factors ? Keep looking !

[audiopile]

Probably the biggest benefit I've gotten out of measuring DCR is deciding which carts to consider for rebuilds/re-tips. I have two DL-103D bodies sitting here - both with squashed cantilevers. One has a open coil -so probably not a great candidate for rebuild ? But the other seemed like it might be worth sending to Soundsmith - until I took another look at the DCR (35.8 ohms/30.7 ohms) - maybe the Linn Troika (2.5 ohms -both channels) is the better candidate for rebuild ?
I agree that .6dB is probably going to be swamped in other variables this is still interesting. I agree with the assumption that close DCR probably strongly implies close inductance - don't have any means of reliably measuring cart inductance - but since a former employer all too accurately accused me of "only working to support your tool habit" - I'm thinkin of a new meter ?

[dlaloum]

I just picked one up (at a good price) on the bay... an M35X...

Tested the inductance and resistance.....
Inductance 423.5/424.5 mH (!?!?)
Resistance 993 / 999 ohm (!?!?!?!?!?)

That is on a par with the very very best hand picked cartridges that I have.... I have an AT20SLa that is on a par with that, but nothing that betters it....

I then looked at what styli will fit...

It is a "broad shank" shure model, with a standard cantilever angle... so the N97xE shank fits, as does the VN5MR... BUT - the cartridge surround is such that these styli cannot fit - their plastic surround is just a bit too high and the wrong shape....

Also the cartridge weighs in at 6.2g where a V15Vx is 6.8g - so it is marginally lighter - an advantage if running with a high compliance stylus like a SAS...

I do have a SAS that came loose from its stylus holder - so it is "Naked" - very handy in this case.... I look forward to making a direct comparison of a V15VxSAS and the M35X-SAS.
(this is most likely some months away though!)

bye for now

David