A Trilogy of Trackers

[Hepokatti]

Still discovered anything new Goatbreath?

I've tried 2 different Shure m97xe in 3 different tables (Rega Planar 3, Sony PS-X555ES, Technics SL-1200mk2) and I just now hate it in every one of them.

It's muddy, distorted, "broad-minded" and whatnot. Seriously the worst cartridge for the price I've heard for a long time. If someone likes this, then good for them. If it works for you, I won't critizie that. Also, I'm sure JICO SAS stylus helps this a lot, but I don't get the fuss about the good "nature" of the cart. If you solve the muddy fuzzyness, then you have a pretty dull and boring cart at your hands.

Today I did comparison with Stanton 500 mkI and it ate the Shure alive. Stanton made music fun to listen, while imaging was of course narrower and there was less details. Still it was much more pleasant to listen to. We're talking about a budget "DJ" cart with a round diamond beating the Shure here..

[Alec124c41]

The Shure is best in a lighter tonearm than those three.

Cheers,
Alec

[dlaloum]

Although it (M97xE) should be OK? (but not at its best)- if the brush is in use...

The other question worth asking, is what is the capacitance of the system in use?

[Hepokatti]

The Shure is best in a lighter tonearm than those three.

Cheers,
Alec

Really? Well well.. I thought the stabilizer brush should combat tonearm mismatch.

I also remember Shure having dyn.comp of 20, which should suit 12g arms, albeit giving 8hz resonance value if using the VE calculator. It is lower than optimal, but not too bad yet.

In any case I trust you as I seem to be the only one hating this cartridge.

Although it (M97xE) should be OK? (but not at its best)- if the brush is in use...

Believe me, I toyed with loads of things. Alignment, VTA, brush up/down.. they only change "shades", not the annoying sound character of the cart. For example I can't get 3d imaging of any kind.

The systems m97xe have been tried in;

Planar 3 - Project Phono-Box
Technics 1200mk2 - Raysonic Audio SP-88 integrated MM
Sony PS-X555ES - Rega Fono, Rotel RA-930 integrated MM, Lehmann Black Cube

Stuff from different price categories, except for the turntables.

The other question worth asking, is what is the capacitance of the system in use?

Capacitance has mostly been well within 200-300pf in every system I believe.

I know my testing hasn't been that extensive, but then again people slap this into any TT and write they're happy with it. I know you and Alec have "a bit" wider experience with TTs and carts than many others, including myself, but this is about the only cart I haven't found enjoyable in some way. I've listened to compromises, believe me, but at least they have been involving and engaging (AT95E, Stanton 500, Pickering XV-15 etc etc.).

[dlaloum]

I wouldn't worry too much about it....
I recall the demonstrating salesman being very taken aback when I said I didn't like the $20k+ box speakers (a well known and regarded speaker) he was demonstrating - as I could "hear the box"...

Years of living with planar speakers will do that!

In any case you just may not like the voicing of the M97xE.... which is OK too.

The M97xE from my recollection has around 27cu compliance (which is lower than the earlier V15IV or M97HE which if I recall correctly had circa 36cu compliance...)

But yes it is a high compliance design in the traditional Shure mold

I have to say I am surprised you could not get it working optimally in the Sony! - but then it may well have been working perfectly and be a sound you simply do not like!!

[Alec124c41]

Some people seem to think the Shures, especially the V-15s, were the best cartridges ever made. I have never been convinced. On an SME 3009 S2 imp., with an SAS stylus, they are not bad at all, the best I have heard them. But, there are other cartridges that I prefer.

Cheers,
Alec

[Hepokatti]

Some people seem to think the Shures, especially the V-15s, were the best cartridges ever made.

Often there are claims that some things are "the best". These claims hold until one hears something better..

@ dlaloum - maybe its like you said. I have Nagaoka MP-200 in Sony now, and I can't even mention the. Shure. in the same sentence. I just don't appreciate enough the things Shure does well in order to overcome its deficiencies.

I have nothing against the idea that Shure could work for someone. I've given up for now. If I can't sell the cart, then I'll just save it for later and give it another shot with a Jico SAS and a matching tonearm - but that will be 'someday'.

Thanks for comments

[bauzace50]

Hi,
in the same vein, it is probably impossible for a thing to be the best. Paraphrasing a line in one cowboy movie, "there's always a faster draw out there".

Even though I enjoy the cartridges mentioned in this thread immensely, there are certain performance details that I like better with the cartridge that is now mounted on the tonearm: the Stanton 881S. Too bad it is discontinued and probably has no truly equivalent replacement stylus.

The LP is a well-kept copy of Verdi's Otello on RCA Stereo. The very first scene has all the excercises needed for a full cartridge evaluation. Ample stage, solo instruments and voices for intimate moments, or massed choruses, full large orchestra and lusty/martial bombast, as well as stage movement and vocal "asides".

The 881S sailed through these treacherous grooves without a hitch and with admirable tonal accuracy and freedom from stress. The others in this thread show degrees of stress on the louder moments, and some tonal deviations from "organic nature" (pretty, or otherwise). I wonder how long the 881S will continue to work.

[Bran Kulez]

Hepokatti wrote: It's muddy, distorted, "broad-minded" and whatnot.

I agree with the above statement and that the M97x isn't engaging. I bought mine a couple of years ago for $50.00 slightly used, right after I bought my first vinyl album in probably 10 years, Fleet Foxes (self titled, with Mykonos). The recording is excellent and to my untrained ears, made the cartridge sound good. So after a couple of years of listening and tinkering, I now hear the cartridge for what it is, but we are talking about cartridges with street prices of +- $100.00.

So after reading this thread I installed the M97x with a Shure V15 type RS stylus, it's a nudie with a hyperelliptical tip. Comparing it to the oem N97xE, I couldn't hear any difference. I then replaced the V15 stylus with a Shure N104E and what a difference it made. The bass is slightly deeper and tighter with less mid-range muddiness. It sounds more like the vintage USA made Shure cartridges.



Out of curiosity, I compared the N97xE with the V15 RS styli in the Shure V15 type RS body. Again, I couldn't tell the difference between the two but the N97xE stylus sounded smoother in the V15 body than it did in the M97x body.



My half-baked conclusion...the Shure M97x and N97xE are mismatched. I think that Shure tried to combine the best of both worlds by utilizing a budget cartridge body (I'm sure it's the same as the M92) to keep the cost down and a more refined stylus assembly. In theory they would compliment each other but in reality they work against each other...

[Hepokatti]

I like better with the cartridge that is now mounted on the tonearm: the Stanton 881S.

Shame that these are so scarce. I'd be really interested to hear one. My friend has 885 low output, but it has its own difficulties.. when it's with the right equipment then there is only one word: wow. With mediocrity, not so wow.

However, the said friend demonstrated me 500mk2 with the stock spherical stylus today. Again: wow! Stanton must've done something right.. I mean 500mk2 is not the deepest of deeps nor has extremely good detail, but it makes music and imo beats stock AT95E right now for the best budget deal ever. (Except for being discontinued)

[goatbreath]

The M97xe is dormant just now..The Denon DL110 sounds so good on the Kenwood I don't want to mess with anything..The M97xe I have had on various arms and tables..But on the Kenwood it sounded great,,on all the other tables totally underwhelming..The reason I keep the Denon on there is because of the vividness of timbre,,I also love it's sense of the acoustic of where the recording took place ..The M97xe sounded rolled off on all my other tables..I have never found a problem with it's rhythmic ability though,,especially in the bass end..The AT95e I have used various ones since 1989..I guess I have learned what they do and don't like..They aint perfect,,they are a compromise,but work in so many situations..Not great on real low mass arms though...The bass can be a bit loose and there isn't any of the etched cymbals you seem to get with a more advanced stylus tip,,still pretty decent though..For less than perfect vinyl or just the fact that a replacement stylus is cheap,,they are great though...

Of my other cartridges,,the Shure V15/Jico SAS is good,,but has it's flaws..The record must have been through a cleaning machine,,plus I have it on my Hadcock GH220/Thorens TD160,,That table is so sensitive to what it is placed on,,if the surface is too dense the sound becomes congested...By far the worst cartridge I own is the Ortofon 510mk2..But it sounded good on an SME 3s I put on a TD166..It has never performed that well on any other deck..Usually bass light,,if you up on the VTF it sounds congested...

I have considered trying the Denon DL110 on my Michell Mycro/Rega RB250,,but the Kenwood KD7010 seems to be better than all my other Turntables..That includes a few classics and yes they are all set up properly,,I have been into turntables for a fair while,,not as long as some on here though...

I do like the coloured sound of my LP12/Rewired RB250 with metal end stub etc..plus AT95e..For general listening it sounds ace..It also means my Denon is for serious listening sessions,,which means the DL110 will last longer..I aint rich...

I also wish I had more space so I could have more turntables set up..For all the cartridges/Arms/Turntables and the geometry of the stylus/arm set up etc....The really Important thing that people never seem to talk about is what the turntable sits on...I have messed around a lot with this...The difference it makes is huge...It is all part of the set up of that particular turntable as far as I'm concerned and a lot of the commercially available options make things sound worse..

Every turntable likes a different surface..Even the different suspendeds,,you can bring out the best in them by just how lossy that surface is..Go too far and you lose something,,not far enough and the vibrations get back to the stylus....Every suspended deck likes a different degree of this..I guess that applies to the actual cartridge compliance too..Try sitting a suspended deck with a low mass tone arm/high compliance cartridge on a piece of glass and hear acoustic feedback..Stick some feet on a piece of lossy wood,,hear it disappear.That is a night and day obvious version of what I am describing..

[Marcie]

Very interesting thread guys. Thought I put in my 2 cents. I own the Denon 103, 110 & 160, among a number of others (M97xE, M95ED, Ortofon X3-MC, Yamaha MC-7, AT's, Stanton 881 etc.) and soon the Benz Micro Ace SL.

I agree on the sound of the Shure M97xE, it is a bit bland as opposed to the M95ED which has the typical Shure sound of yesteryear (at least, as I remember it).

As to the Denon's, I like all three, for different reasons. My preference is for the DL-160 as I find it a good deal more refined than the DL-110. The '160 has indeed a different cantilever, but more importantly a much finer stylus tip, and a higher compliance (ca. 20cu '110 vs 27 cu '160); for the rest they're identical. The '110 can sometimes sound a little bit harsh compared with the '160; I also notice a slight sizzle with the 110. The euphonic bit escapes me, and I have tried both carts across a broad range of 'tables, shells, amps & speakers. Still, the '110 is very good (unbeatable for the money) and hadn't I heard the '160 alongside, I wouldn't have known different. I would agree with most descriptions of the '110's sound except I feel the '160 beats it in every respect. The 103 on the other hand is so different from the other two, that you really can't compare them as to sound character.

So I feel it is such a shame that Denon dropped the '160 from their portfolio; if you can get one, don't hesitate! And if you can't, get the '110 while you can, it may disappear without warning! The DL-110 can be had for 125 euro on the European continent, btw.

[dlaloum]

I also wish I had more space so I could have more turntables set up..For all the cartridges/Arms/Turntables and the geometry of the stylus/arm set up etc....The really Important thing that people never seem to talk about is what the turntable sits on...I have messed around a lot with this...The difference it makes is huge...It is all part of the set up of that particular turntable as far as I'm concerned and a lot of the commercially available options make things sound worse..

Every turntable likes a different surface..Even the different suspendeds,,you can bring out the best in them by just how lossy that surface is..Go too far and you lose something,,not far enough and the vibrations get back to the stylus....Every suspended deck likes a different degree of this..I guess that applies to the actual cartridge compliance too..Try sitting a suspended deck with a low mass tone arm/high compliance cartridge on a piece of glass and hear acoustic feedback..Stick some feet on a piece of lossy wood,,hear it disappear.That is a night and day obvious version of what I am describing..

I was recently reading a review comparing a Hadcock unipivot and the Dynavector ultra massive bi-axial design...

Ultimately, the reviewer seemed to marginally prefer the Hadcock in some circumstances, but ended up purchasing the DV for himself!

One of the things that reviews of the hadcock have mentioned is that it is extremely sensitive to external vibrations - being a unipivot the design is ultra light and inherently unstable (sort of like an aerobatic aircraft, very very nimble but inherently unstable) - the fluid damping around the pivot is used to stabilise it.

This instability means that if vibrations hit it, it can take a few cycles (or longer) to settle.
So when placed on some surfaces, it simply did not sound great, it was constantly being unsettled by vibrations impinging via the plinth, unsettling the arm.
Placed on a truly totally isolated platform, it then becomes a truly top level performer.

The DV arm on the other hand has massive inertia, tiny vibrations tend not to bother it... in the same situations, on the same tables, the DV would keep tracking well.

Does an arm like the DV sound better on the totally isolated platform, than on the flimsier rack - YES, but the difference is subtle.

Does an arm like the Hadcock sound better on the totally isolated platform... oh my god yes - it is not at all subtle, more of a chalk and cheese change!

I currently have 2 tables in use - one is the Revox Linatrack, linear tracking ultra light unipivot arm with magnetic damping, on a sprung chassis - This one seems to be relatively insensitive to external vibrations, and worked well on my previous rack setup.
My 2nd table is a JVC QL-Y5F with the servo damped S-Arm... this one had a series of vibration issues on the same platform as the Revox...
First the feet are (were) screwed into a flexible baseboard, the baseboard and plinth creates a drumlike enclosure which would resonate, and the feet would move with the resonance... need I say more! - I extensively damped the plinth, and immobilised the baseboard, and replaced the OEM feet with ISO9H footers including one in the middle of the baseboard to damp and immobilise/pressurise it.
Sound took an immediate turn for the better.
Then the setup was very sensitive to footfall, you could hear every step someone took around my house.... I added a concrete paver on Sorbothane pads, and mag-lev stands under the platform - Another huge difference - the reduction in noise at low frequencies was on the order of 20db+ (yes I measured it)

Now the JVC is performing very well indeed - the Revox on the same platform, I believe it to be better, but the improvements are subtle and as I do not have an ability to A-B the before and after, I am not sure whether there is an improvement - the Revox setup is inherently quite well isolated to start with!


And then one can talk about other parameters - like the fact that putting a 1.5kg arm on a suspended table can be a problem (!!) - the Dynavector arms cannot be fitted to all turntables, and many of the ones where it can be fitted, require special work/tuning to the suspension to handle it.


We sort of tend to assume that vibration control has been implemented for each person's setup - but in reality this is not always the case.
And this is the area where the biggest improvements are frequently available for the lowest costs... (Paver = $10, Sorbothan Pads = $12 - total $22 for the biggest single improvement to the JVC tables performance!)

Suspended tables tend to be easier, in that they have more inherent isolation... but the benefits are still there

bye for now

David

[goatbreath]

TheHadcock GH220 is not a unipivot....

Putting a suspended deck on a concrete slab makes it sound worse..

The idea is to drain off the vibrations or they will travel around the whole turntable and back to the needle..Think about an acoustic guitar,,The top is usually made of Spruce or Cedar,,both conifers and quite fast growing with wider grains,,but the back and sides are usually of mahogany or rosewood..This enables the vibrations to be sent back along the soundboard again because the vibration travels easier in the spruce,,so it takes the easiest path,,so as soon as it hits the denser wood it reverses direction..They usually use uniform grained spruce or cedar for this purpose..By placing a suspended deck on something less dense than the turntable itself but still rigid enough the vibrations will drain through what the turntable is sitting on..So a piece of cheap lightish chipboard with feet will do the trick,,very well indeed..But if the material is denser,,concrete,,marble etc...The vibrations instead of being drained will travel in a loop and that vibration will cause at the least sub standard tracking ability,,at worst acoustic feedback through the speakers...Even a TD160 mk 1 with heavier mass Thorens arm benefits from doing this trick..