Cartridge for SME 3009 Series II Tonearm
i...@pe.net
I reviewed some of the archives regarding this tonearm, my understanding is
that it is considered a low mass tonearm, and will work best with a high
compliance cartridge.
I'm considering the Grado Prestige Gold (I'm on a tight budget). Does anyone
know if this is considered a high compliance cartridge? Does anyone know if it
is a good match for the tonearm in question? Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Ivan
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
CCSman
compliance cartridge and will no doubt mate well with your SME arm.
I seem to recall that many years ago, a Shure cartridges and SME arms were a
very typical match-
For a listing of high compliance cartridges, you might wish to search out the
annual equipment directory of Audio magazine, and look up cartridges. I'm
pretty sure most cartridge specs. listed include complience specs.
JohnAFR
>I need a cartridge for a newly acquired SME 3009 Series II tonearm.
>
>I reviewed some of the archives regarding this tonearm, my understanding is
>that it is considered a low mass tonearm, and will work best with a high
>compliance cartridge.
Actually, the SME 3009 Series II is a medium mass arm and should
work well with medium compliance cartridges. I consider a low-mass
arm to have an effective mass in the neighborhood of 5-grams similar
to that of the SME Series III. According to SME's Information Sheet
No. 24, the Series II and the Series II Improved have effective masses
of 12.5-grams and 9.5-grams, respectively. In my way of thinking,
these would be considered medium mass arms.
In matching a cartridge to a tonearm, it is desireable to achieve an
arm/cartidge system resonance between 8 and 13Hz. If the system
resonance is too low, it can be excited by record warps. If it is too
high, it may become excited by low frequencies in the record groove.
Either of these conditions will cause distortion and possibly
mistracking. Therefore, you need to select a cartridge with the
proper mass and compliance to maintain an arm/cartridge system
resonance within the range of 8 to 13Hz.
You can calculate the expected system resonance using the
following equation:
F = 1000 / {2*Pi*Sqrt[C*(MC+EA)]}
where:
F = arm/cartridge system resonance
Pi = 3.14159265359
Sqrt[] = square root of everything inside brackets
C = cartridge compliance in compliance units (cu)
i.e., 1cu = 1*10^-6 cm/dyne
MC = mass of cartridge in grams
EA = effective mass of tonearm in grams
For example, suppose you have the Series II (12.5g effective mass)
with a cartridge weighing 7-grams at a compliance of 15cu. You
should expect a system resonance of about 9.3Hz. Since this falls
within the desireable range, this cartridge should be compatible with
your tonearm, at least from the standpoint of mass and compliance.
>I'm considering the Grado Prestige Gold (I'm on a tight budget). Does anyone
>know if this is considered a high compliance cartridge? Does anyone know if
>it is a good match for the tonearm in question? Thanks in advance.
Unfortunately, I don't know the mass and compliance of the Grado
Prestige Gold, but if you can find this information, you can apply the
equation above to determine its compatibility with your particular arm.
Best Regards,
John Elison
Richard D Pierce
>While I don't know if it's in your budget, the Shure V15V is certainly a high
>compliance cartridge and will no doubt mate well with your SME arm.
>
>I seem to recall that many years ago, a Shure cartridges and SME arms were a
>very typical match-
That was most likely because, for many years, Shure was the U.S. importer
for SME. The original SME3009 was not a particularily low mass arm, and
whether it was a good match for the a V-15 or not was sort of secondary to
the economics of the situation: they were a servy typical match primarily
a concession to economics and only secondarily to the physics.
The SME 3009/II was, one the other hand, significantly lower in mass and
more suitable, as a result, to higher compliance cartridges.
--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| DPi...@world.std.com |
Donald Steven
It now has a Sumiko Blue Point Special installed. Does this arm require any
maintenance (lubrication, etc.) and, if so, where can it be done?
Donald Steven
Tony Lupoli
>I need a cartridge for a newly acquired SME 3009 Series II tonearm.
>I'm considering the Grado Prestige Gold (I'm on a tight budget). Does
anyone
>know if this is considered a high compliance cartridge? Does anyone know if
it
>is a good match for the tonearm in question? Thanks in advance.
The Grado is indeed a high compliance cartridge. However, it is an easily
excited cartridge and having owned one in the past I would not recommend it.
I hated mine and was glad to have sold it. It sounded incredibly edgy.
Have you considered a moving coil? Ortofon make some great reliable budget
ones.
Sorry beyond that I can't help
Chuck Ross
<to...@nospam.lupoli.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> The Grado is indeed a high compliance cartridge. However, it is an easily
> excited cartridge and having owned one in the past I would not recommend it.
> I hated mine and was glad to have sold it. It sounded incredibly edgy.
Edgy? a Grado? Hmm...that's completely contrary to my experience, with both
inexpensive ones and the Reference Platinum wood-bodied ones. They sound
anything _but_ edgy.
But that's what opinions are for. Ask ten different people, get ten
different opinions.
--
Chuck Ross
See my digital photo page at
http://www.enteract.com/~ckross
Peter
Grados are definitely easily excited. I have a budget Grado and it
would do the "Grado dance" on 5 (yes 5) different turntables.
Also, inner groove distortion was the worst I'd ever heard from ANY
cartridge. Even a cheapo Sansui cartridge beat it by miles.
Peter
On 28 Dec 1998 10:32:46 -0600, ckr...@interact.com (Chuck Ross) wrote:
><to...@nospam.lupoli.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> The Grado is indeed a high compliance cartridge. However, it is an easily
>> excited cartridge and having owned one in the past I would not recommend it.
>> I hated mine and was glad to have sold it. It sounded incredibly edgy.
>
>Edgy? a Grado? Hmm...that's completely contrary to my experience, with both
>inexpensive ones and the Reference Platinum wood-bodied ones. They sound
>anything _but_ edgy.
>Chuck Ross
Peter
milk...@zip.com.au
FWIW, I had a Linn LP12/SME3009 11, and tried it with Shure V15 111,a
Supex, an Ortofon MC(I don't remember the model),a Dynavector, and
finally stopped looking when I tried the Denon 103 MC. Worked like a
charm, and even 16+ years later I haven't heard a better combination
with that arm. I wish I had never sold them!
Good Luck,
Graeme
Stewart Pinkerton
>[quoted text deleted -- deb]
>
>FWIW, I had a Linn LP12/SME3009 11, and tried it with Shure V15 111,a
>Supex, an Ortofon MC(I don't remember the model),a Dynavector, and
>finally stopped looking when I tried the Denon 103 MC. Worked like a
>charm, and even 16+ years later I haven't heard a better combination
>with that arm. I wish I had never sold them!
Sorry, but I also had a 103 and I actually changed my arm from 3009/II
to Mission 774 because the 103 made the bearings rattle in the SME!
Low-compliance moving coils just do *not* suit the lightweight 3009
and its knife-edge bearing. The high-compliance Denon 110 or the ADC
25 and its kin are much more suitable, as is the modern Shure V15.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
milk...@zip.com.au
a...@borealis.com wrote:
> milk...@zip.com.au writes:
> >FWIW, I had a Linn LP12/SME3009 11, and tried it with Shure V15 111,a
> >Supex, an Ortofon MC(I don't remember the model),a Dynavector, and
> >finally stopped looking when I tried the Denon 103 MC. Worked like a
> >charm, and even 16+ years later I haven't heard a better combination
> >with that arm. I wish I had never sold them!
> Sorry, but I also had a 103 and I actually changed my arm from 3009/II
> to Mission 774 because the 103 made the bearings rattle in the SME!
> Low-compliance moving coils just do *not* suit the lightweight 3009
> and its knife-edge bearing. The high-compliance Denon 110 or the ADC
> 25 and its kin are much more suitable, as is the modern Shure V15.
> Stewart Pinkerton | Music is art, audio is engineering
Dear Stewart, Interesting, but I had no such experience with mine.
However I did neglect to mention(rusty memory) that I made ny own
silicon fluid damping trough for the arm to try to improve the sound
of the V15-to no avail-and it's possible that this ameliorated any
bearing problems. Graeme