Joshua,
personally I think overhang is most important than two null points than azimuth. As proper overhang will decide accurate null points. If possible change the headshell with slotted holes.
Regards
TD 124 Wakes Up
- Thread starter jls001
- Start date
personally I think overhang is most important than two null points than azimuth. As proper overhang will decide accurate null points. If possible change the headshell with slotted holes.
Regards
Finally fitted a headshell with slotted hole (cannibalised off a Panasonic TT). Also changed to M97xE cartridge.
Carefully did the stupid protractor thingie again. This time is was definitely easier to achieve null alignments.
In my hurry I started playing records and found that the bottom of the cartridge was literally scraping the record suface, so I raised the toneram height but it didn't help much. The sound was straightaway more polished than my workhorse M44-7. But I was still bothered by the way the bottom almost scrapped the record surface, then reality hit home! I had not balanced the arm at all after fixing a new headshell and new cartridge. The current tracking weight was way too high.
So I re-did the whole balancing rigmarole, readjusted the antiskate (most painful of all as the nylon thread is so thin that looping it and tightening it is quite a task), then as a final step re-adjusted the arm height.
I think I'm set now.
It's been a wonderful learning experience, aided by the wisdom and knowledge of fellow forumers who willingly shared their hard-earned wisdom and knowledge. Thanks, guys (you know who you are).
Only one thing bothers me - I'm staying up late into the night since the last few days, spinning record after record, re-discovering old gems.
Carefully did the stupid protractor thingie again. This time is was definitely easier to achieve null alignments.
In my hurry I started playing records and found that the bottom of the cartridge was literally scraping the record suface, so I raised the toneram height but it didn't help much. The sound was straightaway more polished than my workhorse M44-7. But I was still bothered by the way the bottom almost scrapped the record surface, then reality hit home! I had not balanced the arm at all after fixing a new headshell and new cartridge. The current tracking weight was way too high.
So I re-did the whole balancing rigmarole, readjusted the antiskate (most painful of all as the nylon thread is so thin that looping it and tightening it is quite a task), then as a final step re-adjusted the arm height.
I think I'm set now.
It's been a wonderful learning experience, aided by the wisdom and knowledge of fellow forumers who willingly shared their hard-earned wisdom and knowledge. Thanks, guys (you know who you are).
Only one thing bothers me - I'm staying up late into the night since the last few days, spinning record after record, re-discovering old gems.
Last edited:
Pic of the slotted headshell taken off a Pioneer PL200 turntable:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The spanking new Shure M97xE cartridge:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The spanking new Shure M97xE cartridge:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Joshua,
if you are particular about cosmetics (like me
) you can get Cosmic turntable headshell from chor bazar etc. There Cogram models had SME type same replica headshell like this...
I had 2 of them but unfortunately gave it away to a friend. Will see if I find another one.
Regards
if you are particular about cosmetics (like me
) you can get Cosmic turntable headshell from chor bazar etc. There Cogram models had SME type same replica headshell like this...
I had 2 of them but unfortunately gave it away to a friend. Will see if I find another one.
Regards
Nice pics, Joshua.
I may be wrong, but the headshell top surface appears to be tilted slightly forward in your second photo. Ideally, it should be parallel to the record surface for ideal VTA, tho' some vinylophiles prefer a slight tilt backwards. Most of the more expensive tonearms out there these days offer VTA adjustment on-the-fly, i.e. while a record is playing so that you can optimize it by ear. It can matter a bit, depending on the thickness of the LP - esp. the new 200 gm ones - and some obsessive Japanese audionuts tend to adjust VTA for each and every LP they play.
You'd have to lower the tonearm height, if you need to get it perfectly parallel.
The problem with the SME tonearm (and most others) is that the bearing plane is slightly higher than the plane of the record. For ideal tracking, the point of the stylus on the record should be in the same plane as the bearing of the arm (simple physics). But it's hard to achieve in a mechanical device like a tonearm without bringing in other problems. One way to reduce its impact in the SME, is to fit a headshell that has its bayonet portion substantially lower than that of the rest of the headshell (see the ADC magnesium design on the 'net to get the idea). This will allow you to further lower the tonearm height bringing the bearing plane closer to the that of the LP, even though you can never get it at the same level. The original SME headshell, for this reason, is poorly designed, as also your substitute headshell, as the knurled ring is almost at the same level as the top of the headshell (as seen in the photo). Fortunately there are many other substitute universal headshells out there, similar to the ADC, that can be bought on eBay. Just remember that they should be lightweight enough so as to not overbalance the SME counterweight (this matters in the later 'Improved' versions, not your Series I ).
Regards.
I may be wrong, but the headshell top surface appears to be tilted slightly forward in your second photo. Ideally, it should be parallel to the record surface for ideal VTA, tho' some vinylophiles prefer a slight tilt backwards. Most of the more expensive tonearms out there these days offer VTA adjustment on-the-fly, i.e. while a record is playing so that you can optimize it by ear. It can matter a bit, depending on the thickness of the LP - esp. the new 200 gm ones - and some obsessive Japanese audionuts tend to adjust VTA for each and every LP they play.
You'd have to lower the tonearm height, if you need to get it perfectly parallel.
The problem with the SME tonearm (and most others) is that the bearing plane is slightly higher than the plane of the record. For ideal tracking, the point of the stylus on the record should be in the same plane as the bearing of the arm (simple physics). But it's hard to achieve in a mechanical device like a tonearm without bringing in other problems. One way to reduce its impact in the SME, is to fit a headshell that has its bayonet portion substantially lower than that of the rest of the headshell (see the ADC magnesium design on the 'net to get the idea). This will allow you to further lower the tonearm height bringing the bearing plane closer to the that of the LP, even though you can never get it at the same level. The original SME headshell, for this reason, is poorly designed, as also your substitute headshell, as the knurled ring is almost at the same level as the top of the headshell (as seen in the photo). Fortunately there are many other substitute universal headshells out there, similar to the ADC, that can be bought on eBay. Just remember that they should be lightweight enough so as to not overbalance the SME counterweight (this matters in the later 'Improved' versions, not your Series I ).
Regards.
Joshua,
if you are particular about cosmetics (like me
I had 2 of them but unfortunately gave it away to a friend. Will see if I find another one.
Regards
A guy sold me a Thorens headshell long back and at that time I just didn't know how it would be useful. Now I know
On next trip to the C Bazaar, will look around for headshells.Nice pics, Joshua.
I may be wrong, but the headshell top surface appears to be tilted slightly forward in your second photo. Ideally, it should be parallel to the record surface for ideal VTA, tho' some vinylophiles prefer a slight tilt backwards. Most of the more expensive tonearms out there these days offer VTA adjustment on-the-fly, i.e. while a record is playing so that you can optimize it by ear. It can matter a bit, depending on the thickness of the LP - esp. the new 200 gm ones - and some obsessive Japanese audionuts tend to adjust VTA for each and every LP they play.
You'd have to lower the tonearm height, if you need to get it perfectly parallel.
The problem with the SME tonearm (and most others) is that the bearing plane is slightly higher than the plane of the record. For ideal tracking, the point of the stylus on the record should be in the same plane as the bearing of the arm (simple physics). But it's hard to achieve in a mechanical device like a tonearm without bringing in other problems. One way to reduce its impact in the SME, is to fit a headshell that has its bayonet portion substantially lower than that of the rest of the headshell (see the ADC magnesium design on the 'net to get the idea). This will allow you to further lower the tonearm height bringing the bearing plane closer to the that of the LP, even though you can never get it at the same level. The original SME headshell, for this reason, is poorly designed, as also your substitute headshell, as the knurled ring is almost at the same level as the top of the headshell (as seen in the photo). Fortunately there are many other substitute universal headshells out there, similar to the ADC, that can be bought on eBay. Just remember that they should be lightweight enough so as to not overbalance the SME counterweight (this matters in the later 'Improved' versions, not your Series I ).
Regards.
Hi Eddie,
Thanks for pointing that out. I did notice it too last night. There is a definite droop towards the headshell. Fortunately, adjusting height on the 3009 is very easy. Let me try a parallel alignment and see if it makes any sonic improvement.
I will also try if my ADC headshell aligns better.
Joshua
Now I know why I overdid the height - as mentioned in my earlier post, the bottom of the cartridge was very nearly scraping the record surface (due to wrong downforce setting) and I went overboard in lifting up the arm height. I did lower the height but I guess it's not nearly enough. Will correct it. In fact I will go overboard and use a spirit level to ensure that all is level.
to ensure that all is level.
Each level in the rack is adjustable by threaded screws with round heads. Since the rack (from magma) is a cantilever design, I make the front (equipment faceplate side) higher when empty. When an equipment rests on it, it weighs down the front side (back side being fixed to the lone spine), the rack becomes level after a few tries. So a spirit level (or bottle, as local carpenters and hardware stores know it) is a must have tool for me.
Lowered the arm height as suggested. Tonearm is now parallel to record surface but headshell droops a bit down at the stylus tip end. I guess this is how it is built so I left it at that.
Net result of levelled arm + M97xE cartridge combo (less than 10 record sides old) compared to old cartridge (M44-7, which was as set up as properly as I know, on same arm):
1. Details: this is the first thing that strikes you during the changeover. The M97xE brings out a lot more detail. I mean, a lot more.
2. Imaging is far superior on the M97xE. It is more specific in its placement of instruments/voices, though an even more specific placement would be welcome
3. Soundstage depth has moved a bit forward compared to the M44-7. Width has gone up only by a bit.
4. Bass - the M44-7 has a reputation for deep thumping bass and I was apprehensive if I would get some wimpy bass with the M97xE. Boy, was I wrong! The bass quality is better, though not necessarily more.
5. Tonality: is definitely improved. I think this equates to saying it has better mids.
6. Highs: highs are more extended and I heard airy highs I had never heard from my analog source.
A good, cost effective upgrade. This cartridge has been lying with me for a very long time, not even unboxed. I had been missing a very good thing for a very long time. Highly recommended for folks using M44-7 or M55. I can make out lyrics better, and this for me eventually leads to more involvement with the music.
Next up: will transplant the stylus of the M97xE to the cartridge body of the Shure V15 Type III after the stylus has gained about 30-40 hours of playtime. The styli of these two models are interchangeable, though stylus shapes are different and cartridge bodies are internally different. It's not a way of getting a V15 on the cheap.
A detailed user review of the M97xE here with comments about how it compares to the V15.
Net result of levelled arm + M97xE cartridge combo (less than 10 record sides old) compared to old cartridge (M44-7, which was as set up as properly as I know, on same arm):
1. Details: this is the first thing that strikes you during the changeover. The M97xE brings out a lot more detail. I mean, a lot more.
2. Imaging is far superior on the M97xE. It is more specific in its placement of instruments/voices, though an even more specific placement would be welcome
3. Soundstage depth has moved a bit forward compared to the M44-7. Width has gone up only by a bit.
4. Bass - the M44-7 has a reputation for deep thumping bass and I was apprehensive if I would get some wimpy bass with the M97xE. Boy, was I wrong! The bass quality is better, though not necessarily more.
5. Tonality: is definitely improved. I think this equates to saying it has better mids.
6. Highs: highs are more extended and I heard airy highs I had never heard from my analog source.
A good, cost effective upgrade. This cartridge has been lying with me for a very long time, not even unboxed. I had been missing a very good thing for a very long time. Highly recommended for folks using M44-7 or M55. I can make out lyrics better, and this for me eventually leads to more involvement with the music.
Next up: will transplant the stylus of the M97xE to the cartridge body of the Shure V15 Type III after the stylus has gained about 30-40 hours of playtime. The styli of these two models are interchangeable, though stylus shapes are different and cartridge bodies are internally different. It's not a way of getting a V15 on the cheap.
A detailed user review of the M97xE here with comments about how it compares to the V15.
sachu888
Well-Known Member
Lowered the arm height as suggested. Tonearm is now parallel to record surface but headshell droops a bit down at the stylus tip end. I guess this is how it is built so I left it at that.
Net result of levelled arm + M97xE cartridge combo (less than 10 record sides old) compared to old cartridge (M44-7, which was as set up as properly as I know, on same arm):
1. Details: this is the first thing that strikes you during the changeover. The M97xE brings out a lot more detail. I mean, a lot more.
2. Imaging is far superior on the M97xE. It is more specific in its placement of instruments/voices, though an even more specific placement would be welcome
3. Soundstage depth has moved a bit forward compared to the M44-7. Width has gone up only by a bit.
4. Bass - the M44-7 has a reputation for deep thumping bass and I was apprehensive if I would get some wimpy bass with the M97xE. Boy, was I wrong! The bass quality is better, though not necessarily more.
5. Tonality: is definitely improved. I think this equates to saying it has better mids.
6. Highs: highs are more extended and I heard airy highs I had never heard from my analog source.
A good, cost effective upgrade. This cartridge has been lying with me for a very long time, not even unboxed. I had been missing a very good thing for a very long time. Highly recommended for folks using M44-7 or M55. I can make out lyrics better, and this for me eventually leads to more involvement with the music.
Next up: will transplant the stylus of the M97xE to the cartridge body of the Shure V15 Type III after the stylus has gained about 30-40 hours of playtime. The styli of these two models are interchangeable, though stylus shapes are different and cartridge bodies are internally different. It's not a way of getting a V15 on the cheap.
A detailed user review of the M97xE here with comments about how it compares to the V15.
I think both M97xe and V15 share the same body,only stylus assembly is different.V15 had Boron cantilever with Hyper elliptical stylus whereas M97xe has Aluminium cantilever with elliptical stylus.A proper upgrade for M97xe would be SAS stylus from JICO which has a same Boron cantilever with HE stylus.
Edit: http://stylus.export-japan.com/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=&products_id=1526
Regards,
Sachin
Last edited:
This has been on my radar for a long time
Will do the deed one of these days. Also on the radar is to get replacement stylus for the Ortofon Super OM 20. I may go the whole hog and upgrade the stylus to Super OM 40 since body is same.
OT: Anyone having a good MC cart in good condition lying around unused and willing to sell to me?
sachu888
Well-Known Member
Hi,
I am also looking to buy an MC cart.
Regards,
Sachin
I am also looking to buy an MC cart.
Regards,
Sachin
Some progress:
1. Took out the mushrooms and mounted the turntable directly on the plinth.
2. The bolt that fastens the turntable to the plinth has become short after changing plinth. Went on a very wild goose hunt at Lohar Chawl to get new bolts but ended up finding nothing of suitable length. magma came to my rescue and procured a 3 foot length from his usual dealers. magma, I can't thank you enough for this favour. You are a life saver. Last night I cut it them to suitable lengths (5 inch and 3/4) and tightly screwed the turntable to the plinth, sans the mushrooms.
1. Took out the mushrooms and mounted the turntable directly on the plinth.
2. The bolt that fastens the turntable to the plinth has become short after changing plinth. Went on a very wild goose hunt at Lohar Chawl to get new bolts but ended up finding nothing of suitable length. magma came to my rescue and procured a 3 foot length from his usual dealers. magma, I can't thank you enough for this favour. You are a life saver. Last night I cut it them to suitable lengths (5 inch and 3/4) and tightly screwed the turntable to the plinth, sans the mushrooms.
I have a nagging doubt and actively soliciting advice and opinions from the forum:
Below is photo of the pivot area of the SME 3009 tonearm. My doubt is:
When holding the arm tube near the knife bearing/pivit point and gently but firmly moving the arm tube along the direction of the green arrow, there is quite a bit of play in the direction of the green arrow. Is this play normal? I have not measured the exact amount of play but I am guessing it could be 2 to 3 mm.
There is no play in the axis of the red arrow.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Sound is quite OK. I am just trying to clear a nagging doubt. The slack seems counter-intuitive to me (as has been the use of the stupid protractor).
Below is photo of the pivot area of the SME 3009 tonearm. My doubt is:
When holding the arm tube near the knife bearing/pivit point and gently but firmly moving the arm tube along the direction of the green arrow, there is quite a bit of play in the direction of the green arrow. Is this play normal? I have not measured the exact amount of play but I am guessing it could be 2 to 3 mm.
There is no play in the axis of the red arrow.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Sound is quite OK. I am just trying to clear a nagging doubt. The slack seems counter-intuitive to me (as has been the use of the stupid protractor).
Joshua,
I'd say its pretty normal. I seem to remember some movement in mine too when I move the counterweight in and out on the tube rear. If you're holding the yoke (the bishop's mitre shaped triangular outer part) you're in no way touching the arm tube. The only place the arm tube touches the base is at the knife edge bearing which rests in the V that is inside the bottom half of the yoke and there's enough space for it to move in this V. It's a loose bearing. It even moves up and down lifting up in the V as you would have seen during lateral balancing process as per the manual.
Regards
I'd say its pretty normal. I seem to remember some movement in mine too when I move the counterweight in and out on the tube rear. If you're holding the yoke (the bishop's mitre shaped triangular outer part) you're in no way touching the arm tube. The only place the arm tube touches the base is at the knife edge bearing which rests in the V that is inside the bottom half of the yoke and there's enough space for it to move in this V. It's a loose bearing. It even moves up and down lifting up in the V as you would have seen during lateral balancing process as per the manual.
Regards
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
Got the little circular spirit level. The beauty is that you can set the azimuth and vta in one stroke.
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=19.063474,72.827075
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=19.063474,72.827075
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
eBay - New & used electronics, cars, apparel, collectibles, sporting goods & more at low prices
There are plenty of other options available. This one is well behaved. You can use it for practically everything, all parts of the platter, the surface of your audio rack, the floor, whatever. You dont need to turn the spirit level 90 degrees after each check. It shows you at once 360 degrees any misalignment anywhere. Cheap, only Rs400 for me on my desk.
There are plenty of other options available. This one is well behaved. You can use it for practically everything, all parts of the platter, the surface of your audio rack, the floor, whatever. You dont need to turn the spirit level 90 degrees after each check. It shows you at once 360 degrees any misalignment anywhere. Cheap, only Rs400 for me on my desk.
The Marantz PM7000N offers big, spacious and insightful sound, class-leading clarity and a solid streaming platform in a award winning package.
Similar threads
