Shure M91ED / Shure M95ED

[ETI_5000]

Still looking for those oddly elusive photos....

Yes, I've tried to find them, too. If I'd known that they'd be this difficult to find, I would have either copied them, or bookmarked the forum thread, but of course I thought I'd be able to find them again!:bash: But they definitely do exist.

 

[wualta]

Fwiw, Shure says the engineering drawings and documents for the Type II no longer exist. Can you say "conspiracy"? and yes, I'm joking.
One reason I'd really like to know about this is that, if it's true, it would be absolutely uncharacteristic marketing behavior for Shure. Much more important is the fact that the lam core everyone knows about has the same v-shape as the V15III body shell and every new-model Shure body shell since then. It simply wouldn't fit the smaller, narrower II body. Which would mean that a laminated II Improved had a unique core, used in only one model and never used again, and marketed for only three years-- very expensive if kept secret and not advertised to increase sales to pay for the engineering and tooling. And Shure did indeed advertise the improved core of the V15 III and M95ED. So to me, the very idea of a V15 II with a lam core is wishful thinking, not to say weird. Not that weird never happens to big companies, but stillllll.....

 

[onwardjames]

Have two M55 and V15 type II. Happy with both. Did get a new M44 off Amazon. Have one on a friends Dual 1209. Like it better than a M97. To me a 97 always sounds blah. My two cents.

Eric

I too have a V15 Type II, not sure yet if it is improved or not. I broke the stock needle trying to re-center it (wayy out of line, unusable, basically) and so I'm gonna have to pony up and get a SAS or something. Anxious to hear it.

I too bought an M44 off Amazon. BEST 40 bucks ever! I find it far better than the M97xe, of which I have 3 bodies and two stock needles. Blah is right.

Oh, and I have a M95EJ that I really like, with stock stylus. Sounds very good.

 

[SoundsAlike]

I too have a V15 Type II, not sure yet if it is improved or not. I broke the stock needle trying to re-center it (wayy out of line, unusable, basically) and so I'm gonna have to pony up and get a SAS or something. Anxious to hear it.

I too bought an M44 off Amazon. BEST 40 bucks ever! I find it far better than the M97xe, of which I have 3 bodies and two stock needles. Blah is right.

Oh, and I have a M95EJ that I really like, with stock stylus. Sounds very good.

Try the Shure SC35C -- best $34 cartridge I've ever heard, lush mid range, well defined channel separation, huge soundstage with deep bass, no crackles or clips from imperfections. The SAS stylii I've used are no where near as great as the original Shure stylus, IMO. Maybe I've used my Shibatas in the wrong arm combo, but they didn't seem to perform anywhere near their price points..

And now I'm convinced an original manufactured stylus for a moving magnet cartridge is going to be superior to any generic regardless of the stylus profile and cost. FWIW I think Audio Technica's hyper elliptical stylii are the best bang for buck for genuine brand needles

 

[onwardjames]

Happy to report I own the Type 2 IMPROVED Shure V15.

Saw those ribs last night, joy. Gotta get a stylus for it.

 

[wualta]

OWJ: Whilst waiting for a stylus to appear, take a peek inside the stylus hole and see if you spot laminations. A fun game.

 

[onwardjames]

OWJ: Whilst waiting for a stylus to appear, take a peek inside the stylus hole and see if you spot laminations. A fun game.

Okay, I used my 15x magnifying glass and the best light I could get.

Found out my eyes now suck (a month from turning 43. In my 20's, I had 20/15 vision).

Also, I clearly have a v15 type 2 improved, no doubt.

And I saw no evidence of lamination. Smooth chamber for the shaft as far as I could see.

I DID see an interesting thing - the letters J and E are in blue at the opening, written upside down from the perspective of a mounted cartridge.

And did I mention this cart has heft? Heavy little guy.

Sorry, I don't see any lamination.

 

[GerardG]

I just looked at my V15 II Improved and with my tired eyes (with magnifying glass) I saw no evidence of lamination. My V15 IV does show these lamination's clearly, however. In blue ink there are the letters LG on the II and RG on the IV. For what purpose perhaps someone else can chime in. :scratch2:

My M95 ED shows no lamination's neither does my newly acquired Ne95ED.

I'm listening, as I write this, to my new to me Ne95ED and made in Mexico Shure stylus from LP Gear and must say I am very impressed. Not quite as bass-y as the Empire with NOS stylus from VOM I wrote of in the Empire thread but with better mids and strong but slightly less detailed highs. :thmbsp:

At least that is how it sounds to my damaged hearing. I have said it before: All my cartridges and styli sound different but I like 'em all! The differences just make me want to swap them out every few weeks. :yes:

Now, back to my listening.

Gerard

 

[wualta]

Thanks for looking, guys. Those blue letters are date codes. A little later I'll add the chart to this post... There. Now, as long as we don't expect it to work or make sense...

SHURE DATE CODES

 

[ETI_5000]

The V15 Type II Improved doesn't seem to have a laminated core, then – I’ve never owned one, so can only go by what owners say. Some people (including some V15 Type II Improved owners from other forums?) probably aren’t as trustworthy as they should be! I’ve amended my list of Shure cartridges with laminated cores.

However, you do need reasonable magnification, and good lighting, to see much – I checked out my own V15 Type V, with a magnifying glass and light (probably around 3X magnification) and all I could see was a black hole, but that’s just my tired old eyes, which aren’t as good as they could be (the last time I saw perfectly without aids was 1972, when I was a young whipper-snapper!).

My M95 ED shows no lamination's neither does my newly acquired Ne95ED.

Yes, the M95ED, ME95ED, M95HE, M95ED/D and M95HE/D didn't have laminations, although they did inherit the same core shape as the V15 Type III, without the laminations. That still gave them a fairly flat frequency response over most of the audio band.:thmbsp: To quote an old 1970's Shure advertisement, the M95ED was "second only to the V15 Type III in stereo reproducation. A thinner, uninterrupted pole piece minimises magnetic losses".

 

[GerardG]

Thanks for the chart, wualta. I was thinking it might have been a date code of some sort but quickly thought two letters made little sense for such as it would at best cover 26 years. :scratch2:

Well, it seems the mystery of the laminated V15 type II is solved. Makes me wonder, though ETI_5000, if a few such beasties were made and escaped into the general population to cause consternation and mayhem amongst unsuspecting Shure cartridge loving audiophiles? ara:

Gerard

 

[ETI_5000]

Well, it seems the mystery of the laminated V15 type II is solved. Makes me wonder, though ETI_5000, if a few such beasties were made and escaped into the general population to cause consternation and mayhem amongst unsuspecting Shure cartridge loving audiophiles? ara:

Gerard

Yes, that could be correct, because some owners are convinced that theirs had laminated cores, and I'm sure I've seen the pics somewhere to support it. So whether it was just a late, even more improved, version of the Improved, or even a Type III trial interior in a Type II body escaped from the Shure labs, I don't know.

Years ago, an engineering training 'fault' radio escaped from an Australian radio manufacturer's factory into a shop. It was only returned to the factory when a concerned serviceman contacted them about the strange radio he'd encountered years later, which appeared to be completely lacking any solder.:thumbsdn: "Aha, we wondered where that went," they said, and sent the unfortunate owner a brand new improved model to replace his faulty radio, which had all dry (non-soldered) joints designed to bamboozle trainee engineers! The strange thing is how it ever managed to function at all, but it went for years in someone's home before a dry joint stopped it working permanently.

 

[GerardG]

Yes, that could be correct, because some owners are convinced that theirs had laminated cores, and I'm sure I've seen the pics somewhere to support it. So whether it was just a late, even more improved, version of the Improved, or even a Type III trial interior in a Type II body escaped from the Shure labs, I don't know.

Years ago, an engineering training 'fault' radio escaped from an Australian radio manufacturer's factory into a shop. It was only returned to the factory when a concerned serviceman contacted them about the strange radio he'd encountered years later, which appeared to be completely lacking any solder.:thumbsdn: "Aha, we wondered where that went," they said, and sent the unfortunate owner a brand new improved model to replace his faulty radio, which had all dry (non-soldered) joints designed to bamboozle trainee engineers! The strange thing is how it ever managed to function at all, but it went for years in someone's home before a dry joint stopped it working permanently.

When I peered into my Type II Improved the view was marginal even with a good magnifier and bright LED flashlight. I couldn't see much but then decided to glance into my Type IV for comparison and the lamination in it was quite easy to spot. Just for interest I did the same with my M95 cartridges. :nerd:

I'd love to see pics of a laminated Type II though and learn if they were cost experiments, test mules for comparison, end of run improvements, or something like the training fault radio you wrote of. :yes::yes:

Interestingly this is where the date code stamps might be of use. Any laminated Type II samples should(?) be at the end of the V15 Type II production run or perhaps have no date stamp if they were test samples. All speculation of course, but interesting. :scratch2:

Gerard

 

[wualta]

If anyone hasn't read that Nov '75 test by Len Feldman (p.61 in the magazine, p.53 of the pdf) that Don kindly linked us to, by all means, take a look. It shows how Shure used to build up the magnetic circuit in their cartridges from separate bits of mu-metal, how they changed all that for the Type III, and then came up with a one-piece 'single-lamination' version of the v-shaped III core for the M95.

The M95 still has a trace of the classic saddle-shaped response curve, but it's not as pronounced as in, say, the M91E. By the time of the M91ED, Shure was learning how to get rid of the saddle while still using the old thick multipiece lossy magnetic circuit Shure had been using for years.


Adventures in Engineering. Here's the link again:
http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/70s/1975/Radio-Electronics-1975-11.pdf

 

[cocobeli]

Does stylus shank size at all correlate with laminations? (Thinking about the difference between the type ii & type iii, which I have.)

Using an otoscope I can see the laminations in my type iii but while my type ii has the ‘improved’ carrier, no laminations are visible.

 

[wualta]

To answer your first question, yes, it certainly looks that way. Small shank = laminated core. Empire followed suit with their 2000Z, as it turns out.

Using a medical viewing device to peek inside cartridges is a great idea. Do you have photos of this, er, procedure?

 

[Pio1980]

Does stylus shank size at all correlate with laminations? (Thinking about the difference between the type ii & type iii, which I have.)

Using an otoscope I can see the laminations in my type iii but while my type ii has the ‘improved’ carrier, no laminations are visible.

The correlation is only related insofar as a costlier lower mass more sophisticated cantelever would be used with a costlier more sophisticated laminated pole structure on a higher end cart.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[boreas]

The correlation is only related insofar as a costlier lower mass more sophisticated cantelever would be used with a costlier more sophisticated laminated pole structure on a higher end cart.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Steve, in this case, "shank" is being used to describe the diamond shaped brass tube that's inserted into the cartridge body. It gets confusing because Shure used shank in place of cantilever.

John

 

[Pio1980]

A-ha! The "nude" tip thing. Similar, as a nude (non-shanked or non-"bushed") naked tip was considered a better option.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[jkilla]

Yeah it would seem shank gets thrown around to describe different sections of the stylus/cantilever/holder assembly