M97XE with new cables and Catmann is correct

Jim Creek

Jazz, Wine, Electronics
It's that time of the month where I rotate my cartridges. First, I bought myself a nice XMas present, Blue Jeans LC1 cables, so I installed my M97XE. These cables are low capacitance. Catmann has been preaching the use of low capacitance cables with the Shure M97XE. You know, he's right. Low capacitance cables brings the high end of the M97EX to life. It still retains its lush midrange and solid bass. I love this cartridge a lot now. Thanks Catmann for your excellent guidance.
 
That is great news Jim. Glad your perplexing problem has been solved. That tells me that the capacitance of the Traveler's wiring is quite low. Would you know the actual capacitance of the Traveler's arm?

I also have Blue Jeans LC1 cables (4 ft), and notice carts like my AT440 and the Shure M91 with an elliptical styli sound near perfect across the frequency band. The same cables when using the SAS present a upper end that is a bit strident. But I am confused whether to increase or decrease the capacitance, in order to tame the top end.:scratch2:
 
Shure (M97xE) recommends 200-300pf and catman, through testing, suggests 250-300pf. I have mine set at about 275pf, as my Pickering XV-15 likes 275pf. Good luck.
 
I know catman participates on other forums but I think he still lurks around here. His research and expertise has been quite useful to me. I wish him all the luck in the world. :thmbsp:
 
Yes, catman still lurks here, but his posting privileges have been revoked. I hear from him now and then, he's doing OK.
 
Jim

Yes I do know what the M97XE is and own two of them, the comment as Bob figured out was directed to 91r100gs. As to the M97xe, I have had multiple e-mail conversations with Felix about it and have tried it at both 47k and 62k and at capacitances from 150 pf to 300 pf and still couldn't get it to sound as good as an M91ED or an M95ED.

David, I said from "that era" referring to the M91 question.
 
Then there's the M97xE with the Jico SAS, which according to this thread does better at a capacitance closer to or under 200pF. I'm at about 200pF on mine and prefer the sound to when it was over 300pF.
 
The M97xE is my best and smoothest cartridge for certain records. It tracks like a beast, tames rock records with rough edges and reduces noise on records in poor condition. My gripe about it has always been poor channel separation. I've gotten used to the mile-wide soundstage of my ADCs and Grados. This, of course, is not an issue for mono records, and is actually an improvement for those annoying hard-panned early stereo records of the 60s.

Lately, I have actually been using my N97E stylus on a Pmount Shure LTP-2 cartridge, tracking at 1.75g, brush down on my Pmount Technics SL-QX300... It sounds fantastic in that configuration, because that body seems to "liven up" that stylus. (Screw you, Pmount spec!)

And, when I was having issues with my setup in my earliest days here at AK, Catman was the first to reach out with a PM to help. I have nothing bad to say about the guy. I'm not sure what his offense was, but I thought of him as an asset to AK. I can only wish him the best, wherever he might be.
 
Last edited:
Hello Multiplex, I too , have a N97xE installed into a M99 P-Mount cartridge. My P-Mount table has VTF and AS adjustments. The M99 came with a TT that I have since recycled. I do referrer it to my old M92.
 
The M97xE is my best and smoothest cartridge for certain records. It tracks like a beast, tames rock records with rough edges and reduces noise on records in poor condition. My gripe about it has always been poor channel separation. I've gotten used to the mile-wide soundstage of my ADCs and Grados. This, of course, is not an issue for mono records, and is actually an improvement for those annoying hard-panned early stereo records of the 60s.

Lately, I have actually been using my N97E stylus on a Pmount Shure LTP-2 cartridge, tracking at 1.75g, brush down on my Pmount Technics SL-QX300... It sounds fantastic in that configuration, because that body seems to "liven up" that stylus. (Screw you, Pmount spec!)

And, when I was having issues with my setup in my earliest days here at AK, Catman was the first to reach out with a PM to help. I have nothing bad to say about the guy. I'm not sure what his offense was, but I thought of him as an asset to AK. I can only wish him the best, wherever he might be.

I use my N97xE in a Rat Shack RXT5, and the high end is just fine, although not as bright as say, a Shibata or something, but certainly right with a HE stylus anyway.

And ditto on the Catman!
 
Catman posted a lot about M97xE loading. In the end he used the same loading settings that Shure recommends.

So if Catman is correct then so are the Shure engineers.

Cheers, Bob

PS. We spend a lot of time on cartridge loading. Back in the day cartridge designers/ manufacturers worked to the standard that most moving magnet phono inputs used. That being a 47k load resistance and capacitance between 120 and 220 pf.

It seems odd to me that any manufacturer would purposely optimize a MM cartridge to other load specs.
 
Last edited:
CD-4 mandated low capacitance TT cabling and loading for the hf 4-channel pilot signal ca 1974 up, which became standard practice.


Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
 
Catman posted a lot about M97xE loading. In the end he used the same loading settings that Shure recommends.

So if Catman is correct then so are the Shure engineers.

Cheers, Bob

PS. We spend a lot of time on cartridge loading. Back in the day cartridge designers/ manufacturers worked to the standard that most moving magnet phono inputs used. That being a 47k load resistance and capacitance between 120 and 220 pf.

It seems odd to me that any manufacturer would purposely optimize a MM cartridge to other load specs.

Odd as it may be, some did. Grado did that with the F1+ back in the day.

There are so many variables, preferences and interpretations of how something should sound... What is flat? What is neutral? What other equipment does a cartridge have to work with to achieve it's sound?

Look at the difference between the M97xE and the AT440MLa. Very different sounding cartridges at the opposite ends of the bright/dark spectrum. Yet, they both claim to be compatible with standard loading. Obviously two very different trains of thought behind the engineering of each of them. Which is more accurate? I dunno. Probably depends on the installation. Which is better? Personal preference entirely. Maybe you'll like neither right out of the box, but a simple change in loading may be enough to change your mind. I suppose this is one of the things that makes vinyl playback so interesting.
 
Back
Top Bottom