• Please note that there are a few updates and clarifications made in the Audiokarma Rules, mostly relating to advertising and the addition of the new "Paying it Forward" & "Giving back" forums in the AudioKarma Audio Marketplace section.

Love them Shure cartridges

sberger

sberger

Hard Core Geezer
Subscriber
Ever since I decided to start using vintage tables(Dual 1219 and Garrard Lab 80 MKII) I have been using Shure carts exclusively. Started with the M97XE, then M95ED, V15III, M91ED. All with either OEM or Jico SAS styli. Yesterday acquired a M55E cart, with a still in original box, seemingly unplayed OEM stylus. Did some research to find out that it was pretty much top of the line back in the mid 60's prior to the introduction of the V15 series. 6.2mv output. The consensus however was that while good, not as highly regarded as the M91ED which I adore. Nonetheless, decided to try it out on the Lab 80. Wow. Big, rich sound with incredible tone. Played a number of jazz and classical lp's with it and it has yet to do anything but make me smile. I may even prefer it to the the 91ED. Maybe it's just synergy with the Lab 80, maybe it's the higher output. I don't know. But I do know that once again an older Shure cart has amazed me. Good stuff for sure.
 
Register to hide this ad
It's prolly synergy. Sometimes things work out that way. When it happens, it's grin and bear it time :D
 
BrocLuno said:
It's prolly synergy. Sometimes things work out that way. When it happens, it's grin and bear it time :D
Click to expand...

:yes:


:D

Of course, it's probably personal preference in sound more than anything. It's all so personal, isn't it? I really love the big fat sound of an old cartridge on an old table, coming through old tube amps and old speakers. But others might shake their head in disbelief as to what is wrong with my ears. That's why I love reading all reviews of equipment, but in the end run I only trust what I hear. Simple philosophy but it seems to work.
 
Last edited:
sberger said:
:yes:


:D

Of course, it's probably personal preference in sound more than anything. It's all so personal, isn't it? I really love the big fat sound of an old cartridge on an old table, coming through old tube amps and old speakers. But others might shake their head in disbelief as to what is wrong with my ears. That's why I love reading all reviews of equipment, but in the end run I only trust what I hear. Simple philosophy but it seems to work.
Click to expand...

What you list is what I call the "fun factor" in the older Shure line. The 97xE may be a lot more accurate than the M75-91, etc, but sometimes I'm in the mood for that rousing "juke-box" sound.
 
The M55e that I have (w/OEM stylus) happens to be my favorite Shure cart. I'm having a similar experience with it mounted on my PL-9.
 
Yes it was the TOTL when introduced in 1964.
It is also 2013's most versatile cartridge considering every type of stylus is available for it cheaply from $13 to $130
It will also accept super track stylus from other Shure carts.

With an SAS on it and the volume turned down a bit, It is just as nice as my V15/5mr SAS.

I really like it.

..
 
Well good to know that others are enjoying this real underdog of a cart and that it's not just my skewed preference of a certain type of sound that is affecting me. Of course, most of my vinyl is between 20-50 years old. I'm sure at least some of it has felt the likes of the 55E on it in a past life. And yeah resound, you're right about being able to find styli for it. I suspect that I'll be able to keep enjoying it for some time.
 
resound said:
Yes it was the TOTL when introduced in 1964.
Click to expand...

Not to quibble, but just because I was interested, I looked up information on the Shure M44 in old hi-fi magazines a few years ago. I don't think the M55E was ever their top-of-the-line, but offered a lower-cost alternative to the V-15 for those desiring an elliptical stylus. Here is what I found in their advertising, anyway:

The M44 (the first Shure designed to track at 15 degrees) replaced the M33 as top dog in their advertising in the Dec. '63 issue. Priced at $49.50 (.5 mil stylus, .75-1.5 VTF) or $44.50 (.7 mil, 1.5-3.0), it was lauded as "awesome in its vitality and clarity," "a night-and-day difference," and "the new standard in distortion-free hi-fi cartridges."

By April of '64, the Shure V-15, with its elliptical stylus, was introduced, relegating the M44 to second-tier status. In September of '64, the M44 was being advertised as the modestly-priced alternative to the "professional grade" M55E and V-15, and the price had dropped to less than $25.00.
 
Where does the M95 fit into the lot? I have two Shures, a V-15 III that I've been playing with of late and a M95 that so far has only seen a conical since I've owned it. Worth a new stylus or stick with the V-15 for my Shure?
 
fiddlefye said:
Where does the M95 fit into the lot? I have two Shures, a V-15 III that I've been playing with of late and a M95 that so far has only seen a conical since I've owned it. Worth a new stylus or stick with the V-15 for my Shure?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure (Shure) the M95 was one step below the V15-III.
 
jrtrent said:
Not to quibble, but just because I was interested, I looked up information on the Shure M44 in old hi-fi magazines a few years ago. I don't think the M55E was ever their top-of-the-line, but offered a lower-cost alternative to the V-15 for those desiring an elliptical stylus. Here is what I found in their advertising, anyway:
Click to expand...

Its not a quibble.
The V15/1 was and is a rare dog. Its cost and weight as well as its not being much better than the M55 kept it from being very popular. The V15 didnt explode until the V-15/2 came out.
Ever seen a V-15/1? I have one.
Its not a very good cart.

Just for fun.


 
beatcomber said:
I'm pretty sure (Shure) the M95 was one step below the V15-III.
Click to expand...
Similar in terms of loading and such? I'm getting the notion of setting up my Ariston/SME 3009 S2i as a Shure deal. V-15III and SAS for the best LPs and the M-95 and a slightly lesser stylus for a beater. How would that work out?
 
I have a V15III with SAS, and as good as it is, I much prefer the 91/95, and now 55, to it. I really think that Shure got it right with their slightly less than TOTL carts. Of course, as I have been alluding to, you'll need to decide with your own ears. But I would not immediately assume that the V15 will beat out the 95 simply because of it's status as best in class.
 
Yes, I do find something winsome about the Shure sound. I've owned and listened to quite a few Shure carts. I especially like the M97HE, one of my daily driver carts, and the M91ED. The M97HE with NOS stylus tracks brilliantly and resolves a lot of detail from the bottom to the top of the frequency range. Lovely.

In descending order I have also enjoyed M95HE, M75ED, M97xE, TM1E, and even the lowly M92E (which greatly improved when fitted with an HE stylus).

I've never had my hands on any of the V15 variants, though. Would be happy to try one if it came my way.
 
resound said:
Its not a quibble.
The V15/1 was and is a rare dog. Its cost and weight as well as its not being much better than the M55 kept it from being very popular. The V15 didnt explode until the V-15/2 came out.
Ever seen a V-15/1? I have one.
Its not a very good cart.

Just for fun.


Click to expand...

Basically a M75 with a aluminum block body shell. I agree, the M75 Type2 was a better cart for a lot less money. Stick an N75type2 stylus on it....it will get better.
 
I'll add my anecdotal support for M55E as being even better than V15/III, though not in any direct comparison. I'm listening to M55E right now, and it sounds smooth and relaxing, just the way many people think vinyl sounds or should sound. I personally had a V15/III in the 1970's, mounted to Dual 1209. It sounded great on my Dyna SCA35, but when I upgraded to Marantz 2270 in 1974 (at least I thought it would be an upgrade, it was more reliable anyway, my SCA35 frequently went into frypan mode) the V15 took on a dry and edgy character. I recall listening to someone else's M55E on a 12" table like the Miracord 50H I'm listening to now, and feeling cheated, their sound was so much better, and yet I had TOTL stylus. And then, just to add another mixed bag comparison, I just now tried an M97xe on a Mitsubishi LT-30, and it sounded harsh not unlike the V15 III years ago. Could be the Stanton headshell on the LT-30, which the Shure may not like, sure didn't go on easily. But I was thinking just the same thing the poster said, maybe Shure did best with their penultimate models, too much specsmanship with TOTL. Or maybe just do the TOTL Shure if you have proper equipment for it, like an SME or Grace arm. That was sorta what the salesman who sold me the 1209 said. He said I'd be better off with 1219 and either the ADC they were throwing in for 1 dollar that day, or a Shure M something that he got manager to approve offering within my stated budget. I later rued not taking his advice to get the 1219. My mother offered shelling out more so I could get the 1219/V15 combo. But I was convinced that only the cartridge mattered, and nothing was worth considering but the V15.
 
Last edited:
I'm enjoying my Shure Presence 1 on my Onkyo CP-1007a. Definitely one of those synergy things though because they both sound better together than I ever expected.
 
Seems to me that the square bottom Shures (M44/55/75/91 etc...) are very popular for a particular sound...

I have several of them, one thing I find disappointing is that the channels are never close to one another in terms of resistance and inductance.

The V bottom bodies (of which I also have quite a few) tend to have much closer specs on the two channels.

I also have a V15-II - but according to all my measurements it is pretty much identical to the other shure square bottom cartridges.... including the mismatched channels.

I have the V15 II / III / IV / V / Vx.... all the V bottom versions (III onwards) are closely matched left and right. (an order of magnitude better than the square bottom carts.)

I have not been able to get my hands on a V15II-Improved (yet) - this is the only odd man out of the square bottom bodies - it has laminated pole pieces, and the reduction in eddy current resulting from this may result in a different sound.... to be seen... but I fear that it will also suffer from the channel mismatch endemic to the square bottoms.

The mismatch means there are marginal / subtle tonal variations between the channels - which won't reduce the fun factor.... but does make me wonder whether the fun factor can be present while still doing better in other aspects.

bye for now

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom