SME - 3012 Tonearm variations Mk1 Mk2 & R

[WESTLOWER]

I'm intrigued by the variants in SME - 3012 Tonearms.

Can anyone offer their experienced views on
SME 3012 Mk1, SME 3012 Mk2 and SME 3012R and the differences.

I have read the general view that the MK1 is better than the MK2 and the R is better still, but why? and how so?

[petrat]

I may be wrong, but I think the Mk1 had a steel arm-tube, whereas the Mk2 is aluminium (similar to the 3009 changing to the 'improved' version). The R was later, introduced in the 1980s, mainly for the Japanese market. It went back to a thin-walled steel arm-tube, with slightly increased length and effective mass. The latter have become much sought-after, and have pretty much tripled in price in the last few years, mainly due to a 58 page rave on another forum.

The Mk2 and R are rather similar-looking, so identifying which is which, is best done by exploring the info on Vinyl Engine ... https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sme/3012.shtml

As to your question, I've heard four over the years, and they've all sounded lovely, but too far apart to make any speculations about. What's your's, Adam?

[WESTLOWER]

I may be wrong, but I think the Mk1 had a steel arm-tube, whereas the Mk2 is aluminium (similar to the 3009 changing to the 'improved' version). The R was later, introduced in the 1980s, mainly for the Japanese market. It went back to a thin-walled steel arm-tube, with slightly increased length and effective mass. The latter have become much sought-after, and have pretty much tripled in price in the last few years, mainly due to a 58 page rave on another forum.

The Mk2 and R are rather similar-looking, so identifying which is which, is best done by exploring the info on Vinyl Engine ... https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sme/3012.shtml

As to your question, I've heard four over the years, and they've all sounded lovely, but too far apart to make any speculations about. What's your's, Adam?

If i'm to understand it I have an EARLY Mk2...(i believe there are differences in the Earlier versions of the Mk2 to the later Mk2)
I'm happy with it and indeed on your last visit to my place, if I remember, you declared it the star of the set up. So you thought it was good too.

Just wondering why the R is so highly regarded or is it so because like many Hifi components on the fora, someones opinion is gospel and that sticks!..

[Barry]

The Mk. 1 arms used a stainless steel arm tube, had an adjustable headshell socket (to take both Ortofon 'square' and Neumann 'Diamond' cartridge contact pin styles), a thicker bedplate and taller locking nuts. The arrangement of the counterweight was different in that the end cap holding the playing weight wayrod was captive (on later versions this was made detachable). The arm lift lower mechanism had an adjustable height control and the knob at the end of the lever was spherical. Connection to the arm was made using a McMurdo multi-pin connector. The Mk. I used a circular bearing cap and was supplied without any means of bias compensation: an aftermarket Crabbe bias compensator was later offered.

On the Mark II versions, the armtube was made of aluminium, the bedplate was shallower (as were the locking nuts), the counterweight assembly changed slightly and a bias compensator came as standard. The lift/lower device had some changes made and the connection to the arm was made using a modified Bulgin 'Unitor' plug and socket.

The 'R' version returned to the use of a stainless steel arm (though of a different thickness to the Mk. I), the counterweight assembly used a different decoupling arrangement, and the main counterweight had an easily adjustable knurled screw, replacing the prior Allen screw. The arm geometry was also changed slightly to conform to the Baerwald prescription for minimum tangential tracking error (both the Mk. I and II arms used a geometry which was meant to follow the Stevenson prescription, but SME made a small mistake in the geometry). I assume, but don't know for certain, the 'R' version reverts to steel knife-edge bearings, whereas the 'Improved' arms used a hard nylon(?) material.
Another difference is the signal leads are connected to the arm via RCA 'phono' connectors. The arm latching mechanism uses that of the 'Improved' arms.



As for sonic differences, I have two SME 12" arms: a Mk. II and an M2-12R.

The latter dispenses with knife edge bearings for motion in the vertical plane, replacing them with ball-race bearings. As such the wayrod used to equalise the force on each knife-edge bearing is no longer needed or used: VTF is now set up by moving the counterweight on a screw thread closer to the arm fulcrum. Like its predecessors is also uses a 'J - shaped' arm wherein the axis of the vertical bearing is not a right angles to the line passing through the stylus cantilever; so when the arm rides a warp the headshell will roll in a counter-clockwise direction when viewed from the front. Though this motion is small it will affect cartridge crosstalk slightly. Most arms have the bearings for motion in the vertical plane correctly at right angles to the headshell axis so when the cartridge rides a warp, motion is truly vertical. I'm surprised SME didn't correct for this (as they did in the Mk. III and have done in the Mk, IV and V arms and the 300 series). The arm geometry now conforms to Baerwald's prescription.

Of the two I prefer the M2-12R, for reasons describe above - but I would be very hard put to describe the sonic differences; I think it might depend on the cartridge it is carrying.


Is the 3012R the 'best of the best' then? I don't know; I haven't heard one, but I would expect it to be the culmination of all the knife-edge arm designs SME produced.

[Vrajbasi]

The 3012r had ABEC 1 bearings on in the vertical position and hard nylon on the horizontal, having owned all versions of the 3012 the 3012r has a real flow to the music it just does not get in the way of the music it is truly one of the most engaging arms ever built and compares amazingly well against all the modern top offerings. For some reason while all the other versions are wonderful the 3012r just sounds like it has no signature in comparison its a stunning arm. I would say buy one quick the prices are starting to soar and good samples becoming harder to source. I recently heard a special 3012r with a abec 7 instead of a 1 in the vertical bearing it was stunning so much more control and focus this was wired with ikeda wire. Some of the 3012rs has steel knife edges but the nylon examples sounded best. There was a special edition version with steel knife edge I much prefer the nylon it has a gentler sound.There was a 3012r HE available for a short period which had a brass bass plate instead of the dicast common version. The best I ever heard was a gold plated version with with abec 7s and a highly tuned nylon bearing the thick copper plating and nickel combined with the gold really does change things.

The 3012r in all variants is still the pick of the bunch.

I do like the M12R I have had different results with various samples I had one that was stunning in every way with amazing control the unsung hero in the current line up of sme tomearms in my opinion.

[WESTLOWER]

Great posts chaps... very informative.

[tlscapital]

On the stainless steel versus aluminium wand/tube differences and the nylon, steel (both SME OG's) or bronze (after market) knife edge bearings combinations for the SME's, there was an interesting trial in comparison done estimating that the steel knife edge bearing suited best the aluminium wand/tube best.

On the other hand t bronze knife edge bearing was heard as an improvement for the stainless steel tube/wand versions. But not the other way around. The original nylon knife edge bearing if performing evenly well on both stainless steel and aluminium tube/wand proved to be somewhat "duller". For what it's worth...

[Barry]

Yes I agree. I swapped the nylon knife-edge bearing in an SME 3009 (Improved) arm for a steel one taken from an early version of the 3009 (Improved) fixed headshell arm. The improvement in dynamics was noticeable, as well as detail and 'air'. The performance is now just more enjoyable, regardless of cartridge used.

I would experiment with an aftermarket bronze bearing, but if you say it doesn't suit aluminium arms as much as stainless steel arms, then I'm not persuaded to try; and changing the bearing is a tricky enough exercise anyway.

[tlscapital]

Yes I agree. I swapped the nylon knife-edge bearing in an SME 3009 (Improved) arm for a steel one taken from an early version of the 3009 (Improved) fixed headshell arm. The improvement in dynamics was noticeable, as well as detail and 'air'. The performance is now just more enjoyable, regardless of cartridge used.

I would experiment with an aftermarket bronze bearing, but if you say it doesn't suit aluminium arms as much as stainless steel arms, then I'm not persuaded to try; and changing the bearing is a tricky enough exercise anyway.

My SME came with a steel knife edge bearing. Love it indeed. You use almost the exact same terms used in the trial comparison between te nylon and steel. Since I don't know if we can post link to any other sites (neutral, friend or foe) on here, I've PM'ed you the link to that site ;)

[Barry]

Thanks for that Tim. Here is the link: https://www.tnt-audio.com/accessories/smebronze_e.html .

I does appear to parallel my findings with aluminium arm tube SMEs.

[WESTLOWER]

Great info and very interesting link....

[tlscapital]

Yes, understanding that the wand/tube and knife edge bearing material match is more significant/determining than just the singular arm material build. There the knife edge bearing is really revealing this SME design's peculiar sonic signature.

Love it or hate it, it's not everyone idea of what bearing should be. At first I was also a bit weary of my SME wobbly bearing... Yet I have learn to truly love and appreciate it. Even more so after having studied it's inner anatomy from close. Simple and effective.

Finally I have find that such well manufactured bearing truly benefit sonically from heavy effective mass/inertia. Originally the heavier mass SME's are the 3012 and they get the favor for most for their better tracking ability and heavier effective mass.

Since I had the chance (somehow) to get a not so desirable (=not sacred) SME3009 'Improved' SII (roughly tweaked prior) that I could only improve, I progressively convert it into a very heavy effective mass to suit my low compliant cartridge.

This truly revealed my SME sonic signature at it's best.

[Barry]

I prefer the 'Improved' arm's method of decoupling the counterweight assembly from the arm tube. Using an outrigger arm to equalise the force on the two knife edge bearings means that there is always a clockwise (as viewed from the cartridge end) torque imposed on the rubber bush, which with time will perish and the assembly sag, if not completely collapse. I have had this happen on two of my 3009s, and whilst replacement bushes are readily available, the removal of the old one can be very difficult (as they were glued in place). Sadly SME are no longer willing to service 3000 series arms, regardless of type. Fortunately though Johnnie (or 'J7') at Audio Origami can provided a quick, efficient and reasonably priced service in this regard.

The decoupling used on the 'Improved' arms means that if, and when, the four rubber grommets perish, the counterweight won't sag or collapse.

[tlscapital]

I prefer the 'Improved' arm's method of decoupling the counterweight assembly from the arm tube... ...The decoupling used on the 'Improved' arms means that if, and when, the four rubber grommets perish, the counterweight won't sag or collapse.

:D me too ! Thought to keep this to myself only, as a little "guilty secret". Expecting to expose such a trivial preference would raise a wave of protest :eek:

Seriously, it work pretty good for me as it also allowed me to simply fit my heavy and later heavier "tailor made" counterweight with ease and elegance.

Still I intend one day to seek other "fixings" for the 'spider web' 3 points and grommets assembly as indeed it tends to "fall down" with my heavier counter weights...

[Barry]

Agreed, the use of heavier counterweights (for use with Ortofon SPUs for example) is a bonus. But your heavier counerweight must be very heavy for the decoupling to sag.

I have a spare spider (and yes you're right: there are three grommets, not four), which I was thinking of using on an SME3012. But despite being the 'shallow' version as used on early 'Improved' arms that used the long knife-edge bearing block, fitting it to the arm tube of a 3012 would require some surgery; something that is beyond my abilities. No doubt Audio Origami could do it for me if I asked.

[tlscapital]

Agreed, the use of heavier counterweights (for use with Ortofon SPUs for example) is a bonus. But your heavier counerweight must be very heavy for the decoupling to sag.

Some 8 years ago, I was advised to buy me a Denon DL-102 MONO cartridge to suit better most of my sixties and seventies records (45's mainly), most which are MONO, not all. But I did not know those 'compliance' factors and other indeep pre-amplifications specifications about cartridges. I was lend a Thorens with a SME tonearm. That we fitted the Denon DL-102 on. Convinced that this was already a better sounding performer than my Technics SL1200 and Shure 'White Label' combo, I converted. The original SME counter weight was pulled back to the max with the VTF at 2.5 grams then... And it started to sag since more and more...

It's only 2 years later, after browsing on the net, that I understood that I had a SME3009 'Improved' SII version (the lightest of the SME3009's) and that more effective mass should benefit better my low compliant DL-102 fort whom no manufacturer's compliance specs are given !!! But believe me it's low of the lowest. By ear it truly benefited. Showing gradually a better focus, clarity, depth and precision. Since I could only go into my tweaks in conversion step-by-step, I had more time then than money at that time, I had to do it all DIY over months to evaluate them individually while selling on the spare original parts to fund the replacement ones.

Last I got myself a 160 grams heavy 'tailor made' counterweight ! I had it done by an English craft men to have the necessary precision in balance. That mass enhancement is the last I did after doing some test. Went the opposite way of 'modern' build and opted for a lengthy counterweight in 'teardrop' shape (echoing both the MKII SME3009/12 pivot pointed bearing top/enclosure and the Thorens TD160 speed changer) with the extra weight in the the tail's end of the counterweight. This required to add mass on the headshell/tonearm mounting connector (Ortofon) collar and the replacement with a heavier 'rider' and 'bias' weight altogether...


I have a spare spider (and yes you're right: there are three grommets, not four), which I was thinking of using on an SME3012. But despite being the 'shallow' version as used on early 'Improved' arms that used the long knife-edge bearing block, fitting it to the arm tube of a 3012 would require some surgery; something that is beyond my abilities. No doubt Audio Origami could do it for me if I asked.

I hear. And indeed to fiddle cut and drill on the SME tube/wand tail, is something I would need to feel fully equipped gear wise with to work on. That which I am not in the first place. Yet that sounds like an interesting project IMO. Something to sleep on definitely.

[Barry]

Since the rear screw fixing of the knife-edge bearing block on the pre-Improved arms is further away from the junction of the main arm tube with the counterweight stub, I suppose one could simply drill a new hole to fit the spider. But I would prefer to fit the spider in the exact same way as was done on the 'Improved' arms: the spider is held captive using the rear screw of the bearing block. To do this would of course require the arm tube to be shortened - something that is beyond my ability to do a neat and precise job.

Maybe I will discuss the project with Audio Origami. I would also need a new counterwight stub with a threaded end made up, so I could use the existing counterweight: heavy versions of the 'Improved' counterweights are difficult to find.

[tlscapital]

Please keep us posted if ever you do that very transformation. Rather interesting I find. For your information; the rider and anti-skate weights had to follow my new heavier effective mass tonearm whole balance with my the addition of my first heavier compatible counter weight... And with my second massive 'tailor made' counterweight, I even had to purchase new heavier rider and bias weight to allow to set and sit properly the tonearm.

p.s.: I have PM'ed you on a heavier SME 'Improved' compatible counterweight matter.

[WESTLOWER]

SME Geometry
is there a definitive on which alignment the SME 3012 mk2 or SME 3012r were designed for?

[WESTLOWER]

Can anyone shed light on this?

[phonomac]

An interesting and useful link here:

https://odysseytonearms.blogspot.com/2011/04/sme-geometry.html

explaining the original SME approach to alignment. If the 'r' is identical in arm tube shape then it will apply there also.

[tlscapital]

Can anyone shed light on this?

If you go on 'vinylengine', register and go on their database you'll access a wealth of documentation and information and other tools to print on as well.

[WESTLOWER]

An interesting and useful link here:

https://odysseytonearms.blogspot.com/2011/04/sme-geometry.html

explaining the original SME approach to alignment. If the 'r' is identical in arm tube shape then it will apply there also.

Thanks Angus