A very indepth analysis of the Shure M44-7 v M55E cartridges

[Wakefield Turntables]

Part 1 - Shure Thing....

Spurred on by Jimbo of these hallowed grounds I thought I'd do some messing about with some of my old Shure Carts.


Just a few lines about how things are going to pan out over the next few days/weeks. I'm in the process of evaluating two ancient Shure Carts the M55E and the M44-7. Previously I have had and said goodbye to many Shure Carts, these being the SC35C + JICO/S stylus, the V15 mk3 with VNH35H (is this correct?) stylus, M75ED. I have had the USA and Mexican version of the M55E, supposedly the USA version is superior, this is the version I will be using during testing but I can't claim to have noticed any difference when doing extended listening tests. I did intend doing this experiment with a SME 3009 as I thought that this would be an excellent match for the Shure Carts. Fate, however seems to have intervened and meant that it would be very difficult to set the Shure's up with the 3009 in it's current configuartion and it took me an age to get the 3009 working with my Ortofon MONO SPU. I did have a solution sitting less than 24" away, this came in the form of a Garrard 401 and SME V-12 configuration. The Garrard 401 was a complete nuts and bolts restoration done by myself and then later checked over by Dr. Martin Bastin, I asked Dr. Bastin to mount the 401 in one of his "Max Planck" plinths. A high quality massive birch ply which decouples the motor. The 401 has had little use over the years and has been mainly over shadowed by the Garrard 301, another nuts and bolts restoration that I did over 10 years ago. The 401 needs some setting up but today I made sure that the 401 was sitting level in all planes, I shall be fettling cartridge setup tomorrow.

I partnered the 401 years ago with a SME V-12 which at the time wasn't cheap, fast forward to 2023 and they now go for double what I paid and that's if you can find one, used examples in very good condition has been changing hands for £7K+ https://storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png (yeah that's what I thought). Tonearm cable happens to be the very top end Yannis Tome cable which again I have on all my arms. I have used the Korf Compliance Calculator korfaudio.com/calculator (http://redirect.viglink.com?key=71fe2139a887ad501313cd8cc e3053c5&subId=6936725&u=http%3A//korfaudio.com/calculator) and checked to see if the old Shure carts would be a decent match for the SME V-12, turns out they should do fine. The first variables that I will be checking are cartridge loading and valve type. Traditionally I have always used a EAR 834P clone which Alan (Fire bottle) modded and built for me a few years ago. The EAR clone had the benefit of cartridge loading installed. I also own the late Len Gregory's Croft phonostage which is excellent but has no cartridge loading capabilities. So, an inability to fine tune these old Shure Carts should prove interesting when assessing them. Another interesting aspect is the valve type, the EAR uses vintage Mullard ECC83 8157's variant. The Croft uses my all time favourite 6SL7 valve the RCA 5691, I've compared 13 different types of 6SL7 and found these to be the best. So, I have to make the tough decision of Croft v EAR, ECC83 8157 v 6SL7 5691 variants. The M44-7 is the first to be put through it's paces. I already have history with the M55E and JICO stylii and don't want to bias findings before they have already started.



I did do an indepth analysis of the M55E + JICO SAS/S stylii v the Ortofon 2MB several years ago. I only had EAR clone phonostage back then and found that the M55E+JICO combo came within microns of upstaging the 2MB, ultimately the 2MB had better detail and resoultion. I did have two other MM phonostages back then, the MM phonostage which is an optional extra in my ATC SCA2 pre-amp and the other being the built in MM phonostage in my Radford SC25 pre-amp (I still own both of these). The Radford used the same M8157's but did nothing for me. The ATC just sounded sterile and lifeless. No a few stats, here are the stats for the Shure M55E



Tracking Force: 0.75 to 1.5 grams
Frequency Response: 20 to 20,000 Hz
Output Voltage: 6.2mV per channel at 5 cm/sec peak recorded velocity
Channel Separation: greater than 22dB at 1,000 Hz
Trackability at 1 gram force: 12 cm/sec at 400 Hz
Effective Stylus Tip Mass: 1.2 milligrams
Tip Radius: 0.2 x 0.7 mils
Inductance: 720 millihenries
DC Resistance: 630 ohms

Dynamic Compliance 25
Recommended load capacitance: 400-500pF

Weight: 6.5 grams


Here are the stats for the Shure M44-7


Output voltage: 9,5mV bei 1kHz, 5cm/sec.
Amplifier-connection: Phono MM
Frequency range: 20-20.000Hz
Material: diamond, bonded
Stylus type: spherical 0.7 mil
Tracking force range: 1,5-3,0g
Tracking force, recommended: 3,0g
Recommended load resistance: 47 kOhm
Recommended load capacitance: 400-500pF

Dynamic compliance 20

Weight: 6,7g





The Shure M55E proved to be a slightly better match running these figures through the Korf Calculator, assuming the Effective mass of the SME V-12 was 11, and the weight of cartridge wires, mounting screws and bolts was around 2.5mg (I do need to verify these). So first blood to the M55E. Stay tuned for more knackers, sorry, I mean indepth analysis of Shure cartridges.



Stay tuned....

[Barry]

I would be wary of following Korf's advice: someone who thinks he knows more about the mechanics of cartridge tracking than either that of cartridge or arm manufacturers.

He correctly states that the compliance figure to use in his calculator should be the dynamic compliance measured at around 10Hz, where ideally the arm/cartridge resonance should lie, but does not say what value to use if only the static compliance is quoted. Shure always quoted the static compliance, so you need to halve that figure to obtain the appropriate figure for 10Hz. If you do that then the arm/cartridge resonance for your M55E in the SME V12 will lie within 8 - 12Hz. (I have assumed 0.5g for the cartridge fixings).

Apropos the M55E cartridges made in Mexico, can one tell the difference by appearance? I have two M55Es: one has a brown coloured body, the other is black. I have never compared them back-to-back, but regard claims that the cartridges made in Mexico are inferior as exaggerated, if not completely untrue. It's the sort of myth that audio enthusiasts like to promulgate.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Thanks Barry, the M55E still theoretically measures better according to Korf even when halving the compliance as you suggested, so nothing changes with respect to better matching M55E v M44-7. I'll have a better idea of fixing weight tomorrow I intend to do some fine tuning tomorrow. The USA v MEXICO debate is something I'd heard about, I'd have to agree, I hear no difference but I've always used the USA cart so that's what I'll stick with, irrespective of rumour or myth. I don't have the resources of time to prove that one is better than the other and ultimately it's what I hear in my system that matters! :)

[Jimbo]

The M44-7 is a brute I feel compared to the M55E which has more finess but maybe you set up might get the best out of it. I wait to see the next round with baited breath.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Output is high on the M44-7 compared to the M55E, I've had the thing on tonight for 3 hours. I'm putting a few hours on the stylus cantilever to try and bed the thing in. I've noticed some distotion already! I will say that the thing is not properly set up so the distortion could just be a by-product of sloppy set up.

[Jimbo]

I am sure you have seen this article Andy on the M44-7?


https://www.resistormag.com/features/shure-m44-7-a-cartridge-heard-by-millions-known-by-few/

[Wakefield Turntables]

I am sure you have seen this article Andy on the M44-7?


https://www.resistormag.com/features/shure-m44-7-a-cartridge-heard-by-millions-known-by-few/

Yep, seen it a while ago but thanks for the heads up!

[Wakefield Turntables]

Part II - Loading

The M44-7 according to Shure likes to see 400-500 pf loading. I'm now glad I'm not using the SME 3009 as I've heard that several people have tried to measure the capacitance of the old tonearm cable with varying readings, sometimes differing markedly from one channel to the other other. I'm glad to say that my cables are a known entity and that the loading capacitance in each channel is pretty much perfectly matched. I have been trying to work out some figures with respects to what my M44-7 is currently "seeing". Here goes :-

Cartridge to Phonostage

Natural capcitance loading of Croft MM stage 100pf
Cartridge tags & cartridge leads 10pf
Connector from tonearm to intrinstic tonearm wiring 10pf
Internal tonearm wiring 15pf (SME source)
Tonearm connector accepting intrinsic wiring 10pf
Tonearm connector 5-pin plug 10pf
Tonearm cable 60pf (Yannis Tome source)
Tonearm cable to RCA 10pf

TOTAL 225pf

So, I'm missing around 225pf loading. This means i'm not getting the best from the M44-7, so it's looking like the EAR 834P may be a better option for optimal cartridge loading. At least I can make the EAR make the M44-7 see the 450pf. Hmmm anothor conundrum to ponder. :scratch:

I've spent a little more time on setting the cartridge up tonight using Dr. Feickharts protractor, cartridge tracking force and antiskate are both sitting at 3g, things appear a lot clearer. The deck is still not perfectly level in all planes but I'm not that far away, the bubble in the spirit level doesn't quite sit perfectly central but it's not so far away, I'm hearing great things. I also need to address the speed accuracy of the 401 as it does not have a speed controller like the Garrard 301 that I own and I'm not prepared to mess around rewire everything for this experiment, I'll dig out the timing laser and alter the speed control that way. Usually we can be accurate within +/- 0.01 RPM. Both cartridges stylii are new the M44-7 has a Tonar stylii to the same specs as the original https://www.turntabletrainingwax.com/tonar-n44-7-stylus mine cost £19 delivered, I'm sure you can get cheaper if you shop around. I must confess to not knowing where I purchased the M55E replacement but I do know it's new and zero hours usage. Currently the M44-7 has around 6 hours usage. I'm trying to get 3 hours a day.

Things I could do to further improve this Experiment
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. Vertical tracking height for cartridge has not been properly set yet.
2. Could use Townshend Isolation platform for further improvement of airbourne vibration and such like.
3. Tonearm needs a very very small amount of tweaking.
4. Feed the phonostages with a cleaner power supply. Could this produce a bias in that the 401 has a clean supply and the phonostages don't?

Factor Affecting the Absolute Performance of the Shure Carts
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The M55E appears to be a marginally better match for the SME V-12.
2. The Croft phonostage (if loading capacitance is set at 100pf) lessens the chances of accurately matching old Shure Carts.
3. I'm compromising the absolute speed accuracy of the 401, I could use a Roadrunner/Eagle PSU combo to match speed to 0.001 RPM rather than
0.01 RPM accuracy.


Steps Taken to Maximise Performance
------------------------------------------
1. Using Baerweld tracking, setup with respected Dr. Fieckhart protractor
2. Using a true Reference tonearm which matches both the M44-7 and M55E very well.
3. Turntable perfectly level in all planes.
4. Tried to make sure that the 401 is running with a clean power supply, supplied with a PS Audio P10
5. Motor decoupled from 401 less vibration getting into cartridge
6. Tried to improve the trackability of the Carts by making sure the vinyl is as flat as possible and then using heavy record clamp and peripheral
platter ring on vinyl.
7. Both cartridge stylii are new and I have allowed a 30 hours break-in period for any cantilever stiffness.
8. Accurately known and matched loading capacitance for left and right channel cartridge channels.
9. 401 platter damped with a Tenuto platter mat.

I think that's enough for tonight. Maybe some pictures tomorrow.

Stay tuned... :cool:

[Barry]

So the reviewer was impressed by the fact that the Shure M44-7 was used in jukeboxes! Not my idea for recommendation.

The nearest I came to hearing one was in a school chum's father's system which used an M44-5 on a Garrard SP25 (Mk.I) through a Leak Stereo 20 amp feeding a pair of Wharfedale sand-filled baffle speakers. He was a passionate classical music enthusiast, so possibly thought the 5 thou stylus offered more finesse, but maybe could not afford the M44E.

My first 'serious' Shure cartridge was the M55E, after a brief period (less than a year) using an M3D. I chose the M55E because I had just bought an SME 3009 arm and the SME advert showed an M55E fitted in the headshell - so if it was good enough for SME it was good enough for me! :)

I went up through the Shure range and stopped with the Shure V-15E Mk.III, before changing my alligience to Ortofon, Denon and EMT moving coil designs.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Always good to get any feedback Barry! I've also had my fair share of Shure Carts, I've always seemed to migrate back to the M55E and I wonder if this (for me) is the apex of great sounding shure carts. I've also been through all the fancy vintage original (or supposed NOS) stylii and always considered the JICO replacements superior. The aim of this experiment is to see if the M44-7 is a better cart than the M55E in my system and that's why I've used supposed like-for-like modern day stylii for the carts and have given them both a 30 hour break in period before real critical listening starts. I've never tried EMT carts but must admit to being a Ortofon fan boy!

[Jimbo]

Part II - Loading

The M44-7 according to Shure likes to see 400-500 pf loading. I'm now glad I'm not using the SME 3009 as I've heard that several people have tried to measure the capacitance of the old tonearm cable with varying readings, sometimes differing markedly from one channel to the other other. I'm glad to say that my cables are a known entity and that the loading capacitance in each channel is pretty much perfectly matched. I have been trying to work out some figures with respects to what my M44-7 is currently "seeing". Here goes :-

Cartridge to Phonostage

Natural capcitance loading of Croft MM stage 100pf
Cartridge tags & cartridge leads 10pf
Connector from tonearm to intrinstic tonearm wiring 10pf
Internal tonearm wiring 15pf (SME source)
Tonearm connector accepting intrinsic wiring 10pf
Tonearm connector 5-pin plug 10pf
Tonearm cable 60pf (Yannis Tome source)
Tonearm cable to RCA 10pf

TOTAL 225pf

So, I'm missing around 225pf loading. This means i'm not getting the best from the M44-7, so it's looking like the EAR 834P may be a better option for optimal cartridge loading. At least I can make the EAR make the M44-7 see the 450pf. Hmmm anothor conundrum to ponder. :scratch:

I've spent a little more time on setting the cartridge up tonight using Dr. Feickharts protractor, cartridge tracking force and antiskate are both sitting at 3g, things appear a lot clearer. The deck is still not perfectly level in all planes but I'm not that far away, the bubble in the spirit level doesn't quite sit perfectly central but it's not so far away, I'm hearing great things. I also need to address the speed accuracy of the 401 as it does not have a speed controller like the Garrard 301 that I own and I'm not prepared to mess around rewire everything for this experiment, I'll dig out the timing laser and alter the speed control that way. Usually we can be accurate within +/- 0.01 RPM. Both cartridges stylii are new the M44-7 has a Tonar stylii to the same specs as the original https://www.turntabletrainingwax.com/tonar-n44-7-stylus mine cost £19 delivered, I'm sure you can get cheaper if you shop around. I must confess to not knowing where I purchased the M55E replacement but I do know it's new and zero hours usage. Currently the M44-7 has around 6 hours usage. I'm trying to get 3 hours a day.

Things I could do to further improve this Experiment
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. Vertical tracking height for cartridge has not been properly set yet.
2. Could use Townshend Isolation platform for further improvement of airbourne vibration and such like.
3. Tonearm needs a very very small amount of tweaking.
4. Feed the phonostages with a cleaner power supply. Could this produce a bias in that the 401 has a clean supply and the phonostages don't?

Factor Affecting the Absolute Performance of the Shure Carts
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The M55E appears to be a marginally better match for the SME V-12.
2. The Croft phonostage (if loading capacitance is set at 100pf) lessens the chances of accurately matching old Shure Carts.
3. I'm compromising the absolute speed accuracy of the 401, I could use a Roadrunner/Eagle PSU combo to match speed to 0.001 RPM rather than
0.01 RPM accuracy.


Steps Taken to Maximise Performance
------------------------------------------
1. Using Baerweld tracking, setup with respected Dr. Fieckhart protractor
2. Using a true Reference tonearm which matches both the M44-7 and M55E very well.
3. Turntable perfectly level in all planes.
4. Tried to make sure that the 401 is running with a clean power supply, supplied with a PS Audio P10
5. Motor decoupled from 401 less vibration getting into cartridge
6. Tried to improve the trackability of the Carts by making sure the vinyl is as flat as possible and then using heavy record clamp and peripheral
platter ring on vinyl.
7. Both cartridge stylii are new and I have allowed a 30 hours break-in period for any cantilever stiffness.
8. Accurately known and matched loading capacitance for left and right channel cartridge channels.
9. 401 platter damped with a Tenuto platter mat.

I think that's enough for tonight. Maybe some pictures tomorrow.

Stay tuned... :cool:

This could be why I don't get the best out go my M55E with my Croft phono stage?

[Jimbo]

If I were to do something with the M44-7 I think this would be rather interesting!:)

https://www.jico-stylus.com/product/n44-7-imp-sas-b/

[Wakefield Turntables]

I'll do an update tonight, twists and turns a plenty, I'll add some pics as well.

[Jimbo]

I'll do an update tonight, twists and turns a plenty, I'll add some pics as well.

:thumbsup:

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt III - Solving problems

This Shure adventure is a really neat way of learning new things, interacting with new people and what's more getting the best from the kit you own. I'd never heard of Miller Capacitance and it's relevance to phonostage design, now it's something I'll always consider. I'm not happy with the way the M44-7 is loaded through the Croft Phonostage and there is no way that I'm opening up a completely unmolested phonostage. I want this thing to be as complete and original as possible. It's always been in my nature to push things as far as possible with the kit I own and in the past this has meant modding to stupid levels of deminishing returns, thankfully those days have gone (well nearly) :lol:. The Croft phonostage belonged to Len Gregory who used to design MI carts, these are known to be pretty much capacitance loading immune and I also know that Len asked Glenn to make this phonostage a custom build to his requirements. You can now see my problem with capacitance loading. Most people who I know and respect seem to think that 100pf loading from the Croft sounds like what Glenn would use. My Croft phonostage offers no way of externally changing capacitance loading but thankfully some of the members of PFM have been very accomodating is coming up with some solutions. I'm happy to say that some of the solutions look cheap and easy to implement so I shall wait with baited breath. I'm still running up the 30 hours on the new M44-7 tonar stylii so I have a weel or two before this milestone is reached and then I have to do the same on the M55E new stylus. Critical listening will start when both carts have had 30 hours break in period with each stylii and then each phonostage will be carefully assessed for it's pro's and con's. I will have a list of records which I shall compare on each phonostage and the I'll make my decision with respects to which is the best cart, and which phonostage will be pared with the Shure Cart.

I though I'd add a few pictures as I've been text heavy over the last two nights.

Firstly, just to prove that this whole thing is actually happening, the venerable M44-7 with Tonat stylii.

https://i.ibb.co/hCnh1yz/IMG-0890.jpg

Secondly a picture of the setup rig. The 401, SME V-12, heavy record clamp and peripheral clamp. All in a bid to get the vinyl as flat as possible.

https://i.ibb.co/PQzwvy6/IMG-0896.jpg

No we've had some talk about Stylii. Presently, I've used a couple of cheap after market replicas which are supposedly to the same specification as the original Shure variants. My reasoning behind using these stylii is very simple, I need a baseline. I've already heard several of the best JICO stylii that money can buy on some of these carts, I have a very good appreciation of how they can sound. A baseline reference will eanable me to very easily see how far these carts can go and also to see the after effects on my listening notes of these top notch stylii from JICO. The M55E no longer has the SAS/S variant which I prefer, the M44-7 might trump the M55-E in my system and this would be good news as there are many stylii to choose from and many a year of fun to be had. :eyebrows:

I will not be releasing any listening notes for probably several months. I'm still very critical of the Croft not properly loading these Shure carts correctly. The M44-7 will have had about 7-10 hours break in by the end of this night. Here's an update of what I've also done to improve my listening. So I listed four areas that I thought might improve my listening experience :-

Things I could do to further improve this Experiment
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. Vertical tracking height for cartridge has not been properly set yet.
2. Could use Townshend Isolation platform for further improvement of airbourne vibration and such like.
3. Tonearm needs a very very small amount of tweaking.
4. Feed the phonostages with a cleaner power supply. Could this produce a bias in that the 401 has a clean supply and the phonostages don't?

I've finally pulled my finger out and sorted out numbers 1 and 3. I'm looking into number 4 and I can always do number 2 when I pull the other finger out. ;)

Stay tuned.. :cool:

[Jimbo]

Shame the Croft not compatible yet but maybe soon?:)

[Jimbo]

I spoke to Jico yesterday and they gave me some excellent news?

Here is a copy of their email transcript.

Dear James,

Thank you for contacting JICO and choosing our stylus.

Regrettably, with the launch of the Custom Shop series,
we discontinued the production of SAS replacement styluses for the SHURE M55E series due to certain categorization changes.

However, we offer the SAS stylus for SHURE M44 series.
It would be compatible with your cartridge.

Here is the link below.
https://www.jico-stylus.com/?s=N44-7+SAS

So another option to get a alternative high performance from the M55E!:yay:

[Wakefield Turntables]

I spoke to Jico yesterday and they gave me some excellent news?

Here is a copy of their email transcript.

Dear James,

Thank you for contacting JICO and choosing our stylus.

Regrettably, with the launch of the Custom Shop series,
we discontinued the production of SAS replacement styluses for the SHURE M55E series due to certain categorization changes.

However, we offer the SAS stylus for SHURE M44 series.
It would be compatible with your cartridge.

Here is the link below.
https://www.jico-stylus.com/?s=N44-7+SAS

So another option to get a alternative high performance from the M55E!:yay:

That indeed is very good news. Well done Jim!

[Jimbo]

Even better for you Andy as you could try the stylus in both the M55E and M44-7.

That would be another evaluation in itself!:)


I might just add the M55E with the JICO SAS Boron micro ridge stylus was the best cartridge I have ever heard apart from the 2M Black which is still numero uno in my experience.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt IV - Problems = Solutions!

Not Shure (sorry) if anyone is following this little series of posts as I don't seem to get much feedback, anyway I do this so others can have a play if they fancy. Firstly, a BIG thanks to Tony over on PFM for sending me a link to a pair of splitters which can be modded to add capacitance to the Croft MM phonostage!!!!!. Here is a link if you fancy producing something yourselves https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gold-Plated-RCA-Phono-Splitter/dp/B00J5N3YHY?pd_rd_w=k9Kfo&content-id=amzn1.sym.564a65b5-8864-489e-8f09-00335ca035f1&pf_rd_p=564a65b5-8864-489e-8f09-00335ca035f1&pf_rd_r=HRDFQ81H72DZ8J914F5R&pd_rd_wg=vlv6M&pd_rd_r=32c3e80a-d051-4173-9c05-e3321883a063&pd_rd_i=B00J5N3YHY&linkCode=sl1&tag=pinkfishmedia-21&linkId=89b765b67ae825c3038f0dec424ec1fc&language=en_GB&ref_=as_li_ss_tl

Yep, a big link. I've a set of loading plugs for the EAR 834P clone and the resistors have a 5% tolerance which to me is no good as I'm supposed to be critically matching each channel as closely as possible. So it looks like I may have to order some resistors from here https://www.vishay.com/en/product/31814/ with a tolerance of 0.005% or it might be a call to Hi-Fi collective if I can't get the correct value, tolerance goes down to 0.01% but that's not too shabby. I'll make up a pair of loading plugs for the Croft once I've got a properly measured value from the MM stage itself. I'm already bugging a few people with brains far larger than mine to have a look at the insides of the Croft and figure this out. It may even be that
I have to make a pair for the EAR 834P clone. We shall see when critical listening tests start. I've added another 3.5hours on the M44-7 stylus today which is approaching the half way period.

It now appears that JICO are making M44 stylii which are compatible with the M55E, thats great if yoy wamt boron but what about Sapphire and Ruby which is something that JICO used to produce for the M55E. Both Ruby and Sapphire are better cantilever materials (to my ears) than Boron. Boron is cheaper but the others do offer a significant upgrade and by experimenting with these materials you can get a cheap entry level into listening to cartridges with Crystal based cantilevers, a little like https://ortofon.com/products/mc-diamond ok, this cart is £10K but it does have a diamond cantilever. I'm not suggesting a 50-60 year old cartridge would sound anything like Ortofon's top cart but the JICO crystal based cantilevers offer a massive upgrade to the Boron cantilevers, and once you factor in the diamond profile it's a killer combo. Please don't bother flaming me for making comparison with a 60 year old MM cart. You won't get any response from me. :(

OK, enough for tonight. I've got to listen to Atomic Rooster.....

Stay tuned.... :cool:

[brian2957]

I've been reading your posts Andy, but a lot to take in. I still have an M55e here and may have a 44-7 somewhere, both without a stylus though. I may try the M55e on my Rega Planar 3 if I can find a decent cheap stylus. We'll see. Anyway, keep up the good work mate :)

[Gazjam]

I've been reading your posts Andy, but a lot to take in. I still have an M55e here and may have a 44-7 somewhere, both without a stylus though. I may try the M55e on my Rega Planar 3 if I can find a decent cheap stylus. We'll see. Anyway, keep up the good work mate :)

Enjoying the pressie from Santa mate? :)

[Jimbo]

Shure Adventures Pt IV - Problems = Solutions!

Not Shure (sorry) if anyone is following this little series of posts as I don't seem to get much feedback, anyway I do this so others can have a play if they fancy. Firstly, a BIG thanks to Tony over on PFM for sending me a link to a pair of splitters which can be modded to add capacitance to the Croft MM phonostage!!!!!. Here is a link if you fancy producing something yourselves https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gold-Plated-RCA-Phono-Splitter/dp/B00J5N3YHY?pd_rd_w=k9Kfo&content-id=amzn1.sym.564a65b5-8864-489e-8f09-00335ca035f1&pf_rd_p=564a65b5-8864-489e-8f09-00335ca035f1&pf_rd_r=HRDFQ81H72DZ8J914F5R&pd_rd_wg=vlv6M&pd_rd_r=32c3e80a-d051-4173-9c05-e3321883a063&pd_rd_i=B00J5N3YHY&linkCode=sl1&tag=pinkfishmedia-21&linkId=89b765b67ae825c3038f0dec424ec1fc&language=en_GB&ref_=as_li_ss_tl

Yep, a big link. I've a set of loading plugs for the EAR 834P clone and the resistors have a 5% tolerance which to me is no good as I'm supposed to be critically matching each channel as closely as possible. So it looks like I may have to order some resistors from here https://www.vishay.com/en/product/31814/ with a tolerance of 0.005% or it might be a call to Hi-Fi collective if I can't get the correct value, tolerance goes down to 0.01% but that's not too shabby. I'll make up a pair of loading plugs for the Croft once I've got a properly measured value from the MM stage itself. I'm already bugging a few people with brains far larger than mine to have a look at the insides of the Croft and figure this out. It may even be that
I have to make a pair for the EAR 834P clone. We shall see when critical listening tests start. I've added another 3.5hours on the M44-7 stylus today which is approaching the half way period.

It now appears that JICO are making M44 stylii which are compatible with the M55E, thats great if yoy wamt boron but what about Sapphire and Ruby which is something that JICO used to produce for the M55E. Both Ruby and Sapphire are better cantilever materials (to my ears) than Boron. Boron is cheaper but the others do offer a significant upgrade and by experimenting with these materials you can get a cheap entry level into listening to cartridges with Crystal based cantilevers, a little like https://ortofon.com/products/mc-diamond ok, this cart is £10K but it does have a diamond cantilever. I'm not suggesting a 50-60 year old cartridge would sound anything like Ortofon's top cart but the JICO crystal based cantilevers offer a massive upgrade to the Boron cantilevers, and once you factor in the diamond profile it's a killer combo. Please don't bother flaming me for making comparison with a 60 year old MM cart. You won't get any response from me. :(

OK, enough for tonight. I've got to listen to Atomic Rooster.....

Stay tuned.... :cool:

Ruby and Sapphire are also available.

[brian2957]

Enjoying the pressie from Santa mate? :)

Of course buddy :)

[Wakefield Turntables]

I've been reading your posts Andy, but a lot to take in. I still have an M55e here and may have a 44-7 somewhere, both without a stylus though. I may try the M55e on my Rega Planar 3 if I can find a decent cheap stylus. We'll see. Anyway, keep up the good work mate :)

Hi Brian, hope your ok! Hope you enjoy the Rega Planar 3


Ruby and Sapphire are also available.

OOOOOhhhh..... :interesting:

[brian2957]

Hi Brian, hope your ok! Hope you enjoy the Rega Planar 3



OOOOOhhhh..... :interesting:

Aye doin fine Andy. Hope all's well your end. Yup, I'm really enjoying the Planar 3. Can't really muck around with it which suits me fine ;)

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt V - Further set up tweaks.

The adventure continues. So far this whole escapade has cost me nothing apart from some electric to power everything. I've managed to solve the problem of loading the Croft with an accurate level of pF so that the Shure carts should be properly loaded and can be assessed accurately against one another and also sonic presentation of the Croft/EAR 834p (clone) phonostages. It turns out I had all the parts sitting around in my garage of plenty. Ages ago I wanted a cheap solution when playing MONO records and I'd bought a couple (in case I lost one) of "Y" splitters to be used with my then Shure M55E and mono stylus. Things move on and stuff gets put in the spares box. I also have a full set of loading plugs, I think these came from Alan (Firebottle). Anyway, I now have capability to listen to the Shure carts at correct pF loading irrespective of phonostage used.

Here's the kit to load the Croft MM phonostage.

https://i.ibb.co/k2JwNxJ/IMG-0905.jpg

More tweaking the the TT setup. The 401 now spins at 33.3 RPM, the laser is very accurate, I've used this system before to monitor the speed of a Pheonix Engineering PSU+Roadrunner controlled Garrard 301 and it pretty much matches it's measurements when you mess around increasing or decreasing the speed. The laser is not the most accurate of kit but I'm confident things are spinning with 0.1 RPM accuracy.

https://i.ibb.co/GRg9X7N/IMG-0904.jpg
If you remember I had a list of things that I'd done, or would like to do to improve this experiment. I have included a new update of the lists.

Things I could do to further improve this Experiment
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. Could use Townshend Isolation platform for further improvement of airbourne vibration and such like.
2. Feed the phonostages with a cleaner power supply. Could this produce a bias in that the 401 has a clean supply and the phonostages don't?

Factor Affecting the Absolute Performance of the Shure Carts
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The M55E appears to be a marginally better match for the SME V-12.
2. I'm compromising the absolute speed accuracy of the 401, I could use a Roadrunner/Eagle PSU combo to match speed to 0.001 RPM rather than
0.01 RPM accuracy.


Steps Taken to Maximise Performance
------------------------------------------
1. Using Baerweld tracking, setup with respected Dr. Fieckhart protractor
2. Using a true Reference tonearm which matches both the M44-7 and M55E very well.
3. Turntable perfectly level in all planes.
4. Tried to make sure that the 401 is running with a clean power supply, supplied with a PS Audio P10
5. Motor decoupled from 401 less vibration getting into cartridge
6. Tried to improve the trackability of the Carts by making sure the vinyl is as flat as possible and then using heavy record clamp and peripheral
platter ring on vinyl.
7. Both cartridge stylii are new and I have allowed a 30 hours break-in period for any cantilever stiffness.
8. Accurately known and matched loading capacitance for left and right channel cartridge channels.
9. 401 platter damped with a Tenuto platter mat.
10. 401 now accurately setup and running at 33.3 RPM +/- 0.01 RPM.
11. All phonostages now have ability to be accurately loaded with accurately measure pF levels.


The M44-7 is now over half way to being run in, probably at the 17 hour mark now after tonights session. I have switched over to the EAR 834P just for a change away from the Croft. Things sound different, but that is for the better. It's nice to refresh myself with the sound of vintage ECC83's, a marked difference from the 5691's! That's it for tonight.

Stay tuned..... :cool:

[Jimbo]

I could do with some of those loading plugs to run the M55E with my Croft.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Speak to Alan (Firebottle) he might be able to make you a set. I will also say that the M55E has weaker channel seperation that the M44-7, stereo imaging may be affected. The M44G might be something to think about it has better channel seperation than the M55E approx. 3dB and THE SAME mV output as the M55E!!!!!! Now if the latest JICO stylii worked with the M44G..........(cue evil bond villan voice) interesting Mr. Bond..... :whistle:

[Jimbo]

Speak to Alan (Firebottle) he might be able to make you a set. I will also say that the M55E has weaker channel seperation that the M44-7, stereo imaging may be affected. The M44G might be something to think about it has better channel seperation than the M55E approx. 3dB and THE SAME mV output as the M55E!!!!!! Now if the latest JICO stylii worked with the M44G..........(cue evil bond villan voice) interesting Mr. Bond..... :whistle:

I think JICO said the SAS stylus would fit the M44G aswell as M44-7 so there could be something interesting brewing there....?

[Wakefield Turntables]

This make for interesting reading. Am I just comparing the same cartridge but just different mV outputs? :doh: https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=128554

[Jimbo]

Yep the Jico SAS B , SAS R and SAS S all fit the M44G although the SAS R is about £400!

[Barry]

This make for interesting reading. Am I just comparing the same cartridge but just different mV outputs? :doh: https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=128554

I read the link you posted and looking at the spec sheets for both the M44 cartridges and that for the M55E cartridge, it would appear the two use the same generator.

If so, why issue an M44E design if it is identical to the M55E?

[Wakefield Turntables]

I read the link you posted and looking at the spec sheets for both the M44 cartridges and that for the M55E cartridge, it would appear the two use the same generator.

If so, why issue an M44E design if it is identical to the M55E?

Welcome to the wonderful, confusing world of Shure. Incidently I realised that the output for the M44-7 has been quoted at 11mV and yet elseweher 9.5mV some sources quote better compliances than others. Another interesting indepth thread can be found here https://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=2253.0

[Jimbo]

I think the M44-7 is 9.5mV output. If it were 11mV it would blow your socks off!

[Wakefield Turntables]

Have a read, Shure quotes 11mV

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=shure+m44-7+specifications

[Jimbo]

Have a read, Shure quotes 11mV

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=shure+m44-7+specifications

mmm.. not Shure:) so many conflicting figures out there.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Maybe the output for these carts is based around the year of production? Maybe Shure decreased output to 9.2mV several years after production started? I can tell you now that the M44-7 needs very little volume on my system to go very loud. :eek:

[Jimbo]

Maybe the output for these carts is based around the year of production? Maybe Shure decreased output to 9.2mV several years after production started? I can tell you now that the M44-7 needs very little volume on my system to go very loud. :eek:

Yeah that's what I found - with my Croft preamp without loading plugs it nearly destroyed my speakers!

[Wakefield Turntables]

Great debate about the M44 carts here https://www.lencoheaven.net/foru but m/index.php?topic=2253.0 (https://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=2253.0) but doesn't really tell us anything new. Quite a lot of info that contradicts itself and that's even coming from Shure ! :eek:

A couple more about the M44-7 - Try this one https://www.machozapp.com/features/needle-habit-00#needle-habit-2

And another one here - https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=126892&sid=4f401bdf398c16d6c603679dbce51db6

Happy reading.

[Jimbo]

Interesting reading Andy. How is the M44-7 coming along and what are you initial impressions vs M55E.

My own take on the M44-7 range of cartridges was that they paint a broad big bold picture where as the V15, M55E, M72, M75, M91 were a bit more subtle and orientated at audio enthusiasts. I think it may be true to say the M44-7 was a DJ cartridge with a sound to match?

I feel if I were to continue my exploration of the Shure cartridges I would once again dive into the SAS pool and come up with another Frankencartridge based on the M55E which would be another old vs modern hybrid?:)

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventure Pt V - Some initial thoughts...

I've now completed my 30 hours on the Shure M44-7 and Tonar stylus, I've had 15 hours with the Croft phonostage and 15 hours on the EAR 834p Clone. I've pitted RCA 5691's against Mullard ECC83's. I've now swapped over to the M55-E and now I'm pluuged into the EAR 834p listening to vintage Mullard ECC83's. It's a sound that I'm very familar with. I've got a Shure N44G sitting in the M55E at the moment as this is the only thing I had that could plub into the M55E and give me some output. I have a few initial thoughts on the M44-7 which I shall share but I don't want to give to much away. I've still got 30 hours to put onto this new stylus for the M55E.

One thing is for S(h)ure the output on the M44-7 is ok (just) on my system. I honestly do not need a great deal of wiggle on the volume pot to get a whole room of noise. This makes this cartridge great for low level listening (if that's what you can call it). It does indeed (Jim) paint a very wide sounstage and I would say that there is more seperation in the soundstage, things just appear "bigger and wider" with the M44-7 than the M55E altough I'm still refreshing my lug'oles with regards the sonic presentation of the M55E, things are a little different in that I'm not using a JICO stylus so presentation is somewhat different to what I'm used to. Maybe I've been biased after reading Jim's post but I would also say that things appear a little polite with the M55E compared to the M44-7, less shrill, less edge and more rounded notes. I'm thinking this could be down to the large difference in mV output. The M55E sits at 6.2mV out and denpending upon which Shure catalouge your reading the M44-7 is either 9.5 or 11mv :eek:!!! I will probably have to do something with the cartridge loading with the M44-7 to make things sound less Shrill. I still have 29 hours to put on the M55E so less typing and more listening...

Stay tuned... :cool:

[Jimbo]

Always felt I was only just in control with the M55E but enjoyed its exuberant bouncy big sound. Great analogue dynamics and with some material like rock and jazz it can be just what you need.

The M44-7 made me feel I had lost control of my system and a wall of sound was coming at me. Slightly unrefined but fun in a bombastic way. I am sure with the right set up and amps it could be tamed but as I mentioned it is not a cartridge for the feint hearted. Amazing what Shure got out of this cartridge and makes modern cartridges sound puny and polite but much more in control?

[Barry]

I think my head is beginning to spin! Fascinating reading, especially the second link.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt 6 - Technical mumbo jumbo

Being a member of multiple forums has its benefits. This has to be the most in depth analysis of Shure Cartridges I have ever seen.

A very very big thanks to the chap over on PFM for this article.

http://shure.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4072/~/high-fidelity-phonograph-cartridge---technical-seminar

I have saved this as a PDF and will from time to time read this at my own leisure to try and digest how these excellent cartridges work.

I did say that this would be a very very indepth analysis of the Shure Cartridges. Part of understanding something is research and as a scientist I need to do loads of research. This project is an on going experiment and will probably take many months of evaluation before I reach any conclusions. A lot of work has already been undertaken. We have placed 30 hours on one cartridge stylus, overcome a loading problem with one phonostage and are currently puttinf the 30 hours on the second stylus. Updates may be slow but I shall from time to time update the thread, a bit like my Garrard 301 thread that's been rumbling on for over a decade. :eek:.

I'll probably write some more tomorrow, stay tuned... :cool:

[Barry]

Link doesn't work for me, but the three links you provided have already caused brain overload for me.

At least I can understand now why Shure enthusiasts dislike and avoid Shure products made in Mexico.

[Jimbo]

I better get a bigger tub of popcorn then!:lol:

[Wakefield Turntables]

Try this!

https://web.archive.org/web/20141105083323/http://shure.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4072/~/high-fidelity-phonograph-cartridge---technical-seminar (https://web.archive.org/web/20141105083323/http://shure.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4072/~/high-fidelity-phonograph-cartridge---technical-seminar)

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt 7 - Nearly......

I've not forgotton about this experiment. Time, as always seems limited. I did intend to try and run the new M55E stylus in over 15 hours and try and get some experience in listening to its presentation. This has not happened. I've had the M55E stylus play a run-out groove for 5 hours today to hopefully break things in a little. The new stylus has had approx 15-16 hours so I think I can start to make some listening notes at some point. I'm not doing anything tonight apart from listening to some Jazz on the main 301 system. I'll hopefully start at some point this week. This experiment is slowly-slowly, it's meant as a bit of fun and hopefully I can come to some conclusions regarding the M44 and M55 carts of which I'll detail in the weeks/months ahead.

Stay tuned.... :cool:

[brian2957]

Interesting reading Andrew. How does the stylus on the M55e sound? I bought a stylus off Ebay but it sounds pretty cack. Do they still sell them. Link please.

[Wakefield Turntables]

I've not done any listening Brian so I can't comment yet. The stylus I have was one that I recieved when I bought the M55E ages ago from eBay. I don't have a link, sorry. I think the stylus I have is the stock standard Shure stylus and not an after market replacement. Sorry can't help further.

[brian2957]

No problem Andrew. Thanks mate :)

[Wakefield Turntables]

Shure Adventures Pt VIII - Focus - Not the prog band.

This experiment is fun. I've been digging through my collection of vinyl playing and finding stuff that I completely forgot that I owned. Playing stuff with gay abandon is all well and good but what am I actually testing and how does this form part of this long term experiment? Well let me try and explain. I've been lacking focus with respect to the design of this experiment and how I could describe or assess the sonic spectrum of the M44-7 and the M55E cartridges. I needed to re-educated myself with terms and basic knowledge with regards the frequency spectrum through the Hz range. So, I've been doing some reading today with respects to the basics of bass, treble and midrange. It's funny how much you forget. So this explains why I've been digging through my vinyl. I've been looking for reference records so that I could assess individual things like vocal treble, sub-terrain bass and all the various other aspects of the sonic spectrum. I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to break down the assessment of the bass, midrange and treble as various parts of this experiment, but that's ok with me as the experiment will be more rigourous and allows me to formulate a method of critical evaluation of any future cartridges which may or may not enter service in my systems.

I have come to realise that these early Shure carts are something very special and that Shure designed something rather special. I also have come to viewpoint that I really like the combo of the SME V-12 and a vintage MM cart even though this arm has been designed for far more venerable carts costing many thousands. I'm also really loving the EAR 834P MM clone phonostage and can confirm that I'm a tad smitten with the Shure / ECC83 valve combo. I will be experimenting with the bass aspect of the Shure M55E cartridge over the next few weeks and then I'll go into the various aspects of the Midrange and treble. I'm still putting together a reference list of material for bass assessment of the M55E. It's all fun and I'll still need to read around bass and the various types which can be found on vinyl recordings and how these impact on what you hear.

OK enough now, stay tuned... :cool:

[brian2957]

Last I heard the M55E was on Lenco GL75 and I must admit I really enjoyed that combo. I really need to dig it out and try it on this Planar 3. I'm afraid, though, that I tend to listen to the bigger picture rather than dissecting the SQ like you Andrew.
I don't have your analytical skills mate. I still read your posts on this with interest though :)

[Halfway Tree]

My own take on the M44-7 range of cartridges was that they paint a broad big bold picture where as the V15, M55E, M72, M75, M91 were a bit more subtle and orientated at audio enthusiasts. I think it may be true to say the M44-7 was a DJ cartridge with a sound to match?



Yep, you are spot on there James. I have two jukeboxes - a 1974 Rock-Ola 454 and a 1959 AMI J120, both fitted with M44-7s. Big and bold is how they sound (as they should). The M44-7 was standard fitment on the Rock-Ola, whilst the AMI would orginally have had a ceramic cartridge. The M44-7 is also particularly robust which it needs to be as jukebox tonearms are not the most refined. Having said that the Rock-Ola tracks well at 3 grams, although the suspension systems of both jukeboxes work exceptionally well at keeping the TT mechanism isolated.