[78-L] SHURES & 78s, etc. (was Turning the tables)

[JD]

> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:07:55 -0700
> From: "Michael Biel" <mbiel at mbiel.com>
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Turning the tables
> To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Message-ID:
> <20100105010755.b192746a6fddb703927f95bcf5fd261f.75bb21667b.wbe at email.secureserver.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I was about to mention the stabilizer brush on your V15 cartridge
> because stopping vertical oscillations is exactly what it really is
> there for, not cleaning records.  That was a major problem with the I
> and II,  and I remember when they added it, I think to the III. The
> bouncing is seen on other long cantilever cartridges, and is more of a
> problem, ironically, when the arm resonance is brought down to the very
> very low frequency range, but also when too good a cartridge is put in
> an ordinary arm.  When the I and II were introduced, not too many people
> had the really good arms these are designed for.
>
> Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com
>
===========

My Shure cartridge experience goes back to their Stereo Dynetic 
arm/cartridge combo (1962). It used a dedicated cartridge (a  physical body 
variation of their first stereo cartridge, I believe) and plugged into the 
end of the arm. The arm moved in the lateral plane only and  vertical motion 
was restricted. Only the cartridge moved vertically via a cueing button on 
the arm just behind the cartridge. A similar arm concept had been utilized 
in older Pickering straight type broadcast arms but they were far more 
massive and may or may not have required dedicated cartridges.   The 
restricted vertical movement was a problem with my original Empire 208 which 
had a platter mat with ridges for 12",  10" and 7" records, each ridge at a 
lower level from the others which made playing discs smaller than 12" (the 
highest ridge)
a problem as once set up properly the cartridge & stylus couldn't extend low 
enough due to the restricted vertical movement of the arm. All in all, 
somewhat Rube Goldbergish although a great looking arm, all black and slnder 
similar in style to Infinity's later Black Widow arm which also was a 
problem for me with the Shures. The Shure reps kept replacing the cartridges 
when I'd show up at the now long amented audio shows in NYC but nothing 
changed, it often sounded as if it mistracked and Shure's big thing then was 
their super tracking capability.  It seemingly never occured to me to 
reverse the Empire mat to gain a flat surface.

Eventually, whatever the problem was abated when I moved on to the II, II 
and IV.   I wound up with two of each of them  all of which I still have and 
use occasionally except for the IV (no more LP stylus) which is by far the 
best of them all.
I do use the  IV for 78 recording to CDR.  With a Dyna PAS 2 or 3 preamp 
(with the  78 curve wired in) or a Marantz 7T with its various curve and 
filter options I'm in business. BTW, my original Dyna PAS 2 stereo preamp (I 
built it fron the kit around 1959 or '60)  still met specs a few years ago 
on uts last bench test and has NEVER been a problem. A remarkable record. 
Wouldst only that David Hafler and Dyna gear were still with us!!!

The Shure III did not have the sabilizer,  it first appeard on the IV 
although at some point Shure was offering an add-on outboard goodie that was 
supposed to serve the same function.

The II and the IV in particular were superb tracking and sounding. I always 
found the III to be a bit brighter than those.
I still consider the IV to be the best cartridge I've ever used along with a 
long defunct Micro Acoustics 2000e for which I would kill for a replacement 
stylus. Micro Acoustics made at least two great products in their short 
reign, , the 2000e cartridge and a tweeter array for bookshelf speakers 
(which resembled the old Janzen electrostatic tweeter) like the ARs or KLHs. 
I had one for a short time and didn't keep it. HUGE mistake!! It opened up 
the sound of some boolshelfs to a remarkable degree without pain.

For the 78 collectors who always seem to be searching for a 78 capable 
preamp I would suggest a Dynaco Pas 2, 3 or 3x. They're tubed and probably 
no longer command high prices. The mic input can be modified (VERY  simply, 
a Dynaco option) to a 78 friendly curve. That along with the tone controls, 
mono swittch & rumble filter of a PAS preamp and/or an outboard equalizer 
does wonders for 78s. I've been doing it this way  for years with my Shre 
V-IV and V-II for my mid thirties & later  collection and wouldn't have it 
any other way. Caveat: Of course the Dyanas are only available as  used 
(experienced is a preferable term) today and unfortunately, there have been 
all too many fools who thought they could "modify" them and other Dyna tube 
gear to make them sound better. Arghh!! This was a travesty and an 
impossible task. The Dyna tube preamps tested and sounded as good as the the 
state of the art competition of its time and more than likely still do. I 
have several and you'd have to kill me to get them. Happy trails,
Jack