[78-L] Shure M44G vs M44-7

[Christopher Steward]

I sometimes use a (modern) M44G for LPs, and find its frequency response quite even. I had the opportunity to try an N44-7 stylus for a short time, and found its bass somewhat bloated. However, the N44G stylus is specified with a maximum tracking force of 1.5g, which most people would consider inadequate for 78s; I use a Stanton 500 with a number of styli (an original 78 stylus and retipped 500AL styli) at about 5-6g and have had no problems with bottoming. There have been a number of suggestions that the current M44 is not on a par with the original ones, but no-one has identified a difference - maybe just poor quality control.Chris 

      From: Tim Huskisson <timhuskisson at btinternet.com.invalid>
 To: 78-l at 78online.com 
 Sent: Sunday, 9 April 2017, 23:29
 Subject: [78-L] Shure M44G vs M44-7
   

There have been many conversations about 78rpm playback equipment here, and
the preferred choice of cartridge among 78rom record collectors has (from
memory of previous threads) been  either the SHURE M44 or the STANTON 500.
I've ruled out the STANTON 500 due to its known problems with warped
records. So, the M44 would appear to be my preferred choice, but I suspect
modern day M44's are not the same as those produced decades ago and beloved
by 78rpm collectors.  


SHURE are offering a model M44-7 and a model M44G. Both appear to be aimed
at the DJ'ing market. The M44-7 is said in at least one review to have
'enhanced bass'. It's hard enough getting the correct EQ playback for
pre-RIAA 78rpm records without having to also deal with a cartridge that
doesn't produce a flat response. So, I'm sceptical of the M44-7 - but SHOULD
I BE? Or would the M44G be a better choiceTim Huskisson.

 

_______________________________________________
78-L mailing list
78-L at klickitat.78online.com
http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l