Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SME 3009, Which is considered best, Series I, II, or III?
I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a
collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM. Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III? Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my tonearm/turntable set up? Thanks, Matt |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain.
-Bill www.uptownaudio.com Roanoke VA (540) 343-1250 "toucanf16" wrote in message ... I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM. Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III? Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my tonearm/turntable set up? Thanks, Matt |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The choice of arm is interconnected with the choice of cartridge.
Kal On 15 Jan 2005 16:14:35 GMT, "toucanf16" wrote: I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM. Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III? Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my tonearm/turntable set up? Thanks, Matt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio wrote:
Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain. Why 'naturally'? The Series III is a disaster for low to medium compliance carts. "toucanf16" wrote in message ... I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM. Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III? The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as the excellent Shure V15. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
... On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio wrote: snip The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as the excellent Shure V15. Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM, which was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low mass arms still around. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as the excellent Shure V15. This may be old news, here, but Shure is stopping V-15 production. Evidently they are unable to source beryllium fabricators for their cantilevers. They have, instead, discontinued selling bodies but will use their remaining stylus assemblies as replacements over the next few years. On a kind of related note, with Qauntegy filing for creditor protection we have another analog source going south. According to a WSJ article last week Qauntegy claimed that the pro open reel business was actually profitable, but other products (was it VHS tape?) brought them down. michael |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The III is the nicest of the arms even if it is the lightest. I would
not call it a disaster by any means. Simply supply the right cartridge and a bit of weight if needed and you have a very nice rig. I agree that a medium mass arm is more universally easy to set-up and that the II is not a bad arm, but the I is not what I would consider a great arm and to answer the original poster's question... -Bill www.uptownaudio.com Roanoke VA (540) 343-1250 "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio wrote: Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain. Why 'naturally'? The Series III is a disaster for low to medium compliance carts. "toucanf16" wrote in message ... I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM. Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III? The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as the excellent Shure V15. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The original poster, Matt ), said he wanted to use
the turntable for playing a collection of old old Seeburg background music records To me, this sounds as if top end vinyl playback is not an issue at all! Raving about what the different version of SME can and cannot do, when it comes to playback with top flight pickup cartridges seems a total waste of time. Correct me if I am wrong. I would put emphasis more on ease of use and general sturdyness for this application, which I think the earlier arms from SME on the Thorens fit like a glove! Per, who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely used these days. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Harry Lavo wrote:
Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM, which was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low mass arms still around. Is the III still being manufactured? Another low mass design of some popularity was the Japanese Grace 707 which featured a four point gimbal design like those found on Dual turntables. Pioneer sold a low mass carbon fiber arm under their Series 20 moniker in the late 70's which, at least on appearance, looked kind of like the low mass ADC carbon fiber arm. An interesting design, I thought, was the Technics EPA 500 unit which featured dedicated tonearm wands matched to various compliance cartridges--low, medium, or high, take your pick. Transcriptors at one time marketed their so called Vestigial tonearm--imagine a low mass mass version of the Dynavector and you'll understand. For what it's worth, there is a guy on Ebay with what appears to be a warehouse full of low mass Sonus Formula 4 silicone damped unipivot arms; he offers one up for sale every now and then--I think they go for about $150.00. I never heard of a Sonus version, but was familiar with the Mayware product. JH Reproducers (I think that was the name) also sold a Formula 4 tonearm at one time. michael |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"michael" wrote in message
... Harry Lavo wrote: Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM, which was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low mass arms still around. Is the III still being manufactured? I don't think so, but a lot of them were sold and they were some of the last made...so a lot show up on eBay in relatively good condition. That's what my comment was based on. Another low mass design of some popularity was the Japanese Grace 707 which featured a four point gimbal design like those found on Dual turntables. Pioneer sold a low mass carbon fiber arm under their Series 20 moniker in the late 70's which, at least on appearance, looked kind of like the low mass ADC carbon fiber arm. An interesting design, I thought, was the Technics EPA 500 unit which featured dedicated tonearm wands matched to various compliance cartridges--low, medium, or high, take your pick. Transcriptors at one time marketed their so called Vestigial tonearm--imagine a low mass mass version of the Dynavector and you'll understand. These were all interesting tonearms. I owned and used a 707 at the same time as and SME III, back in 1980 or so. It was excellent. The Transcriptors with an ADC XLM was an outstanding combo, although very fragile. It was TAS's reference for awhile back when the mag was just getting started. Anybody know why high-compliance has gone by the boards for most MM's? For what it's worth, there is a guy on Ebay with what appears to be a warehouse full of low mass Sonus Formula 4 silicone damped unipivot arms; he offers one up for sale every now and then--I think they go for about $150.00. I never heard of a Sonus version, but was familiar with the Mayware product. JH Reproducers (I think that was the name) also sold a Formula 4 tonearm at one time. michael |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
No argument there. I don't want to be the one to insult his choice of
material, but if fidelity is not critical then it really does not matter so much. If you want simplicity and robustness, then the RB250 would stand out like a billboard. These are all very nice arms for general use. Perhaps those records are more important to him. -Bill www.uptownaudio.com Roanoke VA (540) 343-1250 "Per Stromgren" wrote in message ... The original poster, Matt ), said he wanted to use the turntable for playing a collection of old old Seeburg background music records To me, this sounds as if top end vinyl playback is not an issue at all! Raving about what the different version of SME can and cannot do, when it comes to playback with top flight pickup cartridges seems a total waste of time. Correct me if I am wrong. I would put emphasis more on ease of use and general sturdyness for this application, which I think the earlier arms from SME on the Thorens fit like a glove! Per, who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely used these days. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Per Stromgren" wrote in message
... Per, who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely used these days. I have the original SME 3009 (detachable head shell) on a TD125 and it works like a charm with any MM or MI cartridge I put in it. I abandoned MC long ago using a Mark Levinson JC-1AC, which I chucked with the trash. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for all the posts. I've also looked at Rega RB250 and RB300
tonearms. My hobby is collecting and restoring jukeboxes. Of course, I had to get records to fill the jukeboxes. Now it seems the record collecting has overtaken my time. The Seeburg background records I mentioned were used in commercial sound systems in the 60-70s, Seeburg's version of the Musak. The 16 rpm records I have are new/never played. The music is, shall I say, not high fidelity by today's standards, and I'd like to capture digital files before I play the records in the Seeburg Background unit I have. I also a reasonable collection (2000+) of 45rpm records and a couple hundred LPs (nothing special though) that I'd like to play. The more I look, the more I'm leaning towards a RB250 and RB300 for my Thorens 124 MkII. Any further comments? Thanks, Matt W. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I like the Rega arms but there are loads of Thorens tables with the
SME MkII arms on them out there. That was probably the most popular choice. You also see some Grace arms, but I still fancy the RB300 over those others. I use a P3 with the RB300 now, so I guess that tells you that I put my money where my thoughts are. I have also collected records for years and have thousands which I like to keep in nice condition. The Dv cartridges work wonderfully with the Rega arms also. On a Thorens, you will need to buy or fashion an armboard for the Rega arm, of course. They will fit in an SME armboard slot but the height is probably going to need adjustment via shims if you would rather use the one you have. -Bill www.uptownaudio.com Roanoke VA (540) 343-1250 "toucanf16" wrote in message ... Thanks for all the posts. I've also looked at Rega RB250 and RB300 tonearms. My hobby is collecting and restoring jukeboxes. Of course, I had to get records to fill the jukeboxes. Now it seems the record collecting has overtaken my time. The Seeburg background records I mentioned were used in commercial sound systems in the 60-70s, Seeburg's version of the Musak. The 16 rpm records I have are new/never played. The music is, shall I say, not high fidelity by today's standards, and I'd like to capture digital files before I play the records in the Seeburg Background unit I have. I also a reasonable collection (2000+) of 45rpm records and a couple hundred LPs (nothing special though) that I'd like to play. The more I look, the more I'm leaning towards a RB250 and RB300 for my Thorens 124 MkII. Any further comments? Thanks, Matt W. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
d&r series 4000 mk II, what difference to former series 4000? | Pro Audio | |||
FS: Grado Lab Series and Elac Studio Series....Turntables...? | Marketplace | |||
FS: Grado Lab Series and Elac Studio Series....Turntables...? | Marketplace | |||
FA: SME 3009 SERIES III S Tonearm * NEW IN BOX | Marketplace | |||
FA: SME 3009 SERIES III S Tonearm * NEW IN BOX | Marketplace |