• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Shure M91ED or M95ED or Sure M75ED Type 2 Cartridge, Whats better?

fiddlefye said:
I'm going to throw a very specific question into the thread if no one minds. I have a Sumiko MMT on the rear board on my table and would like to mount a Shure of some sort for those moments when I find myself craving that sound. I have three Shures in the house currently - V-15 III, M-95 and M-91. All three could stand a fresh stylus. I'm presuming the V-15 III would not be a great match to the medium mass MMT (exact effective mass figures unknown as far as I can tell)? So, of the two remaining choices - which to go with (as a starting point) and what would be the best selection of stylus considering the arm in question? I'm leaning toward starting off with the M-91 simply because it was the basic sound of my "formative" audio years, but either would be fine. No M-75 around here to date.
Click to expand...

Agree with your choice of the Shure M-91xx cartridge.

I have both the Shure M-91 SAS and Shure M-95 SAS dating back to the old sub $100.00 era.

I believe the Shure M-91 SAS has a slightly more enjoyable melodic sound. :thumbsup:
 
Balifly said:
Agree with your choice of the Shure M-91xx cartridge.

I have both the Shure M-91 SAS and Shure M-95 SAS dating back to the old sub $100.00 era.

I believe the Shure M-91 SAS has a slightly more enjoyable melodic sound. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
The point is to recapture a particular sound, especially for those rock records of the time. I'm probably also going to mount up a Stanton 681 and a DL-103 (in heavy shell) for some other choices. So you think the SAS would handle the mass of the Sumiko arm fine, then?
 
fiddlefye said:
The point is to recapture a particular sound, especially for those rock records of the time. I'm probably also going to mount up a Stanton 681 and a DL-103 (in heavy shell) for some other choices. So you think the SAS would handle the mass of the Sumiko arm fine, then?
Click to expand...

I have no knowledge of the Sumiko MMT aside from what I have read.
https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sumiko/premier-mmt.shtml

I believe with the excellent bearing and construction of the fine tone arm, it should be fine with the Shure M91 SAS stylus compliant wise.

I have used the Shure M91 SAS on medium heavy tone arms of Pioneer PL-550 and Sansui SR-838.

The old SAS may not be available at this time you may want to try out the old stock HE-hyper elliptical for now. :thumbsup:
https://lptunes.com/products/hyperelliptical-replacement-for-shure-n-91ed-n91ed-stylus
 
Balifly said:
I have no knowledge of the Sumiko MMT aside from what I have read.
https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sumiko/premier-mmt.shtml

I believe with the excellent bearing and construction of the fine tone arm, it should be fine with the Shure M91 SAS stylus compliant wise.

I have used the Shure M91 SAS on medium heavy tone arms of Pioneer PL-550 and Sansui SR-838.

The old SAS may not be available at this time you may want to try out the old stock HE-hyper elliptical for now. :thumbsup:
https://lptunes.com/products/hyperelliptical-replacement-for-shure-n-91ed-n91ed-stylus
Click to expand...
It is funny how secretive some companies are about the effective mass of their arms. Jelco (who made the MMT) is notorious in that regard. I'm guessing with a shell on the lighter side I'll be fine then. I've only run MC carts on the Sumiko when it was "an only child" on another table. Now it is on the back board on the DP-80 and free to do whatever it likes!
 
Pio1980 said:
All Shure Bros carts use the same ELAC generator layout and system. With these carts, the 'essence' is primarily the specific stylus example, the body second with two body "families", solid core and laminated core.
Click to expand...

Awesome answer. I def thought they upgraded the generator on the m97xe to a degree. Thanks for schooling me :)
 
From my reading, the M75 and M91 are basically the same, also about the same as a V15 II.
And the M97xe would fit right in between the V15 IV and V15 V. Better than the IV but not quite as good as the V. So, according to Shure, an M97xe would be superior to the M75, M91, V15 IV. Obviously, your preference would be paramount though!
Thanks for the helpful replies!
The many stylus options available for the M75 have been mentioned here. I may look at picking up a .6 mil Jico conical for it for my worse condition records.
 
Rockin Robby said:
I may look at picking up a .6 mil Jico conical for it for my worse condition records.
Click to expand...

There is one theory that the worse condition records have groove damage from using old conical and old elliptical stylus.

Therefore the alternative would be to get a finer stylus that will delve into the un used and un damaged portion of the groove.

You will then be playing the new and undamaged portion of the LP.

What do you think? :idea: :)
 
Balifly said:
There is one theory that the worse condition records have groove damage from using old conical and old elliptical stylus.

Therefore the alternative would be to get a finer stylus that will delve into the un used and un damaged portion of the groove.

You will then be playing the new and undamaged portion of the LP.

What do you think? :idea: :)
Click to expand...

Sounds great. But most of my reading suggests that most of these records would be worn by a .7 conical, and that a .6 conical would be the best to go deeper. I do have an SAS on the way, but these are purported to pick up MORE noise since they contact almost the entire groove.
 
Rockin Robby said:
Sounds great. But most of my reading suggests that most of these records would be worn by a .7 conical, and that a .6 conical would be the best to go deeper. I do have an SAS on the way, but these are purported to pick up MORE noise since they contact almost the entire groove.
Click to expand...

Good, you can try both the SAS and the 0.6 conical !!! :thumbsup:
 
Rockin Robby said:
From my reading, the M75 and M91 are basically the same, also about the same as a V15 II.
And the M97xe would fit right in between the V15 IV and V15 V. Better than the IV but not quite as good as the V. So, according to Shure, an M97xe would be superior to the M75, M91, V15 IV. Obviously, your preference would be paramount though!
Thanks for the helpful replies!
The many stylus options available for the M75 have been mentioned here. I may look at picking up a .6 mil Jico conical for it for my worse condition records.
Click to expand...
Afaik, the type V15-4 is superior to the 97xE.
 
Dunno why they would state that, afaik, the 4 with either oem or SAS stylus will be in every way, a superior pickup to the 97xE.
 
Rockin Robby said:
I had just ordered a Jico SAS for the M97xe (which I purchased new in January). Then realized I had my Dad's old M75ED around still. Would that Jico SAS fit into the M75ED? I think I read somewhere about somebody putting a stylus from an M97XE into an M75.
Click to expand...

It will fit, but fairly sure, only after a bit of the plastic is cut back. I prefer the older Shure M75 M91 M95 to the new M97 I bought.
 
I will have to give the M75 a proper listen on my system! Many fans here, and it is the cartridge I grew up with.

I must say I freaking LOVE the sound of my stock M97xe on my JVC table though. The tracking and eq sound about perfect to me, and I am worried that the Jico SAS will sound too bright on it since it seems so perfect now. Makes me wonder how the M75 could beat it as well.


jusmee said:
It will fit, but fairly sure, only after a bit of the plastic is cut back. I prefer the older Shure M75 M91 M95 to the new M97 I bought.
Click to expand...
Do you remember the specific differences you found between the M97xe and the M75?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom