Shure M91ED / Shure M95ED

[jkilla]

Can you tell us, or post a link to where you purchassed that?

Thanks

I purchased it from a Local Repair shop in Toronto called "Ring Audio", the same item is also available on *bay, where the seller lists it as "by Nagaoka"

 

[karmen]

this is not an exact copy of the original m91ed stylus. i have a NOS Shure replacement stylus purchased several years ago. the plastic molding is different ,but surely compatable with the m91ed cartridge body

 

[open0]

I do have both m91ed and m95ed, all with good original stylus. M95ed makes much better sound than the other.
Cheer!

 

[ETI_5000]

There were two main differences between the M91ED and the M95ED (if I haven’t already explained them!), leading to the improved fidelity of the M95ED. The M95ED had a slightly improved nude 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus/cantilever assembly, which gave marginally better tracking at low frequencies, according to Shure’s trackability figures.

The other main difference was due to a magnetic structure that used magnetic pole pieces (coil ‘cores’) which were the same shape (although not laminated) as the V15 Type III. This enabled slightly lower inductance coils to be used, and gave a slightly flatter frequency response.

So the M95ED had slightly better trackability, and a slightly flatter frequency response. Being an Era III cartridge, it included some of the improvements of the V15 Type III, which the M91ED, as an earlier design, didn’t get. It also was upgraded with a nude hyperelliptical stylus in 1979 to becme the M95HE, which gave the advantages of significantly lower distortion and lower stylus and record wear.

The M91ED was never upgraded with an HE stylus – possibly Shure decided that upgrading the M75ED Type 2 (which had identical performance to the M91ED) to become the M75HE Type 2 was enough. However, like a lot of M91ED owners, I would have liked the ability to upgrade it to an HE stylus. I suppose technically that was possible, if I’d bought an N75HE stylus – the trouble was, I didn’t know I could do that, as Shure didn’t publicise it!

I’m not sure if I’ve linked these in the past, but there are reviews of the M91ED, M95ED and M95HE, from just after they’d been released, at these electronics magazine links (to download the whole magazine issue):

M91ED, Popular Electronics Feb 1973 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1973/Poptronics-1973-02.pdf
M95ED, Popular Electronics Nov 1975 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1975/Poptronics-1975-11.pdf
M95ED, Radio Electronics Nov 1975 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/70s/1975/Radio-Electronics-1975-11.pdf
M95HE, Popular Electronics Aug 1979 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1979/Poptronics-1979-08.pdf

 

[wualta]

Thanks for the links, Don!

 

[boreas]

My thanks as well!

John

 

[91r100gs]

Thanks for posting,

It was nice to read a review without tons of jargon and jibberish. Also in his final conclusions of the M95HE, he left no doubt on his feelings, instead of the advertiser.

 

[Jeff K]

Thanks for the links. I well remember Julian Hirsch, but had forgotten about Len Feldman.

 

[HypnoToad]

My first real turntable was a Sansui SR-212 their bottom of the range model, it came with a cart, I bought a M91-ED on sale and it was a huge improvement. That cart was smooth and kinda laid back, you could listen to it all day long.

 

[bobins08]

ResT

There were two main differences between the M91ED and the M95ED (if I haven’t already explained them!), leading to the improved fidelity of the M95ED. The M95ED had a slightly improved nude 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical stylus/cantilever assembly, which gave marginally better tracking at low frequencies, according to Shure’s trackability figures.

The other main difference was due to a magnetic structure that used magnetic pole pieces (coil ‘cores’) which were the same shape (although not laminated) as the V15 Type III. This enabled slightly lower inductance coils to be used, and gave a slightly flatter frequency response.

So the M95ED had slightly better trackability, and a slightly flatter frequency response. Being an Era III cartridge, it included some of the improvements of the V15 Type III, which the M91ED, as an earlier design, didn’t get. It also was upgraded with a nude hyperelliptical stylus in 1979 to becme the M95HE, which gave the advantages of significantly lower distortion and lower stylus and record wear.

The M91ED was never upgraded with an HE stylus – possibly Shure decided that upgrading the M75ED Type 2 (which had identical performance to the M91ED) to become the M75HE Type 2 was enough. However, like a lot of M91ED owners, I would have liked the ability to upgrade it to an HE stylus. I suppose technically that was possible, if I’d bought an N75HE stylus – the trouble was, I didn’t know I could do that, as Shure didn’t publicise it!

I’m not sure if I’ve linked these in the past, but there are reviews of the M91ED, M95ED and M95HE, from just after they’d been released, at these electronics magazine links (to download the whole magazine issue):

M91ED, Popular Electronics Feb 1973 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1973/Poptronics-1973-02.pdf
M95ED, Popular Electronics Nov 1975 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1975/Poptronics-1975-11.pdf
M95ED, Radio Electronics Nov 1975 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/70s/1975/Radio-Electronics-1975-11.pdf
M95HE, Popular Electronics Aug 1979 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Poptronics/70s/1979/Poptronics-1979-08.pdf

Great info, thank you.

Do you happen to know how the V15-II fits into the Shure product line?
I think I have an improved version which could be similar to the M95ED but I heard this as more of speculation.

 

[stereofisher]

Have had both like both!

A long, long time ago, I had the M91ED. Broke the stylus, then got an M95ED. The difference was enough to blow me away. This was with a tiny Bogen amp and Utah speakers.
For good reason, I am not a fan of Ed Saunders styli. JICO is the best and closest in quality to original-manufacture styli.

Your records are precious. Many I can't replace. I can't hear a difference between them. But don't skimp on the stylus. Seth is right, run Jicos.. I do like both carts. Funny, I don't have either presently. Have two M55 and V15 type II. Happy with both. Did get a new M44 off Amazon. Have one on a friends Dual 1209. Like it better than a M97. To me a 97 always sounds blah. My two cents.

Eric

 

[ETI_5000]

Do you happen to know how the V15-II fits into the Shure product line?

Here are the best models from Era 2, 2.5 (as I call the Type II Improved era) and 3:
Era 2 (1966-70)
1. V15 Type II
2. M91E
3. M75E

Era 2.5 (1970-73)
1. V15 Type II Improved
2. M91ED or M75ED Type 2 (equivalent performance ‘twins’)

Era 3 (1973-78)
1. V15 Type III
2. M95ED

Note that the dates I’ve indicated are just when the particular V15 models were the best in Shure’s line – production and sales of previous era V15's normally continued on for a few years after the next generation model had been introduced.

The V15 Type II Improved was an upgrade of the Type II, with a slightly better stylus and a laminated magnetic core, although the laminated core of the Improved was never mentioned by Shure, who only started publicising it as one of the ‘new’ changes introduced with the Type III in 1973. The laminated magnetic core was used by the V15 Type II Improved, and all later V15’s with the exception of the V15xMR and Realistic V15-RS, and suppressed core eddy currents, allowing a flatter response through the midrange frequencies, without the typical slight dip through the midrange experienced by many MM cartridges.

I think I have an improved version which could be similar to the M95ED but I heard this as more of speculation.

You can tell whether it's a Type II, or a Type II Improved - the bodies look slightly different. The Type II has a matt silver finish body, that looks like this on the sides.

The Type II Improved has vertical ribs on the sides, and looks like this.

It's better than the M95ED in some areas - the stylus assembly effective mass was only 0.45mg, although I'm not sure if that was the Type II, or the Type II Improved, while the M95ED stylus effective mass was 0.5mg. The later Type II Improved stylus had better trackability all through the frequency range than the M95ED, while the original Type II was better in trackability at 5kHz and 10kHz, but slightly worse at 400Hz and 1kHz than the M95ED.

The Type II Improved also had the advantage of the laminated magnetic core, which should give a slightly flatter frequency response through the all-important midrange. It's very easy to hear that the post-V15 Type II Improved V15 cartridges with the laminated cores, with the exception of the non-laminated-core V15VxMR and Realistic V15-RS (neither of which I've heard), sound much fuller in the midrange than most other Shure cartridges, and in fact most other MM cartridges without laminated cores.:thmbsp:

There are several reviews of the Shure V15 Type II and Type II Improved available online, including from the following electronics and music magazines:

V15 Type II:
Electronics World, April 1967, page 90-92 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics-World/60s/1967/Electronics-World-1967-04.pdf
Radio Electronics, Aug 1967, page 71 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/60s/1967/Radio-Electronics-1967-08.pdf

V15 Type II Improved
Gramophone magazine, Dec 1970 (you need to be logged into vinylenegine to see and download the review) http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=43504
Electronics World, May 1970, pages 8, 10 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics-World/70s/1970/Electronics-World-1970-05.pdf

 

[wualta]

If Shure didn't mention it, and the articles you link to don't mention it, what evidence is there that the core of the Improved is laminated?

 

[ETI_5000]

If Shure didn't mention it, and the articles you link to don't mention it, what evidence is there that the core of the Improved is laminated?

You can see the laminations if you look down the stylus hole. There are photos showing it on vinylengine, and it's pretty obvious that it used a laminated core.

I don't know why Shure didn't mention it, but suspect it's because they told owners of the original Type II that they'd be able to get II Improved performance just by changing to the new stylus, which isn't quite true - they'll get better tracking, but not the flatter frequency response. They did mention that one of the improvements of the Type II Improved was a flatter frequency response than the Type II, but didn't own up that it was the laminated core curing the midrange dip which was the main reason for that.

 

[bobins08]

Here are the best models from Era 2, 2.5 (as I call the Type II Improved era) and 3:
Era 2 (1966-70)
1. V15 Type II
2. M91E
3. M75E

Era 2.5 (1970-73)
1. V15 Type II Improved
2. M91ED or M75ED Type 2 (equivalent performance ‘twins’)

Era 3 (1973-78)
1. V15 Type III
2. M95ED

Note that the dates I’ve indicated are just when the particular V15 models were the best in Shure’s line – production and sales of previous era V15's normally continued on for a few years after the next generation model had been introduced.

The V15 Type II Improved was an upgrade of the Type II, with a slightly better stylus and a laminated magnetic core, although the laminated core of the Improved was never mentioned by Shure, who only started publicising it as one of the ‘new’ changes introduced with the Type III in 1973. The laminated magnetic core was used by the V15 Type II Improved, and all later V15’s with the exception of the V15xMR and Realistic V15-RS, and suppressed core eddy currents, allowing a flatter response through the midrange frequencies, without the typical slight dip through the midrange experienced by many MM cartridges.



You can tell whether it's a Type II, or a Type II Improved - the bodies look slightly different. The Type II has a matt silver finish body, that looks like this on the sides.

The Type II Improved has vertical ribs on the sides, and looks like this.

It's better than the M95ED in some areas - the stylus assembly effective mass was only 0.45mg, although I'm not sure if that was the Type II, or the Type II Improved, while the M95ED stylus effective mass was 0.5mg. The later Type II Improved stylus had better trackability all through the frequency range than the M95ED, while the original Type II was better in trackability at 5kHz and 10kHz, but slightly worse at 400Hz and 1kHz than the M95ED.

The Type II Improved also had the advantage of the laminated magnetic core, which should give a slightly flatter frequency response through the all-important midrange. It's very easy to hear that the post-V15 Type II Improved V15 cartridges with the laminated cores, with the exception of the non-laminated-core V15VxMR and Realistic V15-RS (neither of which I've heard), sound much fuller in the midrange than most other Shure cartridges, and in fact most other MM cartridges without laminated cores.:thmbsp:

There are several reviews of the Shure V15 Type II and Type II Improved available online, including from the following electronics and music magazines:

V15 Type II:
Electronics World, April 1967, page 90-92 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics-World/60s/1967/Electronics-World-1967-04.pdf
Radio Electronics, Aug 1967, page 71 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/60s/1967/Radio-Electronics-1967-08.pdf

V15 Type II Improved
Gramophone magazine, Dec 1970 (you need to be logged into vinylenegine to see and download the review) http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=43504
Electronics World, May 1970, pages 8, 10 http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics-World/70s/1970/Electronics-World-1970-05.pdf

Looks like a got an improved version of the V15-II. I like it on my AR XB with just a low cost Jico/EVG stylus. I am surprised by the sound. It is an engaging and energetic little bugger.

Thanks for the information!

 

[wualta]

You can see the laminations if you look down the stylus hole. There are photos showing it on vinylengine, and it's pretty obvious that it used a laminated core...

I don't own a Type II Improved, so I can't inspect one myself, and the only photo of Shure V15 laminations I can find (on another forum) is this one by AndyV:

Are there any others you can point me to?

...They did mention that one of the improvements of the Type II Improved was a flatter frequency response than the Type II, but didn't own up that it was the laminated core curing the midrange dip which was the main reason for that.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just that so far, since I don't have an Improved body, no evidence has come my way showing that the II core was laminated, and there are several circumstances that would argue against it.
Thanks for any help you can provide.

 

[ETI_5000]

I didn’t bookmark where the pictures were, unfortunately – they weren’t in the Shure gallery, but were put up on a vinylengine thread similar to this one, and they clearly showed the laminations. At least I think they were on vinylengine, but it may have been on another forum, with a vinylengine thread linking to them, but I (and quite a few others) have definitely seen them - honest!

The photos were put up because people were quoting Shure that their first cartridge to use a laminated core was the V15 Type III, or that the Type II didn’t have a laminated core, so someone showed that the Type II Improved also had the laminations. It wasn’t something I believed (due to Shure’s publicity about the V15 Type III) until I saw the photos, but...EDIT - it now looks like they weren't of the Type II Improved.

For some reason Shure kept very quiet about it, possibly to avoid annoying owners of the original Type II. However, people with the money to buy a cartridge like that would have possibly thought about upgrading if they knew that the Type Improved was better in ways other than the stylus, or the different-looking body, so it may have produced extra sales if they’d released that info.

The Shure cartridges which definitely have laminated cores are (each line contains the cartridges based on either the same bodies, or same internals, but I’ve probably missed some out):
• V15 Type III
• V15 Type IV and its re-bodied SME III tonearm wand/V15 Type IV internals cartridge cousin the MV30HE and p-mount V15-LT
• V15 Type V and its modified variants Ultra 500 (the best cartridge Shure ever made), VST-V and the p-mount V15V-P
• ML120HE, ML140HE and their modified variants Ultra 300 and Ultra 400
• M24H.

The top-level cartridges which definitely didn’t have laminated cores were (again, bodies and/or internals the same) the Realistic V15-RS, V15-Pro-S, Ultra VST-III, p-mount Ultra VST-III-P and V15VxMR. These were all otherwise excellent, with beryllium cantilevers and nude HE or MR tips, so they were much better than any M-series models.

 

[wualta]

I'm trying to get hold of a V15 II Improved for myself. Other than the original I and II and the expensive Ultra #00s, it's the only one of the TOTL Shures I've never owned.

Oh, and don't forget the M24H, which had the III's core.

 

[ETI_5000]

I'm trying to get hold of a V15 II Improved for myself. Other than the original I and II and the expensive Ultra #00s, it's the only one of the TOTL Shures I've never owned.

I suspect they didn't sell a great deal of Ultra 500 cartridges, as they cost about double the price of the already expensive V15 Type V-MR! However, there should be plenty of V15 Type II Improved cartridges around, although they may not always be advertised as the Improved. The ribs on the sides probably signify the laminations inside.

Oh, and don't forget the M24H, which had the III's core.

I had forgotten it, but can see from a brochure that it also had a laminated core, so I've added it to the list.:thmbsp:

 

[wualta]

Still looking for those oddly elusive photos....