Shure stylus microscope

[bigernie]

Can anyone who has used or purchased one tell me if this is a reasonable price for the microscope?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Ultra-RARE-Shur...666?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b4eb2872

 

[dshoaf]

I remember using one back when I was a bench tech. These were available to dealers to purchase directly from Shure along with the C-PEK test jig. Occasionally, Shure would use the microscope and test jig plus the Shure test LPs as sales incentives. Usually the deal was if you sold enough Shure phono cartridges, the dealership would receive the inspection/test setup as a spiff.

This was the case with my dealership where we met quota. The test jig showed up and we set up a corner of the store where we used advertising to get folks to bring in their turntables on Saturdays and we would test them for performance. For a small fee, we'd also do basic service on the spot, too. It was a nice way to get people in to look at the new gear in the store and to offset my time as a bench guy.

These promotions were somewhat popular early on but interest died out after about 6 months.

In either case, the microscope wasn't that special. The lighting setup on it was pretty good, though. Frankly, most any undergrad college Biology lab would have a similar microscope so there really aren't any special functions on this Shure scope to get excited about. If any improvement could be made, it would be to use a stereo-scope instead of the mono-ocular versions Shure provided.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,

David

 

[Pio1980]

OK for a specialist, too much for infrequent use by an individual.

 

[rajoo]

I remember using one back when I was a bench tech. These were available to dealers to purchase directly from Shure along with the C-PEK test jig. Occasionally, Shure would use the microscope and test jig plus the Shure test LPs as sales incentives. Usually the deal was if you sold enough Shure phono cartridges, the dealership would receive the inspection/test setup as a spiff.

This was the case with my dealership where we met quota. The test jig showed up and we set up a corner of the store where we used advertising to get folks to bring in their turntables on Saturdays and we would test them for performance. For a small fee, we'd also do basic service on the spot, too. It was a nice way to get people in to look at the new gear in the store and to offset my time as a bench guy.

These promotions were somewhat popular early on but interest died out after about 6 months.

In either case, the microscope wasn't that special. The lighting setup on it was pretty good, though. Frankly, most any undergrad college Biology lab would have a similar microscope so there really aren't any special functions on this Shure scope to get excited about. If any improvement could be made, it would be to use a stereo-scope instead of the mono-ocular versions Shure provided.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,

David

Hello David, any idea as to the magnification needed. We have several stereo scopes of this format (typically 30X) and am curious if I can use one of them for inspection. Not that I know what to look for but just for the fun of it. Thanks. rajoo

 

[Pio1980]

IIRC, you need at least 200x.

 

[JonL]

7th Sticky down in this forum has all the info you need. I strongly suggest reading it. "Sparky's fabulous DIY Stylus Microscope," or something to that effect.

 

[Karma16]

HI,
I wrote the sticky mentioned above. I built the DIY project for $75 including the lighting and the necessary optics. The project is easy to build and you will save money compared to the ebay item. The best part is the DIY microscope works as well as the Shure unit.

Here is the link to the DIY project:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225960

One suggestion: follow my directions. If you do you will have a very good microscope. If you don't-well the results are up in the air.

Sparky

 

[resound]

Its nothing more than a standard microscope with a Shure badge on it.
That auction seller is full of Poop and will probably get to keep it.

Its certainly worth more as a vintage branded piece but you can go buy the same or better in a hobby shop for under $100.

You should look into USB microscopes before you buy. Better, easier, cheaper-ish :yes:


..

 

[Arkay]

Some of the USB microscopes with built-in LED lighting are SUPERB as stylus microscopes. Really, really good. I got mine directly from the manufacturer at an industry exhibition, and I'm not sure what brand name(s) it's sold under nor even in which countries, but it was made in Taiwan. Small, lightweight, easy-to-use, giving well-lit and very clear images with a bigger depth-of-field, plus the ability to manipulate the images digitally, if you desire. The images it gives are clearer than those from the Sharp, and you can enlarge them to full-screen size and really see the details of the wear facets. I love it! If you have a laptop or iPad with a USB port, you can take it with you and examine secondhand styli on-the-spot, in any lighting conditions.

I stuck mine on a base with a rack-and-pinion mount that was originally built to hold a loupe for gemological inspection; it's like the bottom half of a regular microscope, but without the optical tube part. Instead, it has a plate with a hole where you'd put a microscope-type eyepiece. That's about the right size for the USB microscope head to fit through. I stuck the connector end of a tonearm where the illumination mirror used to be (since the USB microscope is self-illuminating and needs no mirror). Voila! A compact, easy-to-use stylus microscope!

 

[Karma16]

HI Arkay,
Given the dismal results obtained from the USB instruments that appeared in the DIY and related threads, I'm skeptical of your claims.

However, I am curious about USB scopes because of some obvious potential benefits. Unfortunately, in my experience the potential has never been realized.

So, could you take some pics off your computer and post them here so we can compare them to those obtained from a conventional stylus microscope? Without firm evidence I can't accept your views as a good way to go. History teaches me that. Your pics could help fill that void. If your claims are valid, it would offer a new and potentially better way to stylus inspection.

Sparky

 

[Blue Shadow]

Arkay, I'm with Sparky on this one, please post some pics of the wear facets so we can update our information on the equipment needs to evaluate stylus wear.

 

[thedelihaus]

Arkay,

I'd love to see this- sounds very interesting and I like your ingenuity !

 

[radioman76]

Arkay,

I'd love to see this- sounds very interesting and I like your ingenuity !

DITTO! :scratch2:

 

[Blue Shadow]

Actually there are two things that make the Shure stylus microscope special.

The ability to put something a lot thicker than a glass slide into it to view. The tray is much lower than a standard microscope.

The lighting for determining stylus wear is dual element from opposite sides. Most 'scopes have a light under the slide. This one should have a couple bulbs, one on each side of the viewing space.

Take a look at the first few pics in this google search (all pics on AK) that show stylus wear facets:

http://www.google.com/images?q=styl...&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=834

Notice you can't really tell you are looking at a chunk of gem (diamond or whatever) attached to a metal rod that is stuck into a cartridge. In the photos you can't even see the stylus mounting to the cantilever because at the magnification needed, the depth of field is so shallow anything not at exactly the same level is out of focus.

If we could get some USB microscope pictures to duplicate these wear facet pictures to determine if such a microscope would work for this task, it would be nice.

A picture of the diamond at the end of a cantilever is just not going to show what needs to be seen to determine stylus wear.

 

[Karma16]

HI,
And to reinforce the point (no pun!) here is a photo taken from the DIY thread:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=147685&d=1240718777

This is fairly realistic. Actually, the real life view is better. You can see that the overall diamond shape is not visible at all. That is good. The only thing that is important are the wear facets and these are very visible. The rest of the tip is totally out of focus due the the very shallow depth of field caused by the high magnification (200X).

Sparky

 

[c_dk]

There are a few of us still out here who where trained by Dirk Roos from McIntosh on the proper way to use the Wild scope to accurately measure the stylus wear not just GUESS and compare to a picture like with the Shure designs. Without a goineameter and a roatating platform mount allowing degree measurements your observations are but quesswork.

 

[Karma16]

There are a few of us still out here who where trained by Dirk Roos from McIntosh on the proper way to use the Wild scope to accurately measure the stylus wear not just GUESS and compare to a picture like with the Shure designs. Without a goineameter and a roatating platform mount allowing degree measurements your observations are but quesswork.

HI c dk,
I'm not familiar with the McIntosh system. Could you describe it to us? Sounds interesting.

What was its purpose? Was it ever available to dealers or customers? If so, how much did it cost and what years was it available? What kind of hardware was used? How much training was required to operate the system?

I would like to point out that the only thing that is really important is the presense or absence of wear facets which a good stylus microscope clearly shows. I have no way of predicting the ultimate life of a stylus but I really don't care about that. ANY observable wear facets are bad for records which calls for a styus replacement.

"Guessing" about What?

Thanks, Sparky

 

[Blue Shadow]

There are a few of us still out here who where trained by Dirk Roos from McIntosh on the proper way to use the Wild scope to accurately measure the stylus wear not just GUESS and compare to a picture like with the Shure designs. Without a goineameter and a roatating platform mount allowing degree measurements your observations are but quesswork.

Ah but experience is something that can not be ignored. So yes, for a first time user of the stylus scope, with no experience seeing the differences there will be errors in determining condition made.

I was the last hired at a single outlet stereo store so I did a lot of stylus checking and that is why I can talk to the issues that folks seem to argue with Sparky about.

I'm sure there are better ways, but not many of us have access to scanning microscopes and the gold plating might not be best for the stylus when using one. (This comment may date my experience with such machines). Additionally, you are the first one to come forward to talk about the system using the multi=adjustable platform.

 

[c_dk]

We would rotate the platform to +- 20 degrees of the contact surface, a part of the elipse that should have no wear. As you would rotate the stylus though the turned down columnated light you could see where the curvature of the worn surface changed. By cycling forward and back and noting the degrees you cuold determine the amount of the 60 degrees of the elipse surface that was worn. NO MORE GUESSWORK. The Wild was expensive. I believe it was $2500 in 1976 dollars. Many dealers poo-poed the system rather than spend the money.

I found a old mailer with a picture of the scope and a checklist we sent out I'm guessing back in 1981. By the way the shop was the oldesr in America having opened in 1922, 2 years before Harvey's in NYC. Of coarse it was a radio shop back then.

 

[Karma16]

HI,
Please correct me if I have this wrong. It seems like the McIntosh system was designed to determine the accuracy of the stylus axis verses the the axis of the cantilever. Do I have this right? This is determined by the precision of the manufacturing operation. Back in the early days of eliptical styli, stylus alignment was a common problem. Today, these problems have been overcome at least with expensive cartridges and, I think, for all cartridges. So, the point is moot. Modern cartridges have come a long ways since then. You never gave a time frame for your work. Would you, please?

Note in the left hand list of attributes in your attachment, stylus wear is not listed. I find this interesting.

Obviously, no matter how desirable (or not) this instrument is not a contender. Too bad. I would like to have played with one.

Sparky