Shure V15HR-P Options with Technics SL-QD33

[crashbowman]

Hey Guys,

Just picked up a Technics SL-QD33 and it has a Shure V15HR-P on it. Not sure what the stylus is. I am wondering if it is a cartridge worth keeping and if there is a decent replacement stylus for it.

I currently have a Technics SL-5 with a AT92ECD that you guys recently helped me get working. I would prefer to use a different cartridge/stylus than another AT92ECD and thought about a Grado if it is not worth using the Shure V15HR-P. I know P mount options are a little limited and my budget is probably under $100 for sure (preferably less) so that limits things even more. Any tips, suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

John

 

[wualta]

The body is a normal Shure p-mount body, from all we've been able to find out. It was the VNHR-P stylus that was special, though only a smidge special-- I'm guessing that it was given a spoonful of V15 Type IV tech to give it a small edge in tracking ability over its near-twin, the DT 1200HRP, thus the confusing "V15" name.

Finding the original Shure stylus will be very difficult, but there are a few high-performance styli available at retail that will give you good sound for less than $100. Let us know what your plans are. Or you could just go grab a Grado.

 

[crashbowman]

The body is a normal Shure p-mount body, from all we've been able to find out. It was the VNHR-P stylus that was special, though only a smidge special-- I'm guessing that it was given a spoonful of V15 Type IV tech to give it a small edge in tracking ability over its near-twin, the DT 1200HRP, thus the confusing "V15" name.

Finding the original Shure stylus will be very difficult, but there are a few high-performance styli available at retail that will give you good sound for less than $100. Let us know what your plans are. Or you could just go grab a Grado.

Is there a strong benefit to sticking with the V15HR-P versus other P mount cartridges?

 

[ETI_5000]

Nobody knows much about the V15HR-P, or even exactly what the ‘Hyper-Ridge’ stylus tip was like, and its exact features. Was it better than the hyperelliptical? Shure’s description of it in the DT1200HRP user guide doesn’t give that much info, apart from that it’s an extended line contact type. Another cartridge the hyper-ridge stylus tip was used on was the DT35P, which was one of their OEM p-mount cartridges.

The 1.25g trackability figures for the V15HR-P also are only slightly better than Shure cartridges with 0.2 x 0.7mil elliptical styli such as the M97xE, so it’s almost certain that unlike their best-ever p-mount, the V15V-P, it didn’t have a beryllium cantilever. The fact that it was given the V15 name would probably indicate that it was quite good, but certainly not in the same class as the V15V-P, V15V-MR or even the V15VxMR or V15-RS.

However, we do know that the V15HR-P will take most of the ‘wide shank’ styli from Shure p-mount (and some other) cartridges. That includes those from the ME94P, ME96P, M92E, MP94E, M99E, M104E, M105E and M110HE.

The M92E stylus (N92E) is the only currently manufactured one, and also the lowest quality, sadly, as it’s the only 0.4 x 0.7mil elliptical – all the others were 0.2 x 0.7mil or hyperelliptical. Some genuine Shure styli are still available from sellers such as lpgear.com for some of the above, such as the M94E, along with aftermarket replacements.

Is there a strong benefit to sticking with the V15HR-P versus other P mount cartridges?

No, there's probably no benefit, apart from not needing to buy another cartridge. However, I say that without having ever seen a V15HR-P review - it may have been really good. Sadly, p-mount cartridges are getting harder to find, due to the very low demand - the p-mount standard was first introduced by Technics in 1980, just prior to the introduction of CD's (1982), so it never gained much popularity.

 

[crashbowman]

No, there's probably no benefit, apart from not needing to buy another cartridge. However, I say that without having ever seen a V15HR-P review - it may have been really good. Sadly, p-mount cartridges are getting harder to find, due to the very low demand - the p-mount standard was first introduced by Technics in 1980, just prior to the introduction of CD's (1982), so it never gained much popularity.

Well, all this stuff is new to me and like I mentioned when you guys helped me get the SL-5 running, I am no audiophile by any means. Now I have the SL-5 and this SL-QD33 and while I like both of them, both are P mounts and I am thinking for longterm options I might be better of with one of them not being a P mount.

 

[wualta]

Is there a strong benefit to sticking with the V15HR-P versus other P mount cartridges?

As Don said, not really. The stylus made the difference here, as it usually does.

My guess is that the V15HR-P's cantilever benefited, slightly, from tech found in the by-then-old-news V15 Type IV. If that turns out to be true, it was probably a good-sounding stylus in a cartridge body that was pretty much standard for non-V15 models. In fact, the V15HR-P's body is an M97xE body in p-mount form, based on my inductance measurements.

As we've said, there are several stylus possibilities, one of which is the JICO copy of the Shure N97LT stylus. Hyperelliptical diamond, lightweight cantilever, costs about $80 shipped from Japan, excellent performance.

...I am thinking for longterm options I might be better of with one of them not being a P mount.

Certainly, I wouldn't argue against that. Why not have both, if you're going to have more than one turntable. But who knows what the prospects for any type of phono cartridge are, long term, so get the good stuff while it's available and affordable.

 

[crashbowman]

Certainly, I wouldn't argue against that. Why not have both, if you're going to have more than one turntable. But who knows what the prospects for any type of phono cartridge are, long term, so get the good stuff while it's available and affordable.

If I am keeping the SL-5 or the SL-QD33 with the intention or replacing the other with a table that handles standard cartridges, which is the keeper? I have read some who say that linear trackers are a good match for P mounts, but so far I have been pretty pleased with this SL-QD33.

 

[wualta]

I think everyone should have a linear tracker, and the SL-5, which I have, doesn't take up much space and sounds great. The QD33 is no slouch, and it's certainly easier to install a "dust bug" on, use a scale to check VTF, and swap cartridges. I have the luxury of owning both plus a standard-mount table (or two); if you're limited to two, and you don't intend to swap cartridges or geek out over VTF, keep the SL-5. In my opinion.

 

[jpciii]

I'll offer a counterargument. The linear tracker is more complicated, thus more could go wrong with it, and also the QD33 has quartz lock. So, keep the 33. Admittedly, I'm biased. I've never owned a linear tracker and I owned a SL-QD33 in the past. I gave it to a friend, then missed it and bought it's older brother SL-Q300. Both tables have been rock solid performers.

You mentioned Grado... I'm not against them at all, I love my Grado SR-60 headphones and I have a 1/2"-mount Grado Red that sounds gorgeous. However, I haven't had the best of luck using Grado P-mount carts on these tables. I had an older model supposedly equivalent to a Blue that sounded... OK.The Black P-mount I have is really dull sounding to me... no highs. The mids and bass sound good, though. IMO, the AT92E (AT92ECD) is better than the Grado Black on these tables, especially considering the price difference.

 

[crashbowman]

Is this stylus the VNHR-P if not does anyone know what stylus this is?

 

[lini]

jpciii: Then again the quartz reference is only good for minimising absolute speed deviation, whereas it doesn't contribute anything against relative wow & flutter. In addition, the SL-QD33 doesn't feature adjustable antiskating, while the SL-5 simply doesn't need that - so that the SL-5 is practically immune to several otherwise skating-relevant factors like different tip shapes, polishing grades... Well, and complexity shouldn't be that different either, 'cause iirc the SL-QD33 sports a second motor for the arm. Well, and weight is practically the same, so that the smaller SL-5 also feels more solid.

Best idea, though, would of course seem to keep both, 'cause it never harms to have a spare table of similarly decent quality...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[wualta]

Is this stylus the VNHR-P if not does anyone know what stylus this is?

Sure looks like one. But it also looks like the 1200HRP stylus. Both user guides say the original stylus is black. My photos show both with silver highlighting on the word SHURE on the front.

 

[crashbowman]

Any thoughts to where picking up a standard mount like a SL-1300 or an Orbit U Turn with a Shure M97xE would matchup in comparison to my P mount system of a SL-5/SL-QD33 with a AT92ECD? I'm starting to get a feel for P mounts, but now that I am looking at standard mounts and vintage tables my mind is boggled. I know that is a random thing to throw out, I'm just trying to get a barometer to look at some things.

 

[59volvo]

try an audio technia AT 311ep p mount. not to expensive sounds good. also try wrapping the tone arm with teflon plumbers tape or a strip of electrical tape. - tightens up the bass quite a bit. I had grado black, red, blue and sounded dull on this tt, the AT 311 sounds a lot better. swithched to an sl-1600 mk1 with at 95se and sounds a lot better than the qd33

 

[crashbowman]

Ok, here is the update. I am going to keep the SL-5 with the AT92ECD. I also have bought a Pioneer PL-400 and a Technics SL-5200 that are on their way to me. I was thinking of putting a Shure M97xE on one of them knowing I could upgrade the cartridge to a Jico SAS down the line.

I have read good things about both tables, but have not found much info on the SL-5200, but have read a few places that it is a good table, just not as many of them out there. Any thoughts as to which table would be the better option between the PL-400 or SL-5200 in general and specifically when matched with the M97xE?

 

[Balifly]

Here is the link to the Pioneer PL-400 manuals.
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/pioneer/pl-400.shtml

Here is a link to the Technics SL-5200 owner's manual.
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/technics/sl-5200.shtml

Both very nice looking turn tables. :thmbsp:

 

[illini]

I am going to keep the SL-5 with the AT92ECD.

Wise move. Recommend procuring a spare tonearm belt while they're still available.

I have read good things about both tables, but have not found much info on the SL-5200, but have read a few places that it is a good table, just not as many of them out there. Any thoughts as to which table would be the better option between the PL-400 or SL-5200 in general and specifically when matched with the M97xE?

I have the service manual for the 5200; pm me if you need it. I needed it. . The tonearm assembly is basically the same as numerous other S-armed Technics tables, including the 1200mkii, which is commonly paired with the Shure. Personally, I'd shoot higher with an audio-technica at150mlx. Also, start thinking about record cleaning machines.

 

[crashbowman]

Wise move. Recommend procuring a spare tonearm belt while they're still available.



I have the service manual for the 5200; pm me if you need it. I needed it. . The tonearm assembly is basically the same as numerous other S-armed Technics tables, including the 1200mkii, which is commonly paired with the Shure. Personally, I'd shoot higher with an audio-technica at150mlx. Also, start thinking about record cleaning machines.

Thanks for all your thoughts. I like the idea of the at150mlx, but that will have to wait. While I am still considering the Shure, I am actually starting to think about playing a bit with some vintage cartridges that allow upgrades to a new stylus to get some ideas with things before I invest much north of $100 on a single cartridge. Thanks for the thoughts on record cleaning machines. Right now I just use a Spin Clean...I had been researching machines big time a few months back, but decided to put that one off. I have upgraded my speakers, turntable and next I would like to upgrade my preamp and receiver.

Any thoughts to be the better table between the SL-5200 and PL-400?

 

[illini]

Any thoughts to be the better table between the SL-5200 and PL-400?

No experience with the pl-400, but I own two 5200's. Both had a runaway speed problem cured by solder joint repairs. It's my understanding that the 5xxx and 3xxx tables from Technics contain subassemblies that are a little different than the interchangable components from the company's later tables (sl-1200mkii, q2, q3, 1800mkii, etc) so both the Technics and Pioneer tables in your choice may suffer from a lack of spare parts.

As far as 'better', no opinion . The 5200 was one of first turntables to feature a stylus light, so that's kind of a bonus. Both tables are most likely due for a recap.