• 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

SME 3009 II - Earlier (non-improved) vs. Improved?

T

Taketheflame

Super Member
Hey all,

Apologies for yet another SME thread in here (seems like it's a popular topic as of recently!), but I'm not one to thread-jack someone else's thread/am curious how this debate I'm having pertains to my own situation.

The synopsis: A pretty considerable turntable upgrade is in the works for me, and it will be getting an SME 3009 II arm. I was originally planning on going w/the improved version (the removeable headshell variant), but some more reading up on the matter has me wondering if I should consider going with the earlier non-improved version instead?

As far as I can tell, these are the immediate "on paper" differences.

Non-improved = 12.5g effective mass, steel knife bearings, wider VTF range (1.0 to 2.5g, or higher with an extra weight?)

Improved = 9.5g effective mass, nylon knife bearings, limited VTF range (0-1.5g).

It's my understanding that the Improved is the better choice for higher compliance cartridges, but I've read of some sentiment that the earlier non-improved arm is of superior build quality and more durable over the long-haul than the improved variant. I'm going w/a rebuilt arm, but that still has me wondering if I should choose the more durable version (if this is the case) - do I really need the lighter arm?

These are the cartridges I had in mind to use - some I already have, some I may pick up later on...

- Shure V15 III (w/JICO & EVG styli, though I haven't ruled out trying a re-tip at some point).
- Grado ZF1
- Ortofon 2M Bronze/Black
- Nagaoka MP-300/500.

I've also considered trying other oddball vintage carts that have JICO styli available, but for the most part, the V15 III is the only truly high compliance cartridge I am staunch about using (and I've already used it on a "bad" match arm [16.5g] with good results), whereas the others may be considered more upper-medium compliance - essentially, other than the Shure, most of what I want to use will be tracking around 1.5-1.6g. So a VTF range of 1.25-1.75g is my intended range I need. Does this mean I'll be having to "max out" the VTF on an improved arm most of the time, whereas that wouldn't be the case on a non-Improved arm?

I have other tables with arms a few grams heavier to use w/mid compliance MM/MI carts and lower compliance MCs if desired, so I don't need to be able to use those on the SME - but I'm curious which version of the arm I should ultimately go with?
 
Register to hide this ad
Bump :)

Additional research suggests that the non-improved version is better from an overall quality/performance standpoint (supposedly the bearings are better?) - although the improved is the better choice for the V15 III.

I guess the real question is this then - are the JICO styli a bit lower in compliance than the original Shure styli? They seem to suggest a VTF range of 1.0 - 1.5g, rather than 0.75-1.25g...

I really love the V15 III, but I don't want to make a tonearm choice based on one cartridge alone...most of what I see myself using is upper-medium compliance than super-high compliance.
 
I had the SME 3009 S2 Improved non removable Headshell and I have use an Jico Seto Hori an Ikeda 9 Kiwami and AT33PTG/ii with success and no issues . Take it for what it’s worth but sometimes the numbers don’t add up and they just work but my SME worked great with the above carts mentioned.

Audiofreak71
 
I have the Improved (removable headshell) and don’t find it a good combination with my Jelco HS25 headshell and 2M Bronze. This has been my main cartridge too on my previous table but it doesn’t gel well with the heavy headshell and cartridge weight. I even have a 130g weight and despite the additional mass, it’s not as exciting as my Denon DL110.

Goes to show how much arm and cartridge combination is such an important step as I’d never have thought the bronze would have left whatever table I ran.

My advice would be to find a light headshell if you wanted to try the 2M, or otherwise try and spend the extra and get the Non Improved.

I love the combo with the Denon, so maybe that’s an option for you, it would be for me, but the arms not staying, so I’ll be back to the Bronze soon.
 
The Improved arms are called the 3009 Series II Improved for the non-removable headshell and

3009 S2 Improved for the removable headshell. The headshell is an S2 part number so it is part of the name for the removable headshell arm.

The non-removable headshell arm was SME's first fixed headshell tonearm.
 
Last edited:
neevo said:
I have the Improved (removable headshell) and don’t find it a good combination with my Jelco HS25 headshell and 2M Bronze. This has been my main cartridge too on my previous table but it doesn’t gel well with the heavy headshell and cartridge weight. I even have a 130g weight and despite the additional mass, it’s not as exciting as my Denon DL110.

Goes to show how much arm and cartridge combination is such an important step as I’d never have thought the bronze would have left whatever table I ran.

My advice would be to find a light headshell if you wanted to try the 2M, or otherwise try and spend the extra and get the Non Improved.

I love the combo with the Denon, so maybe that’s an option for you, it would be for me, but the arms not staying, so I’ll be back to the Bronze soon.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting the 2M Bronze will be happier on the non-improved arm?

I figured it would be fine on both, but maybe better on the improved version of the arm.
 
Non-improved here. More cartridge / stylus options with good compliance matches.
 
^^ +1 ^^

Non-improved user here, too. A learning curve to set it up properly.

Once dialed in, it sings with my Denon carts below.

upload_2021-2-12_12-31-14.jpeg
 
I’m in the same boat as you are, I have both and I use signet TK cartridges that are on the more compliant side,
And I don’t like to keep extra gear I don’t you use, I want to restore and upgrade one with better wiring.
At the end the jury seems to point towards the non improved 3009 II with a removable head..
 
jbjsr said:
Non-improved here. More cartridge / stylus options with good compliance matches.
Click to expand...
This was kind of the impression that I got comparing the two - versatility vs. optimization for high compliance carts.

Blue Shadow said:
Generally thought to not be an improvement. It is a lighter tonearm, lower mass. But if you need to lower mass the improved is the way to go.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt in my mind the Improved is the better choice for a V15 III.

I guess what I also need to know is if the Improved is inferior or better than the standard Series II for the other carts I want to run (Grado, 2M Bronze/Black, and Nagaoka MP-300/500). That is, would I be giving up a better arm match for those carts to keep the V15 III happier?

My only experience w/the V15 III so far is with a match that is pretty bad on paper (TP-16 Mk I @ 16.5g effective mass), but yet it sings even in that arm...
 
Taketheflame said:
I have no doubt in my mind the Improved is the better choice for a V15 III.
Click to expand...
and other high compliance cartridges but in general...and supported with pricing, the non-improved is preferred. I don't know why. Folks just seemed to thing the improved was as solid. Couldn't be, it was made to be a lower effective mass.

Gonna have to run the resonance frequency calculations for the other cartridges to determine how the non will compare to the improved.
 
Well, after much pondering (and also running different cartridge scenarios through compliance calculators), I think I've come to a conclusion...the only real way to solve this dilemma may be to have 2 different tables with SME arms - one for each type :p (i.e - a table w/an Improved, and one w/a non-Improved).

But I think for the time being (unless I'm quoted the same price for either arm), it's probably best I go with the Improved on this table. Everything except the Shure will be a good match for either arm (and AFAIK, the Jico styli are slightly lower in compliance than the OEM styli). But it seems like the non-Improved is maybe a bit better for the Grados/has enough mass for some MC carts too - so it's a tradeoff.

Ultimately, I will share my final decision when I have the new table in my possession.
 
Taketheflame said:
Are you suggesting the 2M Bronze will be happier on the non-improved arm?

I figured it would be fine on both, but maybe better on the improved version of the arm.
Click to expand...

I suspect part of my problem is the Jelco Headshell which is pretty heavy and the combined cartridge/headshell combo is 19g

I was not impressed with the 2M with that combo, even with a heavy counterweight which was supposed to add effective mass.

They’re supposed to work well with the 2M. Just wasn’t my experience.

The DL110 was a far superior combo and is 2-3G lighter with the same headshell I believe.
 
jbjsr said:
Non-improved here. More cartridge / stylus options with good compliance matches.
Click to expand...
That's why I chose the non improved... more cartridge choices.
Another thing... not all cartridges can physically fit into an SME headshell. I had to use a flat magnesium ADC headshell to accommodate my Grado Statement Sonata 3. An SME tonearm with a fixed SME headshell is a cartridge choice limiting factor.16133443157854878028419067336786.jpg
The Grado Sonata 3 cartridge cannot fit inside of this SME headshell.
16133449299867702192454113826736.jpg
 
Thank you.
I'm a Pharmacist so I've collected a few over the years. This one's even more accurate. 20210214_232704_HDR.jpg

I see them on eBay all the time.
 

Attachments

  • 20210214_232704_HDR.jpg
    20210214_232704_HDR.jpg
    128.3 KB · Views: 9
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom