SME 3009 Improved- Unfair Criticism- or a "steal"?

garpt

garpt

"Analog is BACK!"
Hi Folks,

Had an opportunity to pick up an SME 3009 Improved, very nice condition, removeable H.S., for under $300. This seems like it's 3 to 5 times cheaper then its predecessor. I understand the high compliance cartridge rap, but it is a quality well made arm from the golden days of audio, so I'm thinking its an "unfair rap" to a certain degree.

By the way, I will be using it on a Thorens TD-145 with a classic ADC XLM MKII with a brand new Shibata. Should I expect close to pure sonic bliss, or are there issues I should look for? Is this as good a buy at just under $300 like I'm thinking- and hoping?

Thanks for any input!

-Gary
 
Register to hide this ad
If your using the Super XLM stylus be prepared for it the stylus to be a bit hot or bright on the top end, plus your records need to be really really clean as the stylus will pickup what's good but also what's bad on the record surface
 
Unfair criticism! A laboratory standard, precision instrument, a delight to own. Excels with high compliance cartridges tracking at 2 grams and less. My favorite practical tonearm in daily use. Not suited for the low compliance moving coil crowd though. But I have a tonearm for those cartridges. And also a nice match to a Thorens table from your era. The early SME 3009 and 3012 are favored by the moving coil brigade so fetch higher prices, and they like the fixed headshell versions best. I prefer the interchangeable headshell version due to practicality reasons.
 
Last edited:
Stanton681EEES said:
If your using the Super XLM stylus be prepared for it the stylus to be a bit hot or bright on the top end, plus your records need to be really really clean as the stylus will pickup what's good but also what's bad on the record surface
Click to expand...

Thanks. If it sounds similar to what I'm getting now with the stock arm, I will not be disappointed. I expected a very bright top end as well, but was very pleasantly surprised at the light, airy naturalness of the high end. And the bass is deeper, tighter then I expected. It is actually a more dynamic sound then my Denon M.C. and has now replaced it as my #1. Great cart.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Unfair criticism! A laboratory standard, precision instrument, a delight to own. Excels with high compliance cartridges tracking at 2 grams and less. My favorite practical tonearm in daily use. Not suited for the low compliance moving coil crowd though. But I have a tonearm for those cartridges. And also a nice match to a Thorens table from your era. The early SME 3009 and 3012 are favored by the moving coil brigade so fetch higher prices, and they like the fixed headshell versions best. I prefer the interchangeable headshell version due to practicality reasons.
Click to expand...

Thanks Kent!
That's great to hear, especially from one with your knowledge and experience.
 
garpt said:
Thanks. If it sounds similar to what I'm getting now with the stock arm, I will not be disappointed. I expected a very bright top end as well, but was very pleasantly surprised at the light, airy naturalness of the high end. And the bass is deeper, tighter then I expected. It is actually a more dynamic sound then my Denon M.C. and has now replaced it as my #1. Great cart.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't sound anything to my ears like the XLM your currently using. Plus you have to remember it. the Super stylus was designed for the Super XLM body with 4 channel capability which is a different animal vs the Stereo XLM. I have one and didn't like it on my Technics arm but it's better on the JVC table I'm using now. it still isn't one of my favorites though and I use it sparingly.
 
Stanton681EEES said:
No it doesn't sound anything to my ears like the XLM your currently using. Plus you have to remember it. the Super stylus was designed for the Super XLM body with 4 channel capability which is a different animal vs the Stereo XLM. I have one and didn't like it on my Technics arm but it's better on the JVC table I'm using now. it still isn't one of my favorites though and I use it sparingly.
Click to expand...

Question for you, Stanton681-
The ADC cart I have came along with a Dual TT I purchased to refurb. The guy who sold the turntable had no idea what he had regarding the cartridge model. It is a gold body ADC, and the stylus I replaced said "XLM Improved MKII"
Is that the 4-channel model or was just the older "unimproved" the 4-channel cart? Is it just the Stylus that determines the 4-channel capability? 'Cause I'm very sensitive to overtly bright cartridges, and this has a lot of "sparkle", but certainly not overly bright. You got me thinking what I have now...
 
The 4-channel XLM was the "Super XLM.," which had both a Shibata stylus and coils wound to pick up frequencies up to 50kHz for CD4.

The "improved" vs "unimproved" XLMs are all in the stylus, with the "improved" model actually having a slightly lower compliance intended to match up better with tonearms that were becoming progressively highr in EM after the end of the high compliance era.
 
gkimeng said:
The 4-channel XLM was the "Super XLM.," which had both a Shibata stylus and coils wound to pick up frequencies up to 50kHz for CD4.

The "improved" vs "unimproved" XLMs are all in the stylus, with the "improved" model actually having a slightly lower compliance intended to match up better with tonearms that were becoming progressively highr in EM after the end of the high compliance era.
Click to expand...

Thanks gkimeng.
That's kinda what I thought, should be a good combo with the SME 3009 improved, then. Sounds great now....
 
Jim had the Sonus Blue Gold set up on one of his tonearms and when he grabbed another table with an even lower mass tonearm, a Mayware (~4 gram effective mass) he noticed a very nice improvement in sound quality. Your SME may be too high mass for best playback but I have always liked that arm and was willing to accept its performance with most cartridges unless it was a total mismatch. Very versatile, well built and a classic.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Unfair criticism! A laboratory standard, precision instrument, a delight to own. Excels with high compliance cartridges tracking at 2 grams and less. My favorite practical tonearm in daily use. Not suited for the low compliance moving coil crowd though. But I have a tonearm for those cartridges. And also a nice match to a Thorens table from your era. The early SME 3009 and 3012 are favored by the moving coil brigade so fetch higher prices, and they like the fixed headshell versions best. I prefer the interchangeable headshell version due to practicality reasons.
Click to expand...

HI Kent,
I agree, unfair. However, the earlier 3009 were best suited to high compliance cartridges, therefore, not moving coils. Remember, the early SME arms were imported by Shure. In fact, they were marketed as SME/Shure. This is no coincidence. It was because the high compliance Shure cartridges were best suited for the low mass SME arms.

Later, the Shure markings were removed as SME started to do their own importing. But this did not change the basic design at all. They were still low mass because most all high quality MM's were still high compliance.

I would not use any of my moving coils on any of the early SME arms, such as the 3009 series. They would be mass/compliance mismatched. This is not true of the later SME arms such as the SME V which are designed for low compliance cartridges such as modern moving coils.

But, all SME arms are terrific but this distinction needs to be recognized to realize maximum performance.

Sparky
 
Karma16 said:
HI Kent,
I agree, unfair. However, the earlier 3009 were best suited to high compliance cartridges, therefore, not moving coils. Remember, the early SME arms were imported by Shure. In fact, they were marketed as SME/Shure. This is no coincidence. It was because the high compliance Shure cartridges were best suited for the low mass SME arms.

Later, the Shure markings were removed as SME started to do their own importing. But this did not change the basic design at all. They were still low mass because most all high quality MM's were still high compliance.

I would not use any of my moving coils on any of the early SME arms, such as the 3009 series. They would be mass/compliance mismatched. This is not true of the later SME arms such as the SME V which are designed for low compliance cartridges such as modern moving coils.



But, all SME arms are terrific but this distinction needs to be recognized to realize maximum performance.

Sparky
Click to expand...

That's what Kent said ...........:rolleyes:
 
For those who like high mass and SME, there are the early model 3009 tonearms. Those are the most sought after by European and Asian audiophiles. In the middle of the mass end are the 3009 II Non-Improved tonearms and the SME 3012 tonearms.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
For those who like high mass and SME, there are the early model 3009 tonearms. Those are the most sought after by European and Asian audiophiles. In the middle of the mass end are the 3009 II Non-Improved tonearms and the SME 3012 tonearms.
Click to expand...

Kent-
Do you mean LOW mass? (early 3009's). Where does the "improved" fit in?
 
Unfair criticism.

garpt:

first is the 3009 first version, highish mass
then the 3009 II
then the 3009 II Improved, lower mass
then the 3009 R, highish mass again
then the 3009 III ("Series III"), super light, a different arm altogether and a technological quantum leap, hated and loved.

i can be mistaken, though.
 
flavio81 said:
Unfair criticism.

garpt:

first is the 3009 first version, highish mass
then the 3009 II
then the 3009 II Improved, lower mass
then the 3009 R, highish mass again
then the 3009 III ("Series III"), super light, a different arm altogether and a technological quantum leap, hated and loved.

i can be mistaken, though.
Click to expand...

Thanks flavio. Looks right.
I've heard about the 3009 Series III, THAT is the one that may be a bit too low mass that it would limit cartridge choices to a larger degree. i don't think I would have wanted to buy that one, even though I actually had an opportunity to get it under the $300 I paid for the Series II Improved.
But mayber THAT's the one with the "unfair rap"..
 
garpt said:
Thanks flavio. Looks right.
I've heard about the 3009 Series III, THAT is the one that may be a bit too low mass that it would limit cartridge choices to a larger degree. i don't think I would have wanted to buy that one, even though I actually had an opportunity to get it under the $300 I paid for the Series II Improved.
But mayber THAT's the one with the "unfair rap"..
Click to expand...

I'm of the ones that think that the Series III is a fantastic arm as long as you use high (or med-high) compliance cartridges. It's a no-nonsense design. One for $300 is an absolute bargain, a steal, the deal of the century.
 
flavio81 said:
I'm of the ones that think that the Series III is a fantastic arm as long as you use high (or med-high) compliance cartridges. It's a no-nonsense design. One for $300 is an absolute bargain, a steal, the deal of the century.
Click to expand...

I should have renamed the thread.......
 
flavio81 said:
Unfair criticism.

garpt:

first is the 3009 first version, highish mass
then the 3009 II
then the 3009 II Improved, lower mass
then the 3009 R, highish mass again
then the 3009 III ("Series III"), super light, a different arm altogether and a technological quantum leap, hated and loved.

i can be mistaken, though.
Click to expand...

HI flavio,
Can you document the masses you claim? I ask because I'm not buying your argument but I'm willing to be wrong. Give me the data.

Sparky
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom