After some initial testing, research, and a bunch of conversations with Larry, I finally decided to buy one of these. I decided to locate a dealer though Shure, rather then flea-bay one and ended up at B&H. The price at the time, and as I write this is $66.99 with free shipping. Nice price, authorized dealer (click!). Fast ship too.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/205325-REG/Shure_M97XE_M97XE_High_Accuracy_Turntable.html
The packaging this cart comes in seems really impressive. An oversized aluminum case with everything set in foam. (protractor, brush, screws, screwdriver included). Although this cart isn't the prettiest thing I've seen.
Setup wasn't any easier or worse then other carts I've been messing with, but that's only because I had a new extra aftermarket Technics headshell laying around. The screws did not fit into the threaded plastic, housed within the original "Block-head" stock headshell, that came on my SL-1800. Even if they did fit they, would have also been too long anyway. I also think I shed about 3 grams, as the older one is that much heavier.
I used the standard Technics overhang tool, along with the Shure protractor to line everything up. Set at 1.35 grams with the dynamic stabilizer up. Seems to be a regular practice for me to add .10g to the recommend weight an go from there.
This is from the manual:
"...When the Dynamic Stabilizer brush is set to the operating position A, it absorbs 0.5 grams of tonearm tracking force. The proper tonearm settings for the recommended range of stylus tip tracking forces are:
TRACKING FORCE (in grams)
RECOMMENDED TRACKING FORCE RANGE (effective at
stylus tip)
TONEARM SETTING
Dynamic Stabilizer Down (operating) A
2.0 g
1.75 g
1.25 g
Dynamic Stabilizer Up (non-operating) B
Maximum 1.5 g
Optimum 1.25 g
Minimum 0,75 g..."
Tracking at with the stabilizer down suggests a heavier tracking weight, which I didn't realize the first time around on my sample from Larry. Granted, there were some other alignment issues I was having with that sample, but if the stabilizer is absorbing .5g as stated by Shure, then it may be best to add it back in, going closer to a 2.0g setting! So even now I may be tracking closer to an effective 0.85 grams with the stabilizer down!
Fortunately, even at the lower setting of 1.35grams (at the tip) I'm using, this cart is doing a fine job tracking everything. The Shure obstacle course LP I'm using suggests that all is well, but I did get a more perfect result on the bass tracks then on the high-frequency ones. Nothing terrible, or amazing, except on the bass drum track which did a better job then anything I've previously tested. The nice thing is that I know I can add more weight if I need too, but I haven't found any reason to do so after listening to a handful of LP's already.
(Playing: Magic Potion~The Black Keys)
For further reading, with some in-depth testing and info look here:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/shure_m97xe_e.html
I may post more later about the sound, but I can at least say that it seems more balanced then the sound of the AT440mla. If anything it is "warmer" but not dull or dead, and as a Jazz fan I like it much better personally then what I've gotten out of the AT on the Technics tables I've used with limited adjustability. In fact, the one thing to my surprise that has improved has been the sound of symbols which sound more realistic and have a shimmer/reverberation that was off on the AT. Could be due to my set-up factors, but lacking any rise or peakiness in the high frequency may prompt me to feel more comfortable turning up the volume, thus hearing more information.
I've read talk about QC on these Shures, and some people go to AT. But I see and have read that there have been issues with the AT as well (like mine has hum on any table, headshell, preamp, amp location combo you name it). So at least, based on my experience so far, I can easily recommend a cost effective cart like the M97xE, purchased from a reputable dealer. Also, an elliptical stylus, as on the M97xE, might be better suited on tables, such as mine, which do not have advanced adjusabilty to get the most out of a microline or other exotic styli.
Peace
P.S. Thanks to Larry for pointing me in this direction, supplying a test sample, and for his general help along the way!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/205325-REG/Shure_M97XE_M97XE_High_Accuracy_Turntable.html
The packaging this cart comes in seems really impressive. An oversized aluminum case with everything set in foam. (protractor, brush, screws, screwdriver included). Although this cart isn't the prettiest thing I've seen.
Setup wasn't any easier or worse then other carts I've been messing with, but that's only because I had a new extra aftermarket Technics headshell laying around. The screws did not fit into the threaded plastic, housed within the original "Block-head" stock headshell, that came on my SL-1800. Even if they did fit they, would have also been too long anyway. I also think I shed about 3 grams, as the older one is that much heavier.
I used the standard Technics overhang tool, along with the Shure protractor to line everything up. Set at 1.35 grams with the dynamic stabilizer up. Seems to be a regular practice for me to add .10g to the recommend weight an go from there.
This is from the manual:
"...When the Dynamic Stabilizer brush is set to the operating position A, it absorbs 0.5 grams of tonearm tracking force. The proper tonearm settings for the recommended range of stylus tip tracking forces are:
TRACKING FORCE (in grams)
RECOMMENDED TRACKING FORCE RANGE (effective at
stylus tip)
TONEARM SETTING
Dynamic Stabilizer Down (operating) A
2.0 g
1.75 g
1.25 g
Dynamic Stabilizer Up (non-operating) B
Maximum 1.5 g
Optimum 1.25 g
Minimum 0,75 g..."
Tracking at with the stabilizer down suggests a heavier tracking weight, which I didn't realize the first time around on my sample from Larry. Granted, there were some other alignment issues I was having with that sample, but if the stabilizer is absorbing .5g as stated by Shure, then it may be best to add it back in, going closer to a 2.0g setting! So even now I may be tracking closer to an effective 0.85 grams with the stabilizer down!
Fortunately, even at the lower setting of 1.35grams (at the tip) I'm using, this cart is doing a fine job tracking everything. The Shure obstacle course LP I'm using suggests that all is well, but I did get a more perfect result on the bass tracks then on the high-frequency ones. Nothing terrible, or amazing, except on the bass drum track which did a better job then anything I've previously tested. The nice thing is that I know I can add more weight if I need too, but I haven't found any reason to do so after listening to a handful of LP's already.
(Playing: Magic Potion~The Black Keys)
For further reading, with some in-depth testing and info look here:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/shure_m97xe_e.html
I may post more later about the sound, but I can at least say that it seems more balanced then the sound of the AT440mla. If anything it is "warmer" but not dull or dead, and as a Jazz fan I like it much better personally then what I've gotten out of the AT on the Technics tables I've used with limited adjustability. In fact, the one thing to my surprise that has improved has been the sound of symbols which sound more realistic and have a shimmer/reverberation that was off on the AT. Could be due to my set-up factors, but lacking any rise or peakiness in the high frequency may prompt me to feel more comfortable turning up the volume, thus hearing more information.
I've read talk about QC on these Shures, and some people go to AT. But I see and have read that there have been issues with the AT as well (like mine has hum on any table, headshell, preamp, amp location combo you name it). So at least, based on my experience so far, I can easily recommend a cost effective cart like the M97xE, purchased from a reputable dealer. Also, an elliptical stylus, as on the M97xE, might be better suited on tables, such as mine, which do not have advanced adjusabilty to get the most out of a microline or other exotic styli.
Peace
P.S. Thanks to Larry for pointing me in this direction, supplying a test sample, and for his general help along the way!
Last edited:
