Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SME 3009, Which is considered best, Series I, II, or III?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 7:14:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a
collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the
Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM.

Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME
3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III?
Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my tonearm/turntable
set up?

Thanks,

Matt
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 7:21:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain.
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"toucanf16" <toucanf16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:csbfhb02sh@news3.newsguy.com...
> I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have
a
> collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose
the
> Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM.
>
> Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME
> 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or
III?
> Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my
tonearm/turntable
> set up?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 7:26:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

The choice of arm is interconnected with the choice of cartridge.

Kal


On 15 Jan 2005 16:14:35 GMT, "toucanf16" <toucanf16@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have a
>collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose the
>Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM.
>
>Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME
>3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or III?
>Also, what would be a good cartridge to use with my tonearm/turntable
>set up?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Matt
Related resources
Anonymous
January 18, 2005 4:56:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio <uptownaudio@rev.net> wrote:

>Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain.

Why 'naturally'? The Series III is a disaster for low to medium
compliance carts.

>"toucanf16" <toucanf16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:csbfhb02sh@news3.newsguy.com...
>> I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I have
>a
>> collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose
>the
>> Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM.
>>
>> Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of SME
>> 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or
>III?

The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different
ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as
the excellent Shure V15.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
January 19, 2005 4:04:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cshqcs02o8h@news3.newsguy.com...
> On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio <uptownaudio@rev.net> wrote:
>
>snip<

>
> The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different
> ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as
> the excellent Shure V15.

Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM, which
was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low
mass arms still around.
January 19, 2005 4:10:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

> The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different
> ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as
> the excellent Shure V15.

This may be old news, here, but Shure is stopping V-15 production.
Evidently they are unable to source beryllium fabricators for their
cantilevers. They have, instead, discontinued selling bodies but will
use their remaining stylus assemblies as replacements over the next few
years.

On a kind of related note, with Qauntegy filing for creditor protection
we have another analog source going south. According to a WSJ article
last week Qauntegy claimed that the pro open reel business was actually
profitable, but other products (was it VHS tape?) brought them down.

michael
Anonymous
January 20, 2005 3:52:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

The III is the nicest of the arms even if it is the lightest. I would
not call it a disaster by any means. Simply supply the right cartridge
and a bit of weight if needed and you have a very nice rig. I agree
that a medium mass arm is more universally easy to set-up and that the
II is not a bad arm, but the I is not what I would consider a great
arm and to answer the original poster's question...
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:cshqcs02o8h@news3.newsguy.com...
> On 16 Jan 2005 16:21:38 GMT, Uptown Audio <uptownaudio@rev.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Series III, naturally. The Dynavector 10x5 is a bargain.
>
> Why 'naturally'? The Series III is a disaster for low to medium
> compliance carts.
>
>>"toucanf16" <toucanf16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:csbfhb02sh@news3.newsguy.com...
>>> I purchased a Thorens 124 MKII turntable and need a tonearm. I
>>> have
>>a
>>> collection of old old Seeburg background music records and choose
>>the
>>> Thorens 124 because it plays at 16RPM.
>>>
>>> Now I need a tone arm. There seems to be a plentiful supply of
>>> SME
>>> 3009 tonearms out there. Which is recommended; series I, II, or
>>III?
>
> The II is an advance on the I, the III is a completely different
> ultra-low-mass design, well suited to high-compliance carts such as
> the excellent Shure V15.
> --
>
> Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 4:04:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

The original poster, Matt (toucanf16@yahoo.com), said he wanted to use
the turntable for playing a

>collection of old old Seeburg background music records

To me, this sounds as if top end vinyl playback is not an issue at
all! Raving about what the different version of SME can and cannot do,
when it comes to playback with top flight pickup cartridges seems a
total waste of time. Correct me if I am wrong.

I would put emphasis more on ease of use and general sturdyness for
this application, which I think the earlier arms from SME on the
Thorens fit like a glove!

Per,
who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely used
these days.
January 21, 2005 4:07:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Harry Lavo wrote:

> Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM, which
> was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low
> mass arms still around.


Is the III still being manufactured? Another low mass design of some
popularity was the Japanese Grace 707 which featured a four point gimbal
design like those found on Dual turntables. Pioneer sold a low mass
carbon fiber arm under their Series 20 moniker in the late 70's which,
at least on appearance, looked kind of like the low mass ADC carbon
fiber arm. An interesting design, I thought, was the Technics EPA 500
unit which featured dedicated tonearm wands matched to various
compliance cartridges--low, medium, or high, take your pick.
Transcriptors at one time marketed their so called Vestigial
tonearm--imagine a low mass mass version of the Dynavector and you'll
understand.

For what it's worth, there is a guy on Ebay with what appears to be a
warehouse full of low mass Sonus Formula 4 silicone damped unipivot
arms; he offers one up for sale every now and then--I think they go for
about $150.00. I never heard of a Sonus version, but was familiar with
the Mayware product. JH Reproducers (I think that was the name) also
sold a Formula 4 tonearm at one time.

michael
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 10:18:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"michael" <pm279@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:cspkkt01seq@news4.newsguy.com...
> Harry Lavo wrote:
>
> > Second Stuart on this. I used one for years with the original XLM,
which
> > was the equal of the Shure in compliance. The III is one of the few low
> > mass arms still around.
>
>
> Is the III still being manufactured?

I don't think so, but a lot of them were sold and they were some of the last
made...so a lot show up on eBay in relatively good condition. That's what
my comment was based on.

Another low mass design of some
> popularity was the Japanese Grace 707 which featured a four point gimbal
> design like those found on Dual turntables. Pioneer sold a low mass
> carbon fiber arm under their Series 20 moniker in the late 70's which,
> at least on appearance, looked kind of like the low mass ADC carbon
> fiber arm. An interesting design, I thought, was the Technics EPA 500
> unit which featured dedicated tonearm wands matched to various
> compliance cartridges--low, medium, or high, take your pick.
> Transcriptors at one time marketed their so called Vestigial
> tonearm--imagine a low mass mass version of the Dynavector and you'll
> understand.

These were all interesting tonearms. I owned and used a 707 at the same
time as and SME III, back in 1980 or so. It was excellent. The
Transcriptors with an ADC XLM was an outstanding combo, although very
fragile. It was TAS's reference for awhile back when the mag was just
getting started. Anybody know why high-compliance has gone by the boards
for most MM's?

>
> For what it's worth, there is a guy on Ebay with what appears to be a
> warehouse full of low mass Sonus Formula 4 silicone damped unipivot
> arms; he offers one up for sale every now and then--I think they go for
> about $150.00. I never heard of a Sonus version, but was familiar with
> the Mayware product. JH Reproducers (I think that was the name) also
> sold a Formula 4 tonearm at one time.
>
> michael
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 10:33:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

No argument there. I don't want to be the one to insult his choice of
material, but if fidelity is not critical then it really does not
matter so much. If you want simplicity and robustness, then the RB250
would stand out like a billboard. These are all very nice arms for
general use. Perhaps those records are more important to him.
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"Per Stromgren" <per.stromgren@telia.com> wrote in message
news:cspkfq01rvf@news4.newsguy.com...
> The original poster, Matt (toucanf16@yahoo.com), said he wanted to
> use
> the turntable for playing a
>
>>collection of old old Seeburg background music records
>
> To me, this sounds as if top end vinyl playback is not an issue at
> all! Raving about what the different version of SME can and cannot
> do,
> when it comes to playback with top flight pickup cartridges seems a
> total waste of time. Correct me if I am wrong.
>
> I would put emphasis more on ease of use and general sturdyness for
> this application, which I think the earlier arms from SME on the
> Thorens fit like a glove!
>
> Per,
> who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely
> used
> these days.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:25:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Per Stromgren" <per.stromgren@telia.com> wrote in message
news:cspkfq01rvf@news4.newsguy.com...
> Per,
> who also happen to own a TD150/SME3009II/Ortofon OM20, but rarely used
> these days.

I have the original SME 3009 (detachable head shell) on a TD125 and it works
like a charm with any MM or MI cartridge I put in it. I abandoned MC long
ago using a Mark Levinson JC-1AC, which I chucked with the trash.
Anonymous
January 25, 2005 3:15:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Thanks for all the posts. I've also looked at Rega RB250 and RB300
tonearms. My hobby is collecting and restoring jukeboxes. Of course,
I had to get records to fill the jukeboxes. Now it seems the record
collecting has overtaken my time. The Seeburg background records I
mentioned were used in commercial sound systems in the 60-70s,
Seeburg's version of the Musak. The 16 rpm records I have are
new/never played. The music is, shall I say, not high fidelity by
today's standards, and I'd like to capture digital files before I play
the records in the Seeburg Background unit I have. I also a reasonable
collection (2000+) of 45rpm records and a couple hundred LPs (nothing
special though) that I'd like to play.

The more I look, the more I'm leaning towards a RB250 and RB300 for my
Thorens 124 MkII. Any further comments?

Thanks,

Matt W.
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 3:50:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I like the Rega arms but there are loads of Thorens tables with the
SME MkII arms on them out there. That was probably the most popular
choice. You also see some Grace arms, but I still fancy the RB300 over
those others. I use a P3 with the RB300 now, so I guess that tells you
that I put my money where my thoughts are. I have also collected
records for years and have thousands which I like to keep in nice
condition. The Dv cartridges work wonderfully with the Rega arms also.
On a Thorens, you will need to buy or fashion an armboard for the Rega
arm, of course. They will fit in an SME armboard slot but the height
is probably going to need adjustment via shims if you would rather use
the one you have.
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"toucanf16" <toucanf16@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ct433b01lf2@news1.newsguy.com...
> Thanks for all the posts. I've also looked at Rega RB250 and RB300
> tonearms. My hobby is collecting and restoring jukeboxes. Of
> course,
> I had to get records to fill the jukeboxes. Now it seems the record
> collecting has overtaken my time. The Seeburg background records I
> mentioned were used in commercial sound systems in the 60-70s,
> Seeburg's version of the Musak. The 16 rpm records I have are
> new/never played. The music is, shall I say, not high fidelity by
> today's standards, and I'd like to capture digital files before I
> play
> the records in the Seeburg Background unit I have. I also a
> reasonable
> collection (2000+) of 45rpm records and a couple hundred LPs
> (nothing
> special though) that I'd like to play.
>
> The more I look, the more I'm leaning towards a RB250 and RB300 for
> my
> Thorens 124 MkII. Any further comments?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt W.
January 24, 2011 3:24:04 AM

The sme series III is perfert for the new hi end carts which place a couple of steps higher then the shure v-whatever. It comes from Soundsmith and is rated Class A by Stereophile. Order the Hi-complience version and mount on a series III. Can't go wrong with or without a damping pot. Best bargain in high end, a 2 to 4 hundred arm and 3 to 22 hundred cart. If you try it and disagree Please let me know why.
!