Shure M97xE Blind Alignment Listening Test

Here we go!

Let me start right off by saying this was a pretty pain-staking process, especially considering I had to wait until my fiancé had gone to bed to do my setups and recording. The end result is probably going to be underwhelming, but it's all in good nerdy fun. I would recommend scrolling to the and bottom downloading the test files while you read this primer, they're big files.

Okay! Here's the WHY & HOW:

I posted recently about not being able to eliminate IGD from the stock N97xe stylus. Online reports across multiple internet forums are split down the middle in two camps - a) IGD eliminated, and b) could never eliminate IGD. What got my goat was people saying they were achieving a Loefgren A (which we'll just call Baerwald from here on out) alignment and using the Technics overhang gauge, which is a physical impossibility. What REALLY got me interested was when I plugged the Technics factory numbers of Effective length, Overhang, and Offset into VinylEngine.com's overhang shift calculator. The Technics alignment is represented in orange. Here are the results I got. This is using IEC Inner Groove numbers, which were recommended by Conrad Hoffman who made the Arc Protractor Template generator we'll be using in this test.




Baerwald is pretty attractive until you get to the end, where it rockets up to the distortion heavens. Doesn't look so hot for the factory recommended Technics alignment either. I mean, the inner null point is after the music ends… but wait, what about DIN? To think about it simply, DIN is Japanese, Technics is Japanese, maybe that's where they were coming from? No, it can't be that simple. Well, let's take a look and see how it plots out with DIN numbers.




Well, that's interesting. The max distortion for the Technics alignment is at the beginning of the record where the grooves are a lot more forgiving. The "distortion hump" has a little more distortion than Baerwald, but not by much. Stevenson looks downright undesirable in comparison.

 

Part 2: as apparently there's a 5 image cap on posts.


Let's see what these look like as actual arc protractors!


Using the Conrad Hoffman arc protractor template generator, I used the "Stevensons" scheme to get the Technics numbers. I just fiddled with the inner & outer groove radius numbers until I got exactly what VinylEngine told me the inner & outer null points should be. As you can see, I already had the IEC numbers used for Stevenson and Baerwald, so that's what the tests where done with. If you can attest to a difference by using DIN, I'll take that into consideration.

Here's how I could tell I'm getting the alignments correct.

Just to satisfy those who question the accuracy of the experiment. Pictured is the Baerwald alignment, as if you didn't already know.

OKAY! On to the recordings!

For recording, I went through an ART DJ PREII, into a Line 6 UX1 as an audio interface with my computer. I recorded into Audacity at 192/24, and bounced the tracks down to uncompressed WAV. They are big.

For the tracks, I used In My Time of Dying off my VG+ copy of "Physical Graffiti". I went through about three copies of this album before settling on one, so trust me when I say this is the best condition I could get my hands on. So obviously I didn't record the entire 11 minute song! Only the last four minutes or so. This one gets darn close to the label, maybe up to the 58mm mark, so I figured this would be a good real-world example of tracking on a popular record. Of course every experiment needs a control, right? Maybe this LZ record is trashed, and this is the best it will sound? Well, I also recorded the end of side A from my new copy of Previn conducting Holst's "The Planets", 2010 release from Hi-Q Records. The end of Jupiter gets pretty close too, maybe about to the 61mm radius. Side note: Not that I think this makes a difference to anyone, but I had the DJ PRE set to +4 for the Zeppelin, but had to turn it down to +2 for the Holst to keep it from clipping.

So here are the download links. To keep any kind of suggestiveness away from the voting, I labeled them completely randomly. J, M, and X. In fact, writing this up right now at work, I don't even remember what's what. Don't worry, I have it written down at home. Here are the files.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/urwx4w6k89eg7ew/AABcLU7DHBzE58-3NcWPuaEUa?dl=0

Umm. I think that's it. Voting ends in a week, at which point I'll reveal which is which. I set it to enable changing your vote should you really feel obliged. I haven't even picked a favorite yet. I'm open to questions, but I'd love to see if this sparks a discussion.

Whew. Apparently I have more free-time at work than I do at home!

 

M. Sounds bold.

 

Your fiancé went to bed and you were playing with cartridge alignment?

 

Yes. Amazingly she's not interested in such things.

 

I am not nearly as technical as you seem to be, but your shouldn't your cart be more in line with the end of the head shell ?

I used the alignment tool that came with my Shure M97xE and I hear no IGD and I really listen for it on any record I play.

It was even pretty close to the alignment tool on the back of my Sony mat.

 

I use my Shure M97xE with an SME 3009-2 which I set up using the Shure alignment tool that came with the cartridge
and I do not have IGD and like the above poster I really listen for it, I think the pick up arm plays a huge part in
all this as well.

 

I listened to all the tracks you produced, I think you have more going on with the vinyl used than tracking. I would try better examples of vinyl.

I would rule X out. I thought M sounded best, but at times thought J was tracking better. It was tough as those both had their plus and minus.

Take my opinion with a grain of salt, as I said I am not the most technical person.

 

I checked out your TT, not a bad vintage TT. Did this come in both straight arm and s-arm ? which do you have ?

You should fill out your audio info in your profile more. Pick your favorite setting and enjoy your vinyl, doesn't sound to bad to me at all.

 

You need to align the cantilever , not the body, with the triple middle line. It's the cantilever, not the body that you align.

 

x2

 

x3

 

As i have done and mine is. Pretty obvious and beginner info.

Maybe it is the way his head shell looks, or the picture. Just looks so far forward. Mine isn't anywhere near that forward. Just an observation.

 

The forwardness is due to using the Technics arc protractor. This was discussed in another thread....the Shure, if you use the Technics protractor sticks WAY out the front if you want it to follow the arc. If you align it to 52mm overhang (which would be what the plastic Technics overhang unit does), the silver bevel will be right on the edge of the headshell which will look more "normal"....

I listened last night....M was best. J was worst. Led Zeppelin was a questionable choice. It's a horribly distorted recording through and through. I get you're a big fan and likely if you're super familiar with exactly the quality of the distortion, maybe it's buzzing differently, but I couldn't listen all the way through any of them here I played "drop the virtual needle" to get my result combined with the classical. I mean--I've been listening (to mine) since the other thread and playing around when I hear something--but, what I'm hearing are things like a slight buzz in a sustained vocal note....or maybe a sibilant vocal "ESSS" kind of splatters instead of either being clean OR being center channel deEssed (made more dull for vinyl)--next to the "everything is distorted" sound of that Zep record....it's MORE distracting on mine because they're clean recordings that have some little nasty added by being the closest to label vinyl track.

I will say I want to see what M was....it stood out on both clips for me as "best sounding" relative to the others. What happened to using Black Hole Sun? That's a much cleaner recording of a heavy rock band, IMO. And I have the 94 CD in my collection to reference for "is it in the recording or the vinyl playback".

 

BTW--I will find it hilarious if M is not the Shure cart! And I would believe it--it has a pretty different midrange response all together. I'm amazed that difference could be made with alignment--assuming none of them are intentionally "poorly" aligned.

 

Don't worry, I'm not trolling anyone by not using the Shure cart. I think Holst-M might have been +3 on the DJ PRE by accident instead of +2 like the others, so take that into account. I didn't redo it because I didn't think it would effect the tonality, maybe it did, maybe it didn't. I'm not positive and it was really late. :/

 

But with the m97xe the cantilever straightens out while moving in a groove.

 

That's not the way to align a cartridge. You align the cantilever instead of body due to intolerances of the assembly.

 

I get what you're saying, but I'm telling you I'm pretty sure I'm doing this right. I had it aligned to the cantilever for a while until I noticed that the stylus was drawn toward the white strip on the front of the Shure cart when in motion. This would indicate to me to align to the cartridge, not the cantilever.

 

Align the cantilever with appropriate VTF set, antiskate off. Then set appropriate antiskate for play. Not a good idea to align the body.

 

So you're saying despite what I've pointed out about the offset changing in motion, that my alignment process is wrong? Can you tell me why?

 

I'm assuming that your cantilever is sitting relatively straight in your cartridge body when not playing a record and prior to alignment (if it's not it kind of renders all other points, including the results of your test, moot).

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're describing a fairly significant deflection of the cantilever when playing a record, although I'm unclear as to which way it's deflecting. If that's the case you either have a defective cartridge or a setup problem most likely relating to antiskate.

If the cartridge is not defective, the course of action is to align the cantilever (without antiskate engaged) and then adjust antiskate to avoid significant deflection during play.

 

Maybe Justin's situation is similar to mine on one of my TTs. On a Rega RB303 tonearm it is impossible to disengage antiskate completely - there is an outwards pull on the arm causing a significant deflection of the cantilever when everything is stationary. There is no way to align zenith of the cartridge to the cantilever by the standard procedure. So two options remain for zenith alignment:
A. Confirm that the cantilever is straight within the body when the tonearm is lifted (or playing) and then align to the body instead.
B. Align to the cantilever, but keep the stylus suspended (using the lifter) just above the protractor, not resting on it. Quite a feat.

 

Actually you have my description backward. Looking directly at the front of the cartridge, we'll call this 12 o'clock, the cantilever is pointed more toward 12:30-12:45 when suspended, or even sitting idle. When the stylus is tracing a groove, the stylus turns to 12 o'clock. This has been confirmed to me by Michael Pettersen at Shure customer support.

From our conversation:

 

A five degree offset is not normal, I call BS. That said, a high compliance cartridge can be centred with anti-skate. I align my cartridges with the body because;

a) I haven't heard a difference.
b) the generator is as much (or more) dependent on the alignment of the components in the body as those attached to the cantilever. And if you think your needle is perfectly aligned with your cantilever...