So I did this to my Shure SC35C

Yes, I know that my opinion is not a popular one. I have found that the JICO SAS extracts remarkable detail and tracks wonderfully, but it's a tradeoff because it also produces a lean, somewhat lifeless presentation, with little in common with the OEM Shure styli. This was my experience with the SAS on both a V-15 III and V-15 IV.

I do like the SAS on my M91ED though, but that cartridge (like the M97xE) already has an inherently meaty character, so the lean/forward SAS character doesn't affect it as severely, allowing the stylus' beneficial qualities to dominate.

 

A few more people around the web have done this now:




This one has an aftermarket M97xE HL stylus:


This one was botched, on very old versions of the body you may need to trim the plastic a bit to fit.

 

dmckean, thank you again for posting this!

I was going to get a SAS for my M97xe, before JICO announced no more SAS & the prices on current inventory went through the roof.

This is looking more & more interesting all the time!

 

Losing the SAS is a bad deal for so many cartridges.

 

The Reichert article in Stereophile also mentions two others, "N70EJ, a 0.4 by 0.7mil elliptical diamond stylus; or the N75HE, a nude 0.2 by 0.7mil hyperelliptical stylus." The former would either be NOS or Pfanstiehl. The latter is available as a non-SAS for about $80, Shure N-75HE Type 2 stylus,Shure N 75HE Type 2 stylus,Shure N75HE Type 2 stylus,Shure N-75HE Type 2 needle stylus,Shure N 75HE Type 2 needle stylus,Shure N75HE Type 2 needle stylus,Shure N-75HE Type 2 stylus needle,Shure N 75HE Type 2 stylus needle,Shure N75HE Type 2 stylus needle,Shure N-75HE Type 2 stylus cartridge,Shure N 75HE Type 2 stylus cartridge,Shure N75HE Type 2 stylus cartridge »

Saw your pictures first over on VJ; thanks for posting. I'm interested in this setup!

 

Wow, I don't know what happened to that text of mine, sorry.

 

Here's mine, a M35X. I just set it up today on my Jelco SA-250ST. I never tried it "stock" because even with the extra-long screws Shure supplies, they weren't long enough. The headshell, at about 1/8" thick, is too thick. So doing this mod makes using this cart possible for me.

I can't find my tiny allen wrenches, so VTA isn't yet set (tonearm is "level," but I'd like to experiment raising it.)

Also, the dog got to the cartridge prior to the epoxy/aluminum shell installation and I found it on the carpet. The stylus had been left installed because when the body is removed from the stock plastic "frame," the stylus guard no longer stays on. Anyway, the cartridge was found tits-up luckily, but still got knocked around and the cantilever is somewhat skewed. When the tonearm lowers onto a record and it compresses, this angle seems exaggerated more. Running at about 2.5gm VTF here.

All that said, this is a conical stylus, so I'm not going to freak out today about azimuth or zenith. I'll order a replacement stylus, maybe another N35X unless I can find something else interesting to try.

I removed an Audio Technica AT1200Sa. That one is delicate up top without being bright in a way that some pricier, modern A-T MM carts are (IMO.) It just has an ease about that says it can handle anything, albeit not with a lot of definition. But the AT12 was always a lackluster cartridge with weak dynamics no matter what. I like it for some records that don't demand a lot from it other than some gentle beauty. I wanted something that sounded good with a wider variety of records, like all of 'em. I also didn't want to spend much, and considered for example the AT95S until I stumbled upon this combo here recently. That one might be better but this seems more fun, and so ...

My first impression of the Shure is that it does really well on brass instruments. The conical's upper-most range unsurprisingly eludes it, but not in a way that detracts very much yet. I would not characterize this as "rounded off" up top, even though it's not ever gonna be as airy as the finest MCs. I've heard enough examples [uh, online] of the M97xE to be convinced that's not the "audiophile" cart in Shure's lineup. This one is.

After an LP or two it really opened up with clean mids and nice, deep round bass that's still reasonably fast.

I wanted a "modern" (in the sense of, currently available and supported) inexpensive cartridge to establish a baseline for my system. Something I'd either leave in indefinitely or be happy to move into a second system without worry I'd overspent. With the AT1200Sa, it's only ever been lovely with certain records, and that's after having spent some time tweaking VTA to the Shibata's liking. That cart was also just a cheap experiment.

Easy to recommend!

Too much epoxy IMO. Had to wipe up as it splooged out. Shure only uses a small amount of superglue to attach it from the factory.

 

@dmckean and @deckeda, I just rebodied a SC35C cartridge this afternoon. Now this was essentially an arts & crafts project and that's something I've always been absolutely terrible at. But I think it went smoothly and I even managed to keep the epoxy from spilling over too much. This new body is clearly much more rigid than the flimsy plastic framework that Shure uses. I have a VST-III stylus for this thing. Can't wait to try it out. Thanks for the photos too. They were a good reference.

 

Great! Post a picture when you get it mounted and let us know your impressions.

 

I did it to mine but not certain I need it.
If anybody wants to make me an offer on the cart and the paradox body please PM me. I'll do it for cost of the cart and the paradox minus the stylus. Plus it comes pre done! You don't have to do the work!

 

I'm really enjoying mine! I would love to hear from others that have tried different stylus on their SC35C's.

 

Will do. I did this mainly so I could use my VST-III stylus on the SC35C body because the different body may actually be better than the original VST and provide a more accurate frequency-response. The VST body requires some pretty wonky loading to get a truly flat response, which is about the same when using an M97xE body. That the body will be more rigid is a huge bonus. It always seemed to me that the last thing on Shure's mind back in the day was the cartridge body design in terms of rigidity.

 

Just to clarify, I think my VST body has a problem and the M97xE body I've been using has an inductance of 650mH. So neither is optimal. But the SC35C has an inductance of 425mH, so that should yield a more extended treble response.

 

Interesting. I always liked the metal body my Shure Ultra 500 came mounted in. Wish Shure had used that on other cartridges. I have a new M35X, how does that comepare to the SC35C?

Ah hell, I jsut found an SC-35C new with free shipping no tax for $49 so I ordered it.

I'll pile it in with my other Shures and someday put it on and check it out.

I paid $38 for my M35X a few months back. These 2 are THE cheapest cartridges I've ever bought, so I'm not expecting much.

But.... my brother used to use budget Shures on his Miracord TT and they always sounded nice, so I'm expecting these 2 to follow suit.

 

Shure claims that the SC35C & M35X have subtly different internals. I use the SC35C body with the N35X stylus. It really surprises me how nice this modest cartridge sounds. The Paradox body is a nice addition, it makes alignment/set up much easier without having to deal with screws and nuts.

 

So far so good! I have the cartridge mounted on an Ortofon SH-4 headshell and I'm using the KAB 17g auxiliary counterweight to balance it out. My early initial impressions are that the background is "blacker", transient attacks have more "snap" to them, and there is less of a veil over the sound. Overall, it's a more lifelike presentation. Hopefully those initial impressions hold up after I do some thorough A/B tests. I also haven't made any measurements yet but they'll happen eventually. The only anomaly I've discovered is that when I turn the volume up pretty much all the way with nothing playing, there's a bit more hum than I'm used to. More hum in the right channel than the left. Removing the ground wire running from the turntable to the phono stage reduces that hum by about half. That's still more than the zero hum I'm used to. But, like I said, the volume has to be turned up way past excruciating (if music was playing) in order to detect this.

 

Interesting.
I wasn't aware an X style of stylus would work with a non X body.

 

So far, the VST-III in the SC35C body is measuring as well as it sounds. Using my CBS test record, I'm getting an exceptionally flat reading (for a phono cartridge) of about +0.75 /-1.00 dB from 20 to 20,000 Hz (with 1 kHz as the 0 dB reference). Average channel imbalance from 20 to 20,000 Hz is only 0.50 dB. That's with a load of 47k Ohms and 250 pF. It's really nice to get such great results using a normal, typical load like that.

Ah, yes, the Ultra 500. That's one of the few exceptions I was thinking about. The Ultra 500's measured technical performance was nearly identical to the Shure V15V-MR's. But in subjective listening tests, the Ultra 500 consistently got much more praise in the stereo mags. All of complaints about the V15V-MR being "boring", "plain", or not "musical" enough, are usually missing from the reviews of the Ultra 500. Great cartridge.

 

I just saw this thread, and read it with interest. I used one of the aluminum Paradox bodies to refit a Denon 103R last year, and have thoroughly enjoyed it. I was very afraid I was going to bugger the cantilever, but I took my time, and it all worked out well!

 

I was just looking at my V15VMR, V15VxMR & M97xE, and all three have the same heavy solid metal mounting base, but it is affixed only to the top & front of the cartridge body. On the Ultra 500 the cartridge sinks the entire body into a solid metal mounting housing. It takes substantially more counterweight to offset the Ultra 500 than those other 3. I far from convinced that makes a sonic difference.

And with that being said, I totally disagree with the reviews of the V15VMR, it is accurate, not coloring the music, if the reviewers called that boring, well I prefer accuracy.

Frankly in my decades of use of those 3, I've found the sonic differences between the V15VMR, V15VxMR and Ultra 500 are so minute it's not worth discussing.

In fact I've found the M97xE comes quite close to those 3, it takes a really good record with a great but taxing recording to tell the differences. The VST V Ultra Group Black SE I have reminds me a lot of an older version of the V15's I used to use, a type IV.

I've not used my M35X yet, once I get my SC35C I'll probably do some comparing.

I also want to try my new Jeico SAS stylus in the V15VxMR and in the M35X, I'm told it will fit both.

 

Here are a couple of pics. It seems to me that the Paradox Pulse block is a much more rigid platform for the Shure body and really seems to keep any unwanted vibration and resonance under tight control. It sounds fantastic. Better than my old V15V-MR and V15VxMR cartridges or the original VST-III body. Interestingly, the SC35C is electrically identical (same resistance, inductance) to the V15VxMR and VST-III bodies so the difference is purely mechanical. It's very similar to the difference between the AT440MLa and AT150MLX bodies or the difference between the stock Technics headshell and the old Audio-Technica line of much more rigid and non-resonant magnesium headshells.

I think these great results are going to "force" me to buy a second block and rebody my M97xE. A while back I went through several M97xE bodies until I found one that had crosstalk levels that exceeded Shure's specs. That might give the SC35C a run for its money once it's in a new body. Whichever one I like best will get the VST-III stylus. The other one I will either sell or rewire for mono and use with the SC35C stylus. Decisions, decisions.

 

I find that interesting seeing my Shure Ultra 500 has a factory precision solid metal case for the cartridge to mount and I've found very little difference between that and my V15VMR & V15VxMR which come with a smaller but still solid metal top/front mounting block.

 

I finally pulled the Shure stylus from my M97XE, and tried it in the Paradox/SC35C set up. Not bad! The N97XE sounds much better in the SC35C than it ever did in my M97XE! I'm sure that part of that is the lower inductance of the SC35C, there is much more high frequency extension using the N97XE in the SC35C. There is noticeably less IGD with the N97XE than the N35X, but there's still some there on demanding recordings. The stylus of the N97XE must be a little shorter than the N35X, I can no longer reach Baerwald with the Ortofon SH-4 headshell on my PLX-1000.

I don't know that I would recommend someone to purchase a new N97XE to try in their SC35C, but if you already have one around, why not?

I think I will try one of the aftermarket line contact stylus for the V15VxMR next. LP Gear has their "Vivid Line", and Turntable Needles has a Jico "Hyper Elliptical".

I don't know that I'm adventurous enough to try the SAS in the SC35C. Someone mentioned that the SAS N97XE sounded "bright" in their SC35C, but they did like their LP Gear Vivid Line N97XE. Perhaps a SAS V15VxMR would sound different than the SAS N97XE?

 

I bought a couple of the Paradox/Pulse machined metal blocks and will say that I very much like the sound produced with the Shure cartridges that I experimented with. I may have mucked up the first attempt a little. It was an M91ed cartridge that was the old clip style cartridge holder. It sounds pretty good. I am running it right now with a Pfanstiehl 4778-de stylus and it tracks like a champ at 1.25g. Sounds pretty damn good.

The clear winner was the RXT4 cartridge. It mounted in perfectly and I have tried it with a few different styli. I actually have a Neo SAS VN5XMR stylus that fits a few of my Shure cartridges so I gave it a shot. I set the VTF to 1.25g with the brush down...so it is tracking at 1g....and I have to say that it sounds absolutely fantastic. Tried it also with the old SAS vn5xmr stylus that I had and it sounds excellent as well. Not as good as the NEO SAS but very, very good. Then I tried it wih an VN5XMR HE from turntableneedles , and again, sounds real good. A cut below both the NEO SAS and the SAS , but an exellent sound.

The NEO SAS was the clear winner...subtle but punchy bass, great detail but smooth and musical, and tracks like a champ while being very quiet in between tracks. I am going to experiment around a bit with an Empire cartridge and see how that works out. I have to say that I was stunned by the sound that the RXT4 produced with the NEO SAS vn5xmr stylus, and I really do like that the block attaches to a headshell so solidly and squarely. Might be on to something here.

 

I've just fitted my M35X to a Paradox Pulse and these were my thoughts too.