Hello Dertonarm,
I was intrigued by what you wrote above in regard to the SME V:
"The impression that many audiophile experienced with the SME V ( kind of dull, life-less sound with an over-prominent upper bass ) has to do with its very design and a few construction details which added up to an unhappy marriage".
I am a longterm SME V user but I am by no means wedded to it. Which elements of its design or of its construction would you hold chiefly responsible for the perceived sonic result?
I know about the internal and external wiring problems with this arm (and I have replaced these wires on mine - with good results).
I am also aware of its limitations regarding adjustment (azimuth, zenith)and of the problems that arise when one mounts a cartridge with non-standard stylus to mounting point distance (I recently mounted a Benz Ruby II).
Surely, though, the basic design aim of the SME V - highest possible rigidity through a single casting of magnesium from headshell back to counterweight - is on the right track?
By the way,I would join Hiho in saying that I find your contributions to this forum very interesting and stimulating. I have learnt a great deal about arms (not least about the SME V by reading them).
Best wishes,
Peter Taylor
I was intrigued by what you wrote above in regard to the SME V:
"The impression that many audiophile experienced with the SME V ( kind of dull, life-less sound with an over-prominent upper bass ) has to do with its very design and a few construction details which added up to an unhappy marriage".
I am a longterm SME V user but I am by no means wedded to it. Which elements of its design or of its construction would you hold chiefly responsible for the perceived sonic result?
I know about the internal and external wiring problems with this arm (and I have replaced these wires on mine - with good results).
I am also aware of its limitations regarding adjustment (azimuth, zenith)and of the problems that arise when one mounts a cartridge with non-standard stylus to mounting point distance (I recently mounted a Benz Ruby II).
Surely, though, the basic design aim of the SME V - highest possible rigidity through a single casting of magnesium from headshell back to counterweight - is on the right track?
By the way,I would join Hiho in saying that I find your contributions to this forum very interesting and stimulating. I have learnt a great deal about arms (not least about the SME V by reading them).
Best wishes,
Peter Taylor