SME Series III (3) Mods & Suggestions - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analogue Source

Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11th November 2008, 04:50 PM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 12km off the alaska highway in northern BC
I have had - and have - several tonearms, including the objectively (as tested with various testrecords) lousy rega 250, modded.

I just like the sme 3, when when set up properly it as as good or better as any of the other sme 2 arms I have and had, as good as the MG1 airbearing arm, and allows for excellent adjustments that no other arm permits.

Just don't know why negative reactions?

I operate it with a denon dl 110, and it performs flawlessly on that arm with nearly flat FR, excellent tracking to max. level , excellent controlled sibilants etc. as per test records I have put it through.

Yes, and only a good test record can tell you what an arm is about.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2008, 05:01 PM   #12
Shaun is offline Shaun  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Quote:
Originally posted by Thomo
have you any idea how to add more mass?

Would damping the arm help? or should I try and add extra weights? Where should I add the extra mass?
The arm's own weights fulfil this function. Another option for those who do not have these weights is to add weight to the head shell instead.
__________________
Shaun Onverwacht
|||||||||| DON'T PANIC ||||||||||
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2008, 05:55 PM   #13
YNWOAN is offline YNWOAN  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
YNWOAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
I've owned an SME III (and a 2 which I still have in a box) and a number of other arms. The III was specifically designed to work with high compliance mm cartridges.

Adding or subtracting the lead weights of the counterweight does not make it into a higher mass arm - it simply reduces the moment of inertia by effectively keeping the counterweight as close to the bearing assembly as possible; which is what SME intended. The same feature is available on their current arms.

A test record is not the best way of testing an arm - pretty much all it can do is tell you whether the arm mass is well matched to the compliance of the cartridge.

The SME III is not junk, but compared to more rigid modern constructions it lacks 'attack' and extension at both frequency extremes. However, it is very nicely made and looks cool.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2008, 06:10 PM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MI
I had an SME 3009 variant, used the III, and currently own a VDH modded V. The last is certainly the best of the bunch but the III was no slouch in terms of performance. I'd stick with it unless you find that it is missing something you were expecting it to have.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2008, 06:26 PM   #15
Shaun is offline Shaun  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Quote:
Originally posted by YNWOAN

Adding or subtracting the lead weights of the counterweight does not make it into a higher mass arm - it simply reduces the moment of inertia by effectively keeping the counterweight as close to the bearing assembly as possible; which is what SME intended. The same feature is available on their current arms.
I'm quite sure that the moment of inertia and effective mass in this context are two sides of the same coin. The fact that the bulk of the mass is concentrated close to the pivot point and not distributed evenly along the length of the arm does not change its effectiveness. You can get the same moment of inertia with evenly distributed mass vs mass concentrated at the same point.

However, doing it the way it is done in the Series III does put extra demands on the arm wand in terms of the amount of rigidity required to avoid excessive flexing. With this consideration, I would opt to add mass at the head shell instead.
__________________
Shaun Onverwacht
|||||||||| DON'T PANIC ||||||||||
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2008, 07:34 PM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 12km off the alaska highway in northern BC
Quote:
A test record is not the best way of testing an arm - pretty much all it can do is tell you whether the arm mass is well matched to the compliance of the cartridge.
It also can tell you in conjunction with a spectrum analyzer ( that's how I use it) the frequency response, distortion sidebands on pure sine waves, proper antiskating and tracking capabilities.
And - they usually give you some excellent examples of well produced music where you can judge how the systems reproduces the attack and decay especially at the frequency extremes.
My favourite is the one produced in Canada by Floyd Toole.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2008, 09:57 AM   #17
webby is offline webby  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: england
Hi All / Lee,
I Should have been more accurate, my Grado is the prestige gold mm cart, black plastic body. Worked better in my Linn arm. In the SME the sound became harsh and a bit spitty.
But I cant recommend the AT33PTG enough for the SME, and only cost me 25% more than the Grado. This made the biggest difference in my system, having recently changed, turntable, arm, phono stage and cart.
Lee, did you rewire the detachable arm tube, and the rest of the internal wiring. Also what cable did you use for the external leads. I am going to use Cardas for the internal?
Cheers
Ian
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2008, 06:17 PM   #18
Thomo is offline Thomo  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Thomo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Hi Ian. Mine too is a Grado Prestige Gold MM. But the main body is silver in colour, and I'm wondering if it should be gold as I've seen gold coloured ones on the net.

As for the rewire, it's a bit of a pain as the wire runs down the arm tube into a connector at the base of the arm where it detaches. Then there's another run of wire from that down to the phono connectors underneath the TT. I have removed everything from the inside and just ran a straight run of wire from the cart down to the phono plugs. I've also made them long enough to reach to the phono stage.

Unfortunately I haven't yet built a working phono stage to test it with!

When I'm up and running I'll attempt adding some mass to the arm and playing about with a few ideas and report my findings.

Regards, Lee.
__________________
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2008, 02:46 AM   #19
towaho is offline towaho  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Default SME rewire

Hi All
For those of you that say the arm is naff I am selling some ear cleaner. I bought it for the dog but have enough spare to sell on e bay!.

I am in the process of silver wiring the same model and the hard bit is removing the wire from the arm tube. After that consider at what height the arm will be mounted if possible. The silver wire is invariably stiffer than copper so coil it under the pillar even if it makes for a longer piece of wire. Coil two clockwise and two anticlockwise to counteract any tension in the wire. The more space under the pillar the better so junk and thick bedplates and raise the arm to its limits if possible.

I use a Mayware MC7 and Goldring eroica (not at same time) and both give good results. Also use the fluid damper if you have it and don't be afraid to ring SME for advice
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2008, 04:00 PM   #20
webby is offline webby  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: england
Hi Lee / towaho,
I am about to order the parts for the rewire, Using this shielded cable and components;

http://www.takefiveaudio.com/mall/shopexd.asp?id=488
http://www.takefiveaudio.com/mall/shopexd.asp?id=503
http://www.takefiveaudio.com/mall/shopexd.asp?id=433


Then strip back the shielding to fit within the arm and fit new tags and RCA's, so I minimise solder joints.
Does this sound correct to you guys?
Lee
How did you remove the Arm tube connector and was there any cotton wool or balsa inside?
Are you still using the arm tube connectors, or did you bypass them so only two solder joints are used?


Many thanks
Ian
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KRELL KSA Amplifier series mods Dr.H Solid State 10 28th January 2013 12:22 PM
Yamaha CDX-550 mods: op-amp suggestions Sparhawk Digital Source 7 25th December 2011 08:19 PM
DAC output mods - suggestions please. Pulse-R Digital Source 11 22nd February 2008 10:39 AM
suggestions for Nad C541i mods ccontreras Digital Source 6 10th November 2006 01:29 PM
Need Referneces/Suggestions: Cal Icon Mods Jonathan Z Digital Source 0 12th May 2002 07:18 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:12 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2