Pundit
Post by paulsaints on Sept 12, 2019 12:50:00 GMT 12
Hi - I have a SME 3009 S2 Improved tonearm with removable head-shell. All was fine until I moved it with the Garrard 401 deck from work office to home. Now I get no sound out of it. I have checked all I can myself. I even get good continuity from tonearm rotating collar to end of cabling (I think - if I am using it right).
So time for some help. Who do people think is the best SME re-wire / refurb to send it to? I am not looking for fancy brass upgrades, so much as a restoration to normal working, plus any sensible upgrades as needed,
or even a local fixer with some kudos?
Any suggestions appreciated.
|
Pundit
Post by paulsaints on Sept 14, 2019 18:53:49 GMT 12
Resolved - it took me deeper into the guts of the SME 3009 than I ever wanted to go but faced with a $CAN350 +freight fixit bill, there was little to loose from taking it apart and giving it a go. I dismounted the tonearm and did a bench level continuity test which showed no issues between the tonearm head-shell socket and the connection to the phono preamp. After a good deal of searching on the web I came across the term "sprung bayonet socket". Sprung? all the pins in my socket were fully back at the rear of the socket. Maybe the problem was airspace between the head-shell pins and socket pins. So a bit more web-work and I could see how to remove the small screw under the tone arm near the headshell collar and gently put the collar assembly out. That showed that the pins had lost their spring. A very careful press on the back of each pin allowed them to spring back to an "un-sprung" position. Reassembly and set-up and sound all good. (As an aside I set the VTA too high at first, and the sound was very poor. Resetting VTA to give a horizontal tonearm made a huge difference - I was quite surprised how much.) Finally, if you ever pull the side weight off its runner, watch out for the spring that sits in the hole below the runner - it will take off when you slide the weight fully off. See the manual on how to get it back on. So all a bit traumatic, but very satisfying to have worked it through!
|
Post by Owen Y on Sept 15, 2019 15:22:13 GMT 12
Excellent - any pics? Maybe some dirt in the pins socket, preventing proper spring action?
|
Pundit
Post by paulsaints on Sept 15, 2019 20:01:21 GMT 12
No pics - and not going back there in a hurry ...
|
Post by colinf on Sept 15, 2019 20:09:56 GMT 12
Excellent you worked it out :-) those spring contacts can be a problem, also because they tarnish over time and the connection becomes unreliable.
AMR-iFi R&D
|
Post by Owen Y on Sept 15, 2019 20:10:38 GMT 12
Oh, I meant the tonearm itself... Having owned a 3009 once only briefly, I've never gotten v deep into the vintage SME 3009/3012 thing, but is yours like one of these (below)? ie. With alumin arm tube, 1-pc short c/weight, outrigger VTF, but with a detachable headshell, not fixed h'shell. 
|
Pundit
Post by paulsaints on Sept 15, 2019 21:41:45 GMT 12
|
Post by Graham on Sept 15, 2019 22:17:11 GMT 12
Hi Paul
Well done on sorting out the issue with those spring loaded contact pins.
It is quite a problem area as the pins will stick in one place over time and if the headshell is disturbed or a different headshell fitted sometimes the pins will no longer make good contact.
I have 'salvaged' a number of SME arms with that problem that the owners were convinced they were faced with a re-wire.
My understanding is the optional fluid damping kit is to be used with low compliance cartridges.
IMO these arms,( particularly with the 'swiss cheese' headshell) are only happy with the medium to high compliance cartridges they were designed for at that time.
They are a lovely looking vintage arm with adjustable everything and look the part on classic turntables.
|
Post by Owen Y on Sept 16, 2019 10:04:36 GMT 12
@ Graham is correct re. Fluid Damping. Fluid damping tricks the cartridge into thinking that the tonearm is heavier (higher Effective Mass) than it actually is - by simulating a heavier arm with higher 'inertia'. This way, when you use a lowish compliance acrtridge, you can keep the resonant frequency down low - see Ortofon's easy to read Resonant Frequency graph. eg. With a Denon DL103 (low compliance), you might want to apply some damping. But with your Shure shown (high compliance), probably unnecessary - but try it out one day, LF performance might improve with a touch of damping.
|
Post by Owen Y on Sept 16, 2019 10:04:48 GMT 12
Graham is correct re. Fluid Damping. Fluid damping tricks the cartridge into thinking that the tonearm is heavier (higher Effective Mass) than it actually is - by simulating a heavier arm with higher 'inertia'. This way, when you use a lowish compliance cartridge, you can keep the resonant frequency down low - see Ortofon's easy to read Resonant Frequency graph. eg. With a Denon DL103 (low compliance), you might want to apply some damping. But with your Shure shown (high compliance), probably unnecessary - but try it out one day, LF performance might improve with a touch of damping.
|
