Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Good to see new activity here. As halcro knows I have never been a big fan of Shure cartridges. While I have admired the things that they do well like the great tracking and sense of composure, in my systems they have always sounded dynamically polite and lacking natural instrumental color. I must say that I really enjoyed the sound of two of the three Shures being considered here. I may have to reconsider.

I completely agree with both your assessments of the cartridges even if I would describe what I hear somewhat differently. I listened to the V15 first and I found much to like. I liked the sound of Ronstadt’s voice with this cartridge a lot; for the wrong reasons, however (more on that later). But, instrumental sounds are missing high frequency content so they sound too covered. Not meaning to take liberties, but I think this may be one of the reasons that Halcro feels it sounds “more refined “ than the ML140. Perhaps also why Dover refers to it as “colored”. When missing highs instrumental sounds tend to sound more “full bodied”. The ML140, as Dover says, sounds clangy. There is an uneven emphasis of the upper mids/lower highs range that causes the piano and vibes to sound glangy. What I meant by “I liked it for the wrong reasons” is that I think that because of its reticence in the highs the V15 hides the effects on the high frequencies of the way the vocals were recorded. I would bet that they used the Aphex Aural Exciter on the vocals. It is commonly used on pop vocals and it has a distinctive sonic signature; like a high frequency halo that rides on top of the vocals. I find it annoying as it adds what to my ears is an unnatural harshness.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exciter_(effect)

I think that the V15 masks those high frequency artifacts and the ML140 lays them bare and perhaps exaggerates them. I think this lets the V15 sound more refined by comparison.

The Ultra 500 strikes the best balance and I agree it is the best of the three. It’s tonal balance is actually closer to that of the V15 than the ML140, but not covered sounding and with more detail than the V15. It’s piano sound is by far the most natural with enough body and without the clanginess. One can still hear the processing on the vocals, but not nearly as much and doesn’t emphasize it like the ML does. Hadn’t heard this record in quite a while. Ronstadt sounds great; a nice sense of honesty and sincerity in her singing.

Yes, would be great to hear the Ultra compared to the Palladian even though the Decca is “King” in my book.

Thanks for the fun comparison.

Apology for the incorrect use of it’s/its.  Twice I overrode the spellchecker; apparently it still won ☹️.

Thanks Frogman....
I thought we had 'lost' you...😢
I was going to dedicate the next 'Shootout' to the 'late' Frogman 👅
I hope you have clicked on the 'Follow' note at the top of the discussion Thread as you will then receive an Email notification of all new Posts?

Great to have you back...

Some audiophiles seem to think that 'Uber Systems' are only worthwhile when playing perfectly recorded  Classical or Jazz recordings (unamplified instruments in real space a la H. Pearson and The Absolute Sound).
I especially have avoided most of the known 'Audiophile Test Records' in these videos, mainly because I generally don't agree they are 'great' but also because I mostly can't stand the music....🙉

I have found that ALL types of music and recordings benefit from higher resolution systems IF the system is REALLY good.
I've heard several million dollar systems I wish I hadn't.....😂

I have a large collection of Reggae, Electronica, Hip-Hop, Rap, R&B, Zydeco, Pop which ALL benefit from higher resolution playback.

This 'Shootout' is dedicated to Frogman (thus the LDR)  who I suspect is a 'closet' Hip-Hop/Rap  fan.......

SHURE ULTRA 500 MM Cartridge

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge

SHURE ULTRA 500 MM Cartridge

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge

Yeah, some do; and those are just one of the different types of knuckleheads in our hobby ☺️. All music benefits from a great sound system.

I may be mistaken, but if I interpret what you are saying correctly, and if the reference to HP means to suggest that he was that type, I would have to disagree. My sense is that his aim was to evaluate and rate components according to how, in his view, a component moved the recorded music closer of farther away from the sound of “unamplified music in a real space”. From that standpoint, I believe he was absolutely correct in his methodology. There are simply too many unknown variables in the sound of music that is amplified and/or recorded in a recording studio. This makes it almost impossible to judge how close the recording gets to a stated reference. That is certainly not to say that studio recordings don’t benefit from superb sound system. They do, big time. Makes for fantastic ear candy. In my experience most of what I consider to be, or are presented as, “audiophile” recordings do not aim for the sound of unamplified music in a real space. Like you, I usually can’t stand the music either. There are exceptions like the Reference Recordings, Chesky and others. Moreover, a good number of HP’s reference recordings were studio recordings. Don’t mean to be an apologist for a blowhard like HP, but the man had great ears, IMO. Good taste in Classical music. Rotten taste outside that genre. Re hip-hop:

No closet fan, but I don’t dismiss the genre at all. Sometimes there is nothing like a great groove with great attitude. Attitude being the operative word when it comes to hip-hop or rap. This is certainly not the thread for it, but much could be said about how the reliance on attitude relates to musical value; not to mention many other cultural values. IMO, and sorry for the rant.

On the 2Pac cut the Ultra 500 sounds impressive with an attractive fullness and “big” quality.....at first, and for a little while. Then, some of what I have always disliked about Shure’s starts to become obvious. It’s like a blanket has been thrown over the sound. A light thin blanket, like what my wife calls our “summer comforter” as opposed to the heavier winter comforter. The upper most harmonic content is missing from instrumental sounds. Everything sounds a little covered. What was an attractive fullness becomes an unnatural, borderline tubby, corpulent quality in the upper bass/lower miss that creeps into the midrange and obscures midrange detail; as if the xover point on the subs was set too high. Then there is the overall gray(ish) tonal quality that I have always disliked about Shure’s and many MM’s; a general lack of instrumental color in timbres. Don’t get me wrong, I think the Shure is a really good cartridge; but, they can’t all be great while sounding so different.

All of the above becomes very obvious when switching to the Decca. This, after compensating for the perceived lower volume level with the Decca and adjusting to the fairly dramatic difference in the “size” of the sound. With the Decca the sound is more contained and less opulent; it sounds less “impressive” at first. When the adjustment is made the good stuff happens. One hears much better harmonic extension with sounds no longer having an obvious high frequency “ceiling”. Vocals sound more natural with more obvious differences in the sound of individual singers. Musical interaction is more obvious and contributes more to the performance. Listen to the repeated synth bass line playing a rhythm that one usually associates with a scratching turntable. Indistinct and tubby with the Shure. Delineated and percussive with the Decca. Or, the synth “handclaps”. With the Shure my reaction was “what is that sound supposed to be?”. With the Decca it was obvious that, as bad as the sampled sound was, it was trying to sound like handclaps. Overall, a musically cleaner sound. I suppose one could argue that the Shure suits that music better than the Decca and some will surely prefer it with this music. I don’t.

On the Barber recording and in keeping with the “unamplified in real space” premise the differences are far greater. There is simply far more nuance in just about every aspect of that music, performance and recording; especially in the area of instrumental timbre realism. Except, perhaps, in the area of “attitude”....in the more usual, urban sense. Never mind that we have something that is much closer to what can justifiably be called a reference. In short, for me, all that I wrote about the 2Pac X 10. The Decca is in a different league.

Thanks for the comparison. Very interesting. I would bet that in spite of the fact that I think the Decca is a better cartridge than the Palladian, differences between the Shure and the Palladian are even greater. That was not a hint 😉....really.