Hi Blake,
Good post - some useful info there
Well, with the 'SA', I've already got the body-shell sorted, so yes, the next move would be to 'upgrade' the stylus, as you have outlined.
Thing is though, I'm not sure..... Don't get me wrong, I don’t doubt for one second the results you're hearing in your system and have reported here, but I'm sceptical purely because experience so far tells me that putting a 'posh' stylus on a 103 is somewhat of a mixed blessing.
I've owned almost every version of the DL-103 since using them in the early 80s, including a 103D and 103M, both with special elliptical type styli, and whilst there were clear gains in high frequency detail retrieval, the trade-off was always the loss of *some* of the 103's rhythmic alacrity, bouncy, groovy deep bass, and overall 'fun factor', for a more sober 'hi-fi' sound, which although more crisply etched and detailed, was to my ears ultimately less musically involving.
You're of course saying that won't happen if a Soundsmith line-contact stylus is fitted, and I accept that, but then, no disrespect, I only have your word for it. I could end up ruining the very characteristics I love about the 103SA to gain traits which I don't consider important for my enjoyment of music and waste a not inconsiderable sum of money in the process, both paying Soundsmith or Expert Stylus for their efforts, and then having to buy another 103SA to recover the type of sonic (and musical) presentation I like...........
Hardly cut and dried or risk-free, is it?
The fact is, there is generally *always* some sort of trade-off from changing stylus profiles on cartridges - rarely, if ever, have I heard only positives and no negatives whatsoever, as indeed was the case with my experience of the 103M and 103D.
This has also always been the case when I've compared cartridges from other manufacturers offering a choice of stylus profiles with the same cartridge, such as the Ortofon SPU and EMT, where in general I've always preferred the conical versions, as these, whilst not being as über-detailed at high frequencies, seemed to add a certain 'magic' to the way music was reproduced that appealed to me, and which I find highly addictive: call it 'soul', if you like.
In effect what I'm saying is that conical styli (when used on generators with Alnico magnets, such as with the 103, SPU, EMT, etc) appear to give music certain sonic characteristics that I'm unwilling to sacrifice in favour of more 'sparkle' or high frequency detail retrieval, which undoubtedly line-contact styli excel at.
This doesn't mean though that I'm settling for a 'rounded-off' sound (far from it!); merely that I don't require the added 'sparkle' generated by the reproduction of more high-frequency detail to 'connect' with the musical message when playing my favourite records.
It's rather like the effect of super-tweeters on loudspeakers... How many of us use them, and how many of us happily get by without them and enjoy our favourite music regardless, blissfully unaware of any lack of 'treble sparkle' or missing high-frequency detail?
Undoubtedly, super-tweeters add extension to the top end, but not always in an integrated way with the rest of the frequency range, which can then have a negative knock-on effect on the overall 'musicality' of a system. Sometimes they can work very well of course, but I've heard what I've described above with them more often than not.
Don't get me wrong, I'll certainly give your suggestion some consideration when the stylus on my 103SA wears out, but as I'm seriously considering buying an EMT XSD-15 (conical type), I'm not sure if having a 'posh tipped' 103SA, too, is somewhat of an extravagance.......
Marco.