PDA

View Full Version : Jason's Techy T/T blog and the arrival of the Jelco 'big boy' c/w



jakwb
23-03-2009, 00:38
{Moved from Jason's thread in the The Gallery area}


Marco,
I look foward to your answers and suggestions when you have time.
:)

Anyone else want to give their opinion on a good phono stage for me to look into - your suggestions are welcome.

Jim, to answer your original question. I think you will probably have good luck with the PEQ3 and your SUT. I picked up my AT while on a business trip to Japan. It wasn't much money (<$200) and has served me well. It's very quiet and sounds very good with MM and MC carts. I really don't have any complaints, but I'm just at the stage where I'm willing to invest more to try to get an even better sound.

Jason

Marco
23-03-2009, 10:21
Hi Jason,


Some recent updates on my rig:
1. I scrapped my Sumiko & Al spacer/weight combo and picked up a Audio Technica LH-18 headshell. This is a no brainer if you're using a Denon 103 on a Technics 1210. The headshell is great and cartridge alignment is automatic with the threaded holes.


Nice one. The Sumiko is a fine headshell but owing both and comparing them side-by-side using various 103s, the LH-18 beats the Sumiko by a significant margin, giving the sound much more depth and solidity, more impact in the bass, and making the top-end and midrange sweeter and clearer. It's all to do with controlling resonance properly and optimising mass. And like you say, alignment is a breeze. It's as if the LH-18 was purposely built for the 103!


2. Bought a Jelco SA750 off Ebay and ordered the arm plate from Dave at SoundHiFi, so when that get's here I'll be mounting it up. (any advice?)


Dave's your man for that. Did you get the Jelco second-hand or something - if not why didn't you buy it (along with the arm plate) from Dave?


The current DL103 (standard) with my AT PEQ20 really set the hook in me. Next I feel like trying out a 103R and would like to upgrade my phono stage.


Well if you feel like exploring the 103R route give me a shout as I'm selling my spare one. It's mint, boxed as new, and has only had 100 hours or so running-in time :)


Marco, I've read your posts were you say that a SUT in combo with a good quality MM phono stage is the way to go. Anyone have recommendations for a good phono stage in the <$1000 (~700GBP) range.


Before we go any further with that one, do you have a preference for valve or solid-state, or are you not bothered?


Also, I see lots of folks using the AU23 but that's pricing out near $1000 in the US. I found a local seller for a Denon HA500 (I do realize it's not a SUT but a MC head amp). If I pick that up, what would be a good phono stage to mate with it?


I have an HA500 and it is excellent, if different from the A23. Transformers always give the presentation a different character compared to active devices. As far as SUTs are concerned, with the budget you have the Denon AU-300LC is a no-brainer:

http://www.audiocubes2.com/brand/Denon/product/Denon_AU-300LC_MC_Cartridge_Boosting_Trance.html

Why not get one and simply plug it into your PEQ20 in MM mode and see how it sounds? You need an SUT anyway and if you get better results with the 103 than you do at the moment with the PEQ20 in MC mode (which I suspect you will) then you're onto a winner and haven't spent much! :cool:

Marco.

jakwb
23-03-2009, 18:32
Hi Marco,
Agree with you completely about the LH-18. I think it's the single best purchase/upgrade I've made this year. Love it. :)

Regarding the Jelco - I had been considering a tonearm change and had narrowed it down to a Jelco for the price and reveiws. Plus I think they're dead sexy looking. I didn't buy it from Dave because it was before I knew about Dave's site. It was like a chicken and egg thing. I bought the tonearm new from a seller on Ebay and then when I was looking for an arm plate, I stumbled upon Dave's 1210 page.
I'm a little bit nervous about the arm switch out. I have never operated on my table before. Is there anything I need to look out for?

I'm definitely interested in your spare 103R. Let's talk in private mail.

Regarding a phono stage, this is where I am very inexperienced because I only have 1 data point - my current one. I know how different cartridges sound in my set-up, but I don't what kind of difference to expect with different phono stages. Is the difference as dramatic as a different cartridge or is it more subtle?

I can pick up that HA500 locally for a reasonable price and play around with using the MM input on my current AT. (good idea :)).

I've been looking at both valve and SS units. I'm very curious about valve units. I've read great reviews on the Puresound P10. Do you think that would mate up well with the HA500?

Thanks, Jason

Marco
24-03-2009, 06:25
Just going out for the day, Jason - will come back to you on this later :)

Send me a PM if you want to discuss the 103R :cool:

Laters,
Marco.

Marco
25-03-2009, 09:32
Hi Jason,


Regarding the Jelco - I had been considering a tonearm change and had narrowed it down to a Jelco for the price and reveiws. Plus I think they're dead sexy looking. I didn't buy it from Dave because it was before I knew about Dave's site. It was like a chicken and egg thing. I bought the tonearm new from a seller on Ebay and then when I was looking for an arm plate, I stumbled upon Dave's 1210 page.
I'm a little bit nervous about the arm switch out. I have never operated on my table before. Is there anything I need to look out for?


No worries. Have you got a suitable arm plate with which to fit the Jelco, and also a tonearm cable? If so, the table will need to be dismantled from the underneath (it's just a series of screws) and the rubber base and bottom plate removed in order for the new arm plate and assembly to be secured and fitted to the top plate of the table. The process is a little time-consuming but not too difficult. Dave will be able to assist via PM or email if necessary :)


I'm definitely interested in your spare 103R. Let's talk in private mail.


PM sent :smoking:


Regarding a phono stage, this is where I am very inexperienced because I only have 1 data point - my current one. I know how different cartridges sound in my set-up, but I don't what kind of difference to expect with different phono stages. Is the difference as dramatic as a different cartridge or is it more subtle?


I guess it depends what you mean by "dramatic". Phono stages certainly have a significant impact on the sound - it's a different effect to changing a cartridge but equally as fundamental. Quite simply, if the phono stage isn't up to it then you'll never hear what your chosen cartridge is capable of.

With the Denon DL-103 (and its variants), in my experience, the most important thing is to use it with a properly matched SUT or head amp (such as the HA-500, A23 SUT, or Denon's own SUTs) to ensure that the cartridge is supplied with the correct impedance and loading, and the gain step-up ratio is optimal. The type of RIAA (47k Ohms) MM stage is less critical - simply go for the highest quality option within your price range.

If I were you, the first thing I'd do is try the 103R with the HA-500 into the MM input of your PEQ20, and take things from there. I think you might be impressed with the results ;)

If you then feel that you want to spend more on a phono stage we can look at that later and I'll give you some suitable suggestions within your available budget.


I've been looking at both valve and SS units. I'm very curious about valve units. I've read great reviews on the Puresound P10. Do you think that would mate up well with the HA500?


Yes it would - that was one of the suggestions I was going to make, amongst others. But I'd see how the HA-500/PEQ20 combo works first - take it a step at a time. Sometimes if you make too many changes at once it's difficult to assess what is most responsible for the differences you're hearing.

Hope this helps :cool:

Marco.

jakwb
26-03-2009, 07:05
Marco,
I did pick up the Denon HA500 and am running it through the MM of my AT preamp. That with the AT LH-18 has really improved the sound of my 103. You are correct that when you put the right pieces in place, the cartridge sings. I really hadn't heard it till now. The bass is much tighter and the mids and highs are beautiful. I look foward to seeing what the 103R sounds like compared to the standard 103.

I did order an arm plate from Sound HiFi made for the Jelco and am waiting for it to arrive. It made it to the US but the USPS tracking is horrible and it's just been telling me that it arrived in NY a week ago with no other updates. :confused: I have the Jelco tonearm cable as well, so I'll let you know how things go.

I will hold off on the new preamp for now. I am curious about how a tube one would sound so I'm sure I'll revisit the topic in the not too distant future.

Thanks, Jason

jonners
26-03-2009, 12:15
Jason -

I seem to be following a similar path to yours, so I hope you don't mind me posting my findings in your thread.

My Denon DL103 arrived this morning :) and I soon had it installed in the headshell of my Jelco SA-750 on the 1210. I used some lead sheet (about 1mm thick) for extra mass between the cart and the headshell. The counterweight ended up being almost as far back as it could go.

Straight out of the box, within 5 seconds of putting on Charles Lloyd 'Fish Out of Water' I just went WOW! After the DL110 which I had been using before, this was like going from hi fi to real music. All the positive things people say about the 103 were immediately apparent - the instruments filling the acoustic space, the lovely realistic piano tone, fullness of the midrange etc.

Several things are not yet optimal: At present the arm slopes down towards the cart slightly, so I'll have to make a thicker spacer. Also, I'm using it into the 2k impedance that I had for the 110 and I have to wind the gain up to max. That should soon be sorted - I've just bought a Newcomb TR-91 step-up transformer on eBay. I've also just received a 21V power supply from Paul Hynes, and I'm going to compare that with my current Diy supply using a 317 regulator.

Marco - are you using the standard counterweight on your Jelco arm?

John

Marco
26-03-2009, 14:15
Guys, just busy at the minute - will come back on this later :)

Marco.

jakwb
27-03-2009, 07:09
John,
No problem at all. I'm very interested in your experience as we are following a very similar path. :)

Did you install the Jelco yourself? Did you use an arm plate from Dave (Sound HiFi)? I am wondering what kind of VTA I will have with the Jelco and if I'll need a spacer with my 103 on the AT LH-18.

How much mass did the lead spacer add? I'm also curious about the counterweight. I just noticed that Dave sells a heavier counterweight for the 750. I wonder if that's needed when using a 103 with a headshell mass 18g or over.

Last thing - (this may be a really dumb question, but I've never mounted a new tonearm before) - the bottom of the tonearm is like a spindle that sits in the base and the base gets screwed into the arm plate. What keeps the spindle aligned in the correct position and prevents it from turning?:confused:
Jason

jonners
27-03-2009, 08:59
Hi Jason

I installed the Jelco myself, using my diy arm mount described here: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2173
I have the arm as low as possible, but I reckon I need a spacer about 3mm thick.

I didn't weigh the lead spacer but I've calculated its weight to be around 3.5g. I don't know about the extra counterweight - Dave or Marco should be able to help here.

The arm spindle is secured by a hex-headed bolt in the side of the base. This also allows height adjustment.

John

jonners
30-03-2009, 22:28
Some recent updates on my rig:
1. I scrapped my Sumiko & Al spacer/weight combo and picked up a Audio Technica LH-18 headshell. This is a no brainer if you're using a Denon 103 on a Technics 1210. The headshell is great and cartridge alignment is automatic with the threaded holes.


Today I received the LH-18 that I bought from Marco (thanks for the fast delivery, M.) I totally agree with Jason and Marco that it's a great upgrade. When you say cartridge alignment is 'automatic', Jason, you presumably mean that the threaded holes ensure that the cart is square in the headshell? To and fro alignment can still be adjusted as necessary by moving the shell in relation to the connector housing.

I'm using a rosewood spacer 4mm thick and I've added mass to the counterweight by wrapping lead strip around it. The lead is 2cm wide and 0.4mm thick, with a sticky backing. It does the job well.

I've also got my newly-arrived Newcomb TR-91 transformers installed. I haven't found much about these on the net, but one or two people seem to reckon them. I had to do a bit of rewiring so that I could use the 200 ohm inputs instead of the 50 ohm, and I had to change the earthing arrangements to eliminate hum. The sound I'm getting with these is excellent, and I can quite see why many folks favour using transformers with the DL-103.

jakwb
30-03-2009, 23:30
Hi John,
Yes, I love the pre-threaded holes. I installed my Jelco tonearm over the weekend and have some updates to share later. :)

Quick one though - I quickly realized I needed a spacer with the 103 on the AT LH-18 and fashioned a crude one out of oak wood - about 3mm thick. Sounds like you did something similar John. Do you have any pics of your set up? Or pics of how you modified the counterweight?

I devised another inexpensive home fix for that one that lets the counterweight ride closer to the pivot. Do you know what a steel shaft coupling w/ fixed nut is? I screwed one onto the back of the tonearm like an aux counterweight and now my stock counterweight isn't all the way at the end of the arm.

By the way,I did check out the pics of your Rosewood armboard. It is quite nice. I admire that kind of woodworking talent. Wish I had the skill.

Jason

Marco
31-03-2009, 07:58
Today I received the LH-18 that I bought from Marco (thanks for the fast delivery, M.) I totally agree with Jason and Marco that it's a great upgrade.


Hi John,

No worries mate. I try to be as efficient as possible: customer service, and all that. I guess it's a discipline that comes from running your own business :)

Regarding counterweight balances and the Jelco SA-750D, I would urge anyone using a 103 in a heavy headshell (LH-18 or 'weighted' standard headshell) to invest in the new 'big boy' Jelco counterweights. These (once reversed onto the back of the arm tube) allow the c/w to be positioned almost right up against the bearing (pivot point), when optimal VTA of 2.7g has been achieved, thus reducing inertia and making for a pretty big sonic improvement.

You might think that your DL-103 sounds great at the moment in a heavy headshell on an SA-750D with the stock counterweight balance teetering on the end of the arm tube, *BUT* I can assure you that you're probably only realising 85% of the potential of the cartridge. Installing one of the new heavyweight c/ws adds solidity and authority to the sound, with bass gaining significantly in terms of depth and weight - honestly, it's not like the 103 is lacking in that area, but with the heavyweight c/w in place it's as if another octave of extension has been added, and the increased bass weight is as tight, tuneful and rhythmic as ever with an optimised 103! The bigger counterweight also makes the arm look rather more 'grown-up' and sexy.

Form a queue now to Dave's website, folks, as this one is a total no-brainer :smoking:

With regards to spacers/'cartridge stabilisers', I'd say that in terms of thickness, 3-4mm of brass metal is about right (lighter materials will obviously need to be thicker in order to provide sufficient extra mass) as this should give significantly more flexibility with VTA and also enough added mass to 'bolster' the stock headshell on most tonearms (even when a Sumiko is used, which is identical to the stock headshell on an SA-750D). Be careful, however, that you don't overdo the mass, as any more than a maximum of 20g (including cartridge leads and fixings) is liable to make the sound 'thick' and overblown, rather like the effect of dialling in too much VTF.

Anyone adding spacers to an LH-18 should bear this in mind especially, as there is already 18g in place without cartridge leads and screws, so I would recommend that the screws used are as light as possible to keep the added mass to a minimum when adding spacers, which really should be made from plastic or as light a material as is available.

Marco.

jonners
31-03-2009, 08:09
Hi Jason

Here's a pic showing the modified counterweight. As you can see, the lead strip is wound concentrically round the weight. The strip is 2cm wide, which happens to match the length of the weight. It's necessary to set vtf with a balance now of course, since the calibrated dial won't be accurate.

Marco
31-03-2009, 08:17
That's a good idea, John - like it! :)

Where's a good place to buy the lead strip?

Marco.

jonners
31-03-2009, 09:04
That's a good idea, John - like it! :)

Where's a good place to buy the lead strip?

Marco.

"Lead flashing for dolls' houses", would you believe! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Lead-Flashing-for-Dolls-Houses-Self-Adhesive-Strip_W0QQitemZ350175289532QQihZ022QQcategoryZ7000 1QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l126 2?_trksid=p1742.m153.l1262

Marco
31-03-2009, 09:47
Nice one - I'm sure that'll be of use to people :)

It certainly provides an inexpensive, if less elegant, solution to those needing the extra mass of the larger and heavier Jelco counterweight balance.

The other thing I would recommend to people is the sonic and adjustability benefits (in terms of VTA) of fitting Dave's new bespoke arm plates for the Jelcos. These are made in Germany and are built to a very high standard to match the finish of Technics SL decks - either the silver SL-1200 or black SL-1210.

Not only do they look fabulous, adding rigidity by creating a firmer platform to which the arm base is fixed (and I suspect lowering vibration transmitted into the main part of the arm as a result), but it also improves the sound quite markedly, as the base of the arm plate also sits lower into the recess of the deck, thus allowing the arm itself overall to be lowered by a significant margin, facilitating more accurate adjustment of VTA, and obviating the need for headshell spacers when using a DL-103.

All of this (including the addition of the Jelco heavy counterweight) I've had carried out recently by Dave and it has noticeably improved the performance of my 1210, along with another little device*.

After experimenting quite extensively recently with headshell spacers/weights with a combination of headshells and my DL-103SA on the SA-750D I have found that the best sound is obtained by fitting Dave's new arm plate (or if one similar can be made via D.I.Y), which allows the arm to sit lower in the deck, facilitating the accurate setting of VTA, together with a suitably heavy headshell (17-18g as standard) with no added spacers/weights fitted on the headhell and the cartridge firmly coupled (but not over-tightened) to the headshell. In my system at least, headshell spacers degrade the sound, possibly through adding resonance and/or creating a 'lossy' form of coupling, providing of course one can add the necessary extra mass (and achieve correct VTA) by using a suitably heavy headshell and appropriate arm plate without the need for adding headshell weights.

It's similar to the effect gained by using only one (good) mat on the 1210, rather than a series of mats (say an SDS Isoplatmat and a Herbie's) - the Herbie's (or Dave's) mat alone works much better due to a firmer coupling of the mat to the platter (and the record to both), and so it is similarly with a cartridge and headshell. As always though, this may be system and/or set-up dependant so it's one to suck and see, however results and experience suggests that it is probably the way to go where possible.

*The Time-Step PSU (yes, I've now done the comparison and in my system the TS outperforms the KAB - see separate review later) ;)

Marco.

P.S I'll move some of these posts to a dedicated thread in Analogue Art later.

jakwb
31-03-2009, 17:28
the base of the arm plate also sits lower into the recess of the deck, thus allowing the arm itself overall to be lowered by a significant margin, facilitating more accurate adjustment of VTA, and obviating the need for headshell spacers when using a DL-103.

Hi Marco,
I am using Dave's arm plate and agree that is fantastic. It fits perfectly and provides a very secure mounting for the Jelco. Regarding the VTA however, I was having an issue using my 103 in LH-18 with out a spacer.
I used this combination in my stock Technics arm and the back of the headshell would only be a few mm above the record surface but this was never an issue unless the record was very warped.

When I put the combo (w/o spacer) on the Jelco arm, the arm was riding so low that it was rubbing on the arm rest and the arm does sit lower so the back of the headshell was virtually touching the record surface. That's why I added the spacer.
I am puzzled about how to get the VTA correct and use a 103 w/o spacer on a headshell like the LH-18. :confused:

Also, thanks for confirming that Dave does sell a heavier counterweight that fits the SA750. I thought I saw one on his website.

Thanks
Jason

Dave Cawley
31-03-2009, 17:39
The arm rest is adjustable, but the LH-18 rides too low in any arm, hence my solution that gives a total of 20gm mass with the standard headshell :kiss:


http://www.soundhifi.com/Stabiliser.jpg


Regards

Dave

jakwb
31-03-2009, 17:49
Hi Dave,
What is the mass of your Cu spacer? 6grams?

I have found that issue with AT headshell. I know I didn't need anymore mass, so I made a spacer from wood. It weighs under 2 grams.

Does a spacer have any impact on the sound of the 103? For example, does a Cu one sound different than Al or wood?:eyebrows:

Jason

Marco
31-03-2009, 17:53
Hi Jason,


I am puzzled about how to get the VTA correct and use a 103 w/o spacer on a headshell like the LH-18.


The only way is to use a thicker mat, which does the same job as the spacer without imposing a negative effect on the cartridge... Therefore the answer is to remove the spacer and add the thicker Herbie's-style mat, available from Dave :)

I would also add that Dave's 'cartridge stabiliser' solution above is very effective with lighter headshells than the LH-18. A fairly thick brass 'plate' such as this will be subject to little, if any, resonance, and in fact would add some much needed rigidity and damping to lightweight headshells.

Marco.

Dave Cawley
31-03-2009, 17:59
It is 8gm and soft copper. It gives the 103 something to "work against". A soft spacer won't couple well.

:bag:

Regards

Dave

Marco
31-03-2009, 18:04
Agreed :)

Marco.

jakwb
31-03-2009, 18:15
Thanks guys,
I'll have to look into the mats (and big boy counterweight). I don't want to give up on my AT LH-18.

My 103 is sounding simply amazing right now. I'm loving it. :lol:


Dave,
One other thing - don't know if Marco told you, but I bought his old KAB PSU. He told me that you can assist me in how to convert it from 220 to 120V. I'll buy you a virtual beer. :cool:

Jason

Dave Cawley
01-04-2009, 11:46
Hi Jason

I can get you going no problem! When you get it open up the box. It should be obvious what to do, but if not just send me a photo and I'll give you step by step instructions.

:bag:

Regards

Dave

Ammonite Audio
01-04-2009, 17:46
I've also just received a 21V power supply from Paul Hynes, and I'm going to compare that with my current Diy supply using a 317 regulator.

John

John

Have you tried out the Paul Hynes 21v supply yet? I had one coming from Paul for the SL-1210 to pitch against the Time Step PSU, but he is now making it up to power my Kenwood DD instead. As a dramatically more advanced supply than any LM317 variant could ever be, the Paul Hynes PSU should be a clear improvement - I await your thoughts with interest!

Marco
01-04-2009, 18:04
What the state of play now with your Techy, Shugs? There have been no updates on your blog :)

Marco.

jonners
01-04-2009, 18:27
John

Have you tried out the Paul Hynes 21v supply yet? I had one coming from Paul for the SL-1210 to pitch against the Time Step PSU, but he is now making it up to power my Kenwood DD instead. As a dramatically more advanced supply than any LM317 variant could ever be, the Paul Hynes PSU should be a clear improvement - I await your thoughts with interest!

Yes the Paul Hynes psu is connected up but I haven't yet had time to evaluate it compared to my 317 supply. I need to get used to the other changes that I've recently made in my vinyl system before making the comparison.

Marco
01-04-2009, 18:31
How's the LH-18 doing, John - still hitting the spot? :)

Marco.

Ammonite Audio
01-04-2009, 18:45
What the state of play now with your Techy, Shugs? There have been no updates on your blog :)

Marco.

It's sitting in the spare room, while the Kenwood sings! I am going to take it do Dave for the motor dynamics mod when I have a bit of time, and maybe that will bring it up to where I'd like it to be! We shall see (or rather hear).

While I am close to making up my mind on the Technics, a further £60 to give it a chance is sensible. If it doesn't work out, then someone will get the chance to get a virtually new deck, with Time Step PSU, AO modified Technics arm, OL Rega armboard, and a pair of Sumiko headshells!

Marco
01-04-2009, 19:02
Sounds good! However, why not simply try another arm on it in conjunction with the Time Step? That may just make all the difference you need... ;)

Ask Dave to fit a Jelco while you're there! I'd also be interested in Dave's opinion of the Kenwood.

Marco.

Ammonite Audio
01-04-2009, 19:12
Sounds good! However, why not simply try another arm on it in conjunction with the Time Step? That may just make all the difference you need... ;)

Ask Dave to fit a Jelco while you're there! I'd also be interested in Dave's opinion of the Kenwood.

Marco.

I'm not spending any more big bundles of cash on it - the motor dynamics mod is the last part of the experiment, particularly as the Kenwood has more to give once its Paul Hynes PSU has arrived.

I did have a chat with Dave at Heathrow on Saturday, and with hindsight, a reconditioned SP10 would have been better value than all this fiddling with the SL-1210! I had no idea that an SP10 was such a reasonable price from Sound HiFi.

Marco
01-04-2009, 19:15
He'll fit one for free to try and you can judge the results yourself! However if you don't want to go there that's fine :)


particularly as the Kenwood has more to give once its Paul Hynes PSU has arrived.


In your opinion only, so far, of course...

I know of Dave's "reconditioned" SP10s, but the last I seen they were lying on the floor of his workshop, far from being 'reconditioned'... ;)

If some of Dave's SP10s are 'ready to go', or imminent, I'd like to know about it!!

Marco.

Ammonite Audio
01-04-2009, 19:22
In your opinion only, so far, of course...

Marco.

Quite.

Marco
01-04-2009, 19:28
Cool. What exactly did Dave say about the availability of his SP10s?

Marco.

Ammonite Audio
01-04-2009, 19:47
I didn't ask, but he did tell me that rough old ones make a good buy, as the costs of reconditioning are reasonable, and all the chips etc are readily available. In essence, the advice was not to pay over the odds for a 'good' one, when he can sell a fully reworked one for (iirc) around £750. I may be wrong on that, and I'm sure Dave would be the first to correct me, but when I consider how much the SL-1210 has cost me so far, the SP10 in a plain plinth is the same sort of money. I've never heard an SP10, and I'm not about to go after one now, but it was a fairly illuminating conversation with Dave.

Marco
01-04-2009, 20:02
Interesting stuff, Shugs. Having spoken to Dave only last week about this matter when I was down at his place I suspect that given his workload at the moment you'd have a long wait for a completed reconditioned one to be ready for sale! ;)

However, the point you're making is extremely valid and one I wholly agree with. I have seen the 'gubbins' that makes up an SP10 (he showed me), particularly the motor unit, which is a different ball game compared to the one in the SL-1210.

Bear in mind though that Dave is on record here as saying that a fully modified SL-1200 or 1210 is 95% as good as an equivalent SP10, so it would appear that the obvious superiority of the parts used in an SP10 doesn't necessarily translate into huge differences in sound quality. This is certainly borne out by my listening experiences to both so far, although I would expect one of Dave's reconditioned units to raise the bar a bit further, hence why I am interested in buying one when they become available :)

Sifting through the second-hand knackered ones, hammered in radio stations and broadcasting studios, and all the hassle this entails to find a good one, is the only reason I haven't bought an SP10 so far.

Marco.

Dave Cawley
01-04-2009, 21:34
Yes 5%. And yes, my work load is considerable. But he who waits; gets the golden goose, with egg fried rice :kiss:

:bag:

Regards

Dave

Marco
01-04-2009, 21:49
Oh don't worry, I'm waiting!! :dummy: :kiss:

Marco.

P.S You have an email regarding silver tonearm cable ;)

jonners
01-04-2009, 22:25
How's the LH-18 doing, John - still hitting the spot? :)

Marco.

Yes indeed. I thought I might try different materials for the spacer - they will need to be lighter than Dave's copper one, though. A bit of spruce tonewood may go there next.

Marco
01-04-2009, 22:26
Oooh, fancy-dancy... :eyebrows:

We want pics when it's done! :)

Marco.

jakwb
02-04-2009, 07:50
Now that Marco upgraded to the Time Step PSU, his KAB PSU found a new home in the US.

Dave,
I opened the box, and it's not obvious (to me at least:scratch:) on what to do to get this thing converted to 120V.

Appreciate your gracious offer to give me step by step instructions. Here's a pic to guide us.:)

http://i723.photobucket.com/albums/ww237/jakwb/KAB-PSU.jpg

Jason

Marco
02-04-2009, 08:10
Hi Jason,

You may find it best to start a separate thread for this :)

Marco.

Prince of Darkness
02-04-2009, 18:32
I expect it's just a matter of connecting the transformer primaries in parallel instead of series.;)

jonners
02-04-2009, 19:21
Oooh, fancy-dancy... :eyebrows:

We want pics when it's done! :)

Marco.

Well I'll see...doing fancy-dancy doesn't leave a lot of time for photography. Anyway, how about a piccy of your 'big boy'? I mean the counterweight! :lol:

jakwb
02-04-2009, 19:44
Thanks for your input Kevin. :) I'm not sure how to do what you described though.

I've started a new thread on this topic in DIY. We can pick-up our discussion there.

jonners
16-04-2009, 17:01
I've modified my arm mount so that the arm sits lower and I can now mount the DL103 in the LH-18 headshell without using a spacer and have the arm horizontal.

Sounds great, though I begin to hear what people mean about the shortcomings of the 103 at the top end. Cymbals, for example sound just a little 'papery' rather than 'sparkly', but it's not a major issue and I have really got round to tweaking the settings yet.

Tony G
16-04-2009, 21:22
Have to say that your DIY arm mount using the original Technics surround/mount ring, looks much more "proper" than the other offerings.
Nicely done. :)

jonners
16-04-2009, 21:34
Thanks Tony.

Further to my previous post: I'm finding - as did Jason - that there's now not quite enough clearance between the disc and the connector end of the headshell. (It's OK until a warped disc comes along). So a thin spacer is going to have to come back in.

jakwb
17-04-2009, 07:03
John,
In my tinkerings, I've found that my 103 and 103R both sound better (considerably) with a light wooden spacer between the LH-18 and the cartridge. :confused:

With my armplate, I can lower the Jelco arm and arm rest low enough to use the 103 on the LH-18 with correct VTA (albeit a very small clearance between the back of the headshell and the record); but when I do this, the 103 and 103R were both sounding a little off. I put the wood spacer back in and they sound great! :smoking:

I don't know what to attribute it to - can't imagine it's mass as the spacer weighs less than 1g, but it makes a huge difference.
Jason

jonners
17-04-2009, 07:34
Jason -

What kind of wood are you using and how thick?

Magna Audio
17-04-2009, 15:02
Wood - yeah will have to try that.
I was using a 1mm thick light alloy spacer on my Rega RB250 arm for the AT 33 PTG - could not get VTA right otherwise.

jakwb
17-04-2009, 17:13
John,
It's nothing exotic. Just some oak I think that I had a thin enough piece of lying around. It's about 3-4mm thick. It helps with the VTA and the sound is better.
Are you using a wood spacer? What wood and thickness are you using?
You have shown your woodworking talents here. I may ask you to craft me a fine tonewood spacer. :)

In my experience, when you get the 103 "tuned in" correctly, it's very apparent. It sounds great. When it's off, it can sound harsh or too heavy or muddy in the bass. When the conditions are right, the bass is tight and the sound is very balanced.

jonners
17-04-2009, 19:02
Jason - If you're into trying different woods I could send you a few samples to craft away yourself ;) - but tbh I haven't heard much difference between different woods or indeed between spacer/no spacer.

What does seem to make a noticeable difference with the 103 for me is VTA. I wish the Jelco was as easy to fine-tune as the Technics in this respect.

Tony G
17-04-2009, 22:42
WRT to the ease of VTA adjustment it has occurred to me to ask Pete Riggle of VTAF fame if his adaptor for Rega and some other arms might be adapted to the Jelco.
Providing sufficient space can be made for it in the mount area, something I have yet to determine.
Then again, the Jelco might not be happy with the "floating" mount that gives.

jonners
19-04-2009, 10:08
What I said in post no.47 about the shortcomings of the DL-103 regarding the treble has completely changed since I removed the plastic body (see the 'Nuding' thread). The treble has now really woken up and is significantly more lively and sparkly.

I've now changed back from my Altec 15095 to the Newcomb TR-91 SUT -the latter gives a richer sound which is no longer deficient at the top.