Denon DL103 or 103R ???

[Haselsh1]

Now come on, there must be more to this than some fancy copper coils with very little impurity in them...? Someone please tell me that the DL103R is worth the extra money because to me it resembles a waste of finances and the difference is fairly substantial.

[Ali Tait]

Sounded good to me. Here's where I got mine, a good price I thought-

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BRAND-NEW-HAND-SELECTED-DENON-DL-103R-MOVING-COIL-MC-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-DL103R-/121503051306?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item1c4a256e2a

[walpurgis]

I've had both. The 103 is not something I'd use again. The 103R however, is in a different league and probably THE best low output MC at the price. It's outstanding.

[twotone]

I've had both. The 103 is not something I'd use again. The 103R however, is in a different league and probably THE best low output MC at the price. It's outstanding.

Interesting, would it work with a Micro Seiki MA-202 & HA-202 headshell Geoff?

I've no idea of the arm's effective mass as it doesn't seem to be published anywhere.

PS, think 2juki is selling the cart cheaper than that link above.

[Ali Tait]

Not with matched channels AFAIK.

[twotone]

Not with matched channels AFAIK.

Take it that means the 'Level L&R 0.31 mv' thing?

Thanks

[Ali Tait]

Aye.

[Marco]

Hi Shaun,

Well, the fancy copper coils are the only real differences between them, which do appear also to cause electrical differences, as the output impedance of the stock 103 is 40ohms, and the 103R, 14ohms. That can have an effect on the loading value that the cartridge likes to ‘see’, and in turn this will affect how both cartridges sound.

In my experience, the 103R is more detailed, but also notably brighter sounding, so be careful that your system can handle the somewhat ‘toppy’ tonal balance, although much will depend on the phono stage and tonearm used. In terms of the latter, you must ensure that there is sufficient mass to allow the cartridge to perform as intended (and that applies to both the 103 and 103R).

Headshell mass is of paramount importance, as that is what controls the overall effective mass of the arm most, so if you have a tonearm with a detachable headshell, the latter should be at least 16g, or preferably 18g, in order to allow the cartridge to perform optimally. I believe you have a Sumiko headshell? If so, you will need to up the mass accordingly, from the stock 12g.

Get it right, and either cartridge will reward you with a beautifully fluid and textured musical presentation, with serious gravitas in the bass, the likes of which completely escapes other moving coil cartridges at or near this price point.

Marco.

[Marco]

Not with matched channels AFAIK.

Yes, try and obtain one with a balanced channel output, as that makes quite a difference to stereo separation and imaging.

Marco.

[walpurgis]

would it work with a Micro Seiki MA-202 & HA-202 headshell Geoff?

The 202 is not an arm I've used, but it is a highish mass device and I reckon it would be fine with the Denon. The 202 headshell is quite a decent item by the way.

[Marco]

Interesting, would it work with a Micro Seiki MA-202 & HA-202 headshell Geoff?

I've no idea of the arm's effective mass as it doesn't seem to be published anywhere.

PS, think 2juki is selling the cart cheaper than that link above.

Hi Tony,

The Micro Seiki arms are a match made in heaven with the DL-103, providing that you fit a high-mass headshell. That done, the results will stun you! :)

Marco.

[walpurgis]

The HA-202 headshell is a stiff and solid, machined alloy casting Marco. I think it should be fine. Lovely quality too.

http://i61.tinypic.com/2a0hveh.jpg

[Marco]

Sure, but it depends on how much it weighs, pure and simple. Trust me, optimising tonearm effective mass with any DL-103 is absolutely essential if you want to hear the cartridge at its best :)

Most of those Jap tonearms, including Denon’s own (which are remarkably similar to the MS) are fitted with fairly lightweight headshells (8 or 9g) and that simply isn’t heavy enough, no matter how solidly they’ve been made. I use my (stock) DL-103 with a 19g Fidelity Research S/3 headshell (in my Ortofon arm), and in terms of mass, is pretty much spot-on.

You have to remember the type of massive tonearms, used in broadcasting studios in the 1960s, that would’ve originally partnered the DL-103, which harks from an era where high-mass was king!

*That* is what you’re trying to replicate today, otherwise you end up creating a square peg in a round hole, as it were…. This is my specific area of expertise, gleaned from 30+ years of experimenting with this cartridge, so I know what I’m talking about here :)

I’d expect the Micro Seiki 9” arms to have an effective mass similar to that of a Jelco SA-750 (15g, including headshell).

Marco.

[twotone]

The 202 is not an arm I've used, but it is a highish mass device and I reckon it would be fine with the Denon. The 202 headshell is quite a decent item by the way.

Thanks Geoff, my Quad pre-amp has a MC board but I've no idea if the Denon 103R would have enought gain for it.

Page 10 of the manual below states (I think) 200mv with a load of 100ohms/22 nf

http://kenrockwell.com/audio/quad/images/34-preamp/Quad-34-Mk2.pdf

[twotone]

Sure, but it depends on how much it weighs, pure and simple. Trust me, optimising tonearm effective mass with any DL-103 is absolutely essential if you want to hear the cartridge at its best :)

Most of those Jap tonearms, including Denon’s own (which are remarkably similar to the MS) are fitted with fairly lightweight headshells (8 or 9g) and that simply isn’t heavy enough, no matter how solidly they’ve been made. I use my (stock) DL-103 with a 19g Fidelity Research S/3 headshell (in my Ortofon arm), and in terms of mass, is pretty much spot-on.

You have to remember the type of massive tonearms, used in broadcasting studios in the 1960s, that would’ve originally partnered the DL-103, which harks from an era where high-mass was king!

*That* is what you’re trying to replicate today, otherwise you end up creating a square peg in a round hole, as it were…. This is my specific area of expertise, gleaned from 30+ years of experimenting with this cartridge, so I know what I’m talking about here :)

I’d expect the Micro Seiki 9” arms to have an effective mass similar to that of a Jelco SA-750 (15g, including headshell).

Marco.

Thanks guys, just weighed the MS headshell with the reson cart attached which is 17g, the reson weighs 6.3g plus the fasteners so likely the headshell weighs just less than 10g.

I've never hear a LOMC in my system and the Denon 103R really appeals on a number of levels.

Sorely tempted here:eek:

BTW, I've the MS supplimentary tone arm weight.

[twotone]

Sounded good to me. Here's where I got mine, a good price I thought-

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BRAND-NEW-HAND-SELECTED-DENON-DL-103R-MOVING-COIL-MC-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-DL103R-/121503051306?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item1c4a256e2a

Ali, did you pay duty etc on the cart?

[Ali Tait]

Can't remember. If I did it wasn't a lot.

[Marco]

Thanks guys, just weighed the MS headshell with the reson cart attached which is 17g, the reson weighs 6.3g plus the fasteners so likely the headshell weighs just less than 10g.


That’s pretty much what I thought, Tony, so you *need* a heavier headshell, in order to ‘max out’ a 103. Don’t get me wrong, it won’t sound broken fitted to the one you’ve got (far from it) - just not as magical as it can sound when mass has been optimised :)

Other than the headshell, your MS tonearm is tailor-made for a DL-103. If you want to do things right, you should also look at SUTs and head amps, as the 103 likes best to be used into an MM input, in conjunction with a quality SUT or head amp. If your Quad has an MM input, then use that with an appropriate SUT or head amp, and the results will blow your mind…

Marco.

[Marco]

Can't remember. If I did it wasn't a lot.

It’s pot luck, depending on whether your shipment slips through customs or not! ;)

I paid duty on mine.

Marco.

[walpurgis]

Thanks guys, just weighed the MS headshell with the reson cart attached which is 17g, the reson weighs 6.3g plus the fasteners so likely the headshell weighs just less than 10g.

I've never hear a LOMC in my system and the Denon 103R really appeals on a number of levels.

Sorely tempted here:eek:

BTW, I've the MS supplimentary tone arm weight.


The DL-103R weighs 8.5g. The 202 headshell was expected to work with Micro Seiki's own low output MCs which weighed 7.5g.

[Ali Tait]

That’s pretty much what I thought, Tony, so you *need* a heavier headshell, in order to ‘max out’ a 103. Don’t get me wrong, it won’t sound broken fitted to the one you’ve got (far from it) - just not as magical as it can sound when mass has been optimised :)

Other than the headshell, your MS tonearm is tailor-made for a DL-103. If you want to do things right, you should also look at SUTs and head amps, as the 103 likes best to be used into an MM input, in conjunction with a quality SUT or head amp. If your Quad has an MM input, then use that with an appropriate SUT or head amp, and the results will blow your mind…

Marco.

You could fit a headshell weight-

http://www.analogueseduction.net/headshell-weights/vpi-stainless-steel-3g-headshell-weight.html

[walpurgis]

you should also look at SUTs and head amps, as the 103 likes best to be used into an MM input, in conjunction with a quality SUT or head amp. If your Quad has an MM input, then use that with an appropriate SUT or head amp, and the results will blow your mind…

Marco.

My experience too.

I sold one of these last year. Works great with Denons: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-Fidelity-Research-FRT-3-Step-up-transformer-/201245692958?pt=UK_AudioTVElectronics_HomeAudioHiF i_Turntables&hash=item2edb2d941e

[Marco]

You could fit a headshell weight-

http://www.analogueseduction.net/headshell-weights/vpi-stainless-steel-3g-headshell-weight.html

Yup, those work fine (although only provide an added 3g of mass), which is insufficient for Tony’s needs. It’s far better using a heavier headshell in the first place - and one which is also better damped (to help eliminate vibration), which the 103 responds very well to.

Ideally, Tony should be looking at something like this (or a vintage equivalent): http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Audio-Technica-AT-LH18-OCC-Headshell-From-Japan-/181326568754?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item2a37e7dd32

That would be a killer combo with his Micro-Seiki! :)

Marco.

[twotone]

That’s pretty much what I thought, Tony, so you *need* a heavier headshell, in order to ‘max out’ a 103. Don’t get me wrong, it won’t sound broken fitted to the one you’ve got (far from it) - just not as magical as it can sound when mass has been optimised :)

Other than the headshell, your MS tonearm is tailor-made for a DL-103. If you want to do things right, you should also look at SUTs and head amps, as the 103 likes best to be used into an MM input, in conjunction with a quality SUT or head amp. If your Quad has an MM input, then use that with an appropriate SUT or head amp, and the results will blow your mind…

Marco.

Hi Marco the Quad has a modded MM phono stage which I find very very good, I've just sold a valve phono stage that was undeniably better but I don't really miss it being completey honest.

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165992

[twotone]

Yup, those work fine (although only provide an added 3g of mass), which is insufficient for Tony’s needs. It’s far better using a heavier headshell in the first place - and one which is also better damped (to help eliminate vibration), which the 103 responds well to.

Ideally, Tony should be looking at something like this (or a vintage equivalent): http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Audio-Technica-AT-LH18-OCC-Headshell-From-Japan-/181326568754?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item2a37e7dd32

That would be a killer combo with his Micro-Seiki! :)

Marco.

That's very reasonable Marco, thanks.

[Marco]

Hi Marco the Quad has a modded MM phono stage which I find very very good, I've just sold a valve phono stage that was undeniably better but I don't really miss it being completey honest.

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165992

It’s ideal then, Tony, to use with a quality SUT (such as Geoff has shown) or head amp. That’s definitely the route I’d recommend you take :)

I doubt you’ll regret buying a 103R, though, so just hit that button! ;)

Marco.

[twotone]

It’s ideal then, Tony, to use with a quality SUT (such as Geoff has shown) or head amp. That’s definitely the route I’d recommend you take :)

I doubt you’ll regret buying a 103R, though, so just hit that button! ;)

Marco.

Until I manage to buy/afford the SUT would the Quad MC card work with the Denon Marco?

[Marco]

It should do, Tony, but here I would defer you to our resident Quad experts, who’ve used a DL-103 with their preamps :)

I’d say that, right now, the purchase of a suitable headshell (such as the AT shown) is more important than an SUT or head amp. You can add one of those later, but the headshell is crucial in order to get the best out of the cartridge.

Marco.

[twotone]

It should do, Tony, but here I would defer to our resident Quad experts, who’ve used a DL-103 with their preamps :)

I’d say that, right now, the purchase of a suitable headshell (such as the AT shown) is more important than an SUT or head amp. You can add one of those later, but the headshell is crucial in order to get the best out of the cartridge.

Marco.

The supplimentary tonearm weight is only 17g Marco but I suppose I could add a wee bit of lead to it if need be?

[Marco]

To balance out the headshell? Yeah, that’d do the trick. Later on, you could get Speedy Steve to machine you a nice higher-mass counterweight balance, out of the same material as the tonearm, and that would finish the job off nicely! :)

Marco.

[twotone]

The DL-103R weighs 8.5g. The 202 headshell was expected to work with Micro Seiki's own low output MCs which weighed 7.5g.

Thanks Geoff, much appreciated.

Tony

[Marco]

This is what I use with my DL-103 - 19g of vintage lurveliness:


http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/540/KiGo1A.jpg


Marco.

[spikeyfaz]

Hello Marco

My Denon DL110 is on its last legs and I am contemplating getting a DL103 as a replacement. I am hoping this will help tame the occasional 'shouty' sound I get from my vinyl set-up. This will be going onto a SL1200 with the standard feet being replaced with Isonoe feet. Before I splash da cash, do you have any thoughts? I realise that the Technics arm may not be ideal but it's not something I am looking to replace as firstly it's virtually brand new and secondly the SL1200 was a gift from my father-in-law. He might not be too happy if I start chopping it about!

The DL103r is tempting, but from what you say it could be a bit bright which is what I am trying to get away from. The price of the standard DL103 also helps! Anyway, any advice on the DL103/SL1200 combination will be much appreciated.

Regards
Mike


Hi Shaun,

Well, the fancy copper coils are the only real differences between them, which do appear also to cause electrical differences, as the output impedance of the stock 103 is 40ohms, and the 103R, 14ohms. That can have an effect on the loading value that the cartridge likes to ‘see’, and in turn this will affect how both cartridges sound.

In my experience, the 103R is more detailed, but also notably brighter sounding, so be careful that your system can handle the somewhat ‘toppy’ tonal balance, although much will depend on the phono stage and tonearm used. In terms of the latter, you must ensure that there is sufficient mass to allow the cartridge to perform as intended (and that applies to both the 103 and 103R).

Headshell mass is of paramount importance, as that is what controls the overall effective mass of the arm most, so if you have a tonearm with a detachable headshell, the latter should be at least 16g, or preferably 18g, in order to allow the cartridge to perform optimally. I believe you have a Sumiko headshell? If so, you will need to up the mass accordingly, from the stock 12g.

Get it right, and either cartridge will reward you with a beautifully fluid and textured musical presentation, with serious gravitas in the bass, the likes of which completely escapes other moving coil cartridges at or near this price point.

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Mike,

I’m certainly more than willing to help, but before we go any further, properly set-up and partnered, a DL-110 should not sound “shouty”, which for me suggests a set-up or mismatch issue somewhere.

First of all, when you say that it’s ‘on its last legs’, are you saying that the stylus is worn? Also, could you list the rest of your system? The phono stage you’re using would be of particular interest, especially whether you’re using the 110 into the MM or MC input.

In terms of set-up, have you ensured that VTA is spot-on, and that the arm is absolutely level? Also, check azimuth, by using a headshell spirit level. What tracking force and anti-skate setting are you using?

Let’s make sure that all is ok first, and that you’re hearing the 110 at its best, before splashing out on a new cartridge whose benefits your system may not be able to take full advantage of :)

Marco.

[spikeyfaz]

Hi Marco.

Speakers-Tannoy Devons

Amp-NAD3130

I am using the NAD phono stage on the MM setting as there is far too much gain on MC. I think what I am trying to describe is almost like a razor sharp treble, but only happens on some records. Maybe my aging ears are after a warmer sound!

I posted about this sound issue a year or so back and from what I remember, opinion was that amp was the issue. Maybe, but cannot afford to replace it. I can just about afford a new cartridge (which is definitely on the way out).

I have checked the arm settings and all good. I have even swapped in my old Kenwood KD 990 turntable and the problem persists, which is why I am thinking the cartridge is the main problem. I am however totally open to alternative views!

Cheers
Mike

[walpurgis]

It may pay to check the crossover components on the Devons, the capacitors may have aged badly. Also have the 'level' and 'energy' switch contacts cleaned. The top end on the HPD 315 can get unruly if they are not maintained.

[spikeyfaz]

I've got a spare set of crossovers and I tried them with no noticeable change in sound quality. I've tried playing with the level and energy settings but prefer the normal settings. I have also tried different speakers from time to time but still get that shrill sound.
It may pay to check the crossover components on the Devons, the capacitors may have aged badly. Also have the 'level' and 'energy' switch contacts cleaned. The top end on the HPD 315 can get unruly if they are not maintained.

[walpurgis]

Hmm. What interconnect leads and speaker cables are you using? Tannoys (and some other speakers) don't seem to respond well to silver plated copper in my experience. Heaven forbid that anybody tries QED Silver Anniversary speaker cable with them for instance.

[spikeyfaz]

Speaker cables are unbranded multistrand copper. Can't see any silver plating on them. Hadn't really thought about speaker cables being a problem. Will see if I can dig some different ones out of the loft. Any recommendations for speaker cables?

Interconnect is the standard cable that is hardwired to the SL1200.

[spikeyfaz]

Just been up in the loft and no speaker cables. However, found my old headphones and plugged them in. Not sounding good either: same kind of sound as from speakers.

[Yomanze]

Thanks guys, just weighed the MS headshell with the reson cart attached which is 17g, the reson weighs 6.3g plus the fasteners so likely the headshell weighs just less than 10g.

I've never hear a LOMC in my system and the Denon 103R really appeals on a number of levels.

Sorely tempted here:eek:

BTW, I've the MS supplimentary tone arm weight.

No no no that headshell is too heavy for the Reca, please try something like the Denon PCL-5, which weighs less than 7G and transforms the Reca on a more massy tonearm like yours. I used to use the DL103, but it's not as good as a Reca with appropriate headshell / tonearm IMO.

[PaulStewart]

Interesting, would it work with a Micro Seiki MA-202 & HA-202 headshell Geoff?

FWIW, at the edit suite we have a contract for the transcription of 120 60s albums for which the masters have been lostt, for release as high res diwnloads etc. When selecting the kit to use the best results we thought were from the 103R in a Hashimoto SoundCraft HSA1 Ebony headhell (10.6g) in our MA-202 on our Technics SL-120, this feeds a Lundahl SUT into a Focusrite mic pre amp. The EQ curve RIAA or whatever variation sounds best depending on the recording, is then applied in software. For this kind of job we auditioned 6 different carts, three arms and two decks we all, except one guy preffered this combo as we found it to be the most neutral yet revealing. The other chap preffered an M44-7 in the Origin Live silver as it was "more exciting" but then, he's a video game audio designer......

[walpurgis]

Mike, before getting new components (i.e., cartridge), I'd be inclined to identify what is causing the shrillness you are experiencing with your vinyl. Are you sure it's not a symptom of the stylus on your DL-110 being worn? Can you use a microscope to examine the diamond tip? Do you have another cartridge to try and see if the problem goes?

[twotone]

No no no that headshell is too heavy for the Reca, please try something like the Denon PCL-5, which weighs less than 7G and transforms the Reca on a more massy tonearm like yours. I used to use the DL103, but it's not as good as a Reca with appropriate headshell / tonearm IMO.

Hi Neil, I never even considered that the MS headshell would be too heavy for the Reca cart, don't have a Denon PCL-5 but do have a Technics standard headshell which weighs 7.8g, would that do for now?

[twotone]

FWIW, at the edit suite we have a contract for the transcription of 120 60s albums for which the masters have been lostt, for release as high res diwnloads etc. When selecting the kit to use the best results we thought were from the 103R in a Hashimoto SoundCraft HSA1 Ebony headhell (10.6g) in our MA-202 on our Technics SL-120, this feeds a Lundahl SUT into a Focusrite mic pre amp. The EQ curve RIAA or whatever variation sounds best depending on the recording, is then applied in software. For this kind of job we auditioned 6 different carts, three arms and two decks we all, except one guy preffered this combo as we found it to be the most neutral yet revealing. The other chap preffered an M44-7 in the Origin Live silver as it was "more exciting" but then, he's a video game audio designer......

Thanks Paul, that sounds very interesting too.

Tony

[Yomanze]

Hi Neil, I never even considered that the MS headshell would be too heavy for the Reca cart, don't have a Denon PCL-5 but do have a Technics standard headshell which weighs 7.8g, would that do for now?

Yes try the Techy headshell for sure it's very light. :)

[twotone]

Yes try the Techy headshell for sure it's very light. :)

I changed the headshells round Neil and there is a definite improvement in the sound, certainly not night and day but sort of lighter sound (no pun intended) ,kind of fleet of foot sort of sound, agile I suppose and more bass or more defined bass, even my wife noticed the change.

I am noticing the crackles and surface noise more than before though, I think.

I'm tracking at 1.6g BTW.

Tony

[Yomanze]

I changed the headshells round Neil and there is a definite improvement in the sound, certainly not night and day but sort of lighter sound (no pun intended) ,kind of fleet of foot sort of sound, agile I suppose and more bass or more defined bass, even my wife noticed the change.

I am noticing the crackles and surface noise more than before though, I think.

I'm tracking at 1.6g BTW.

Tony

Good stuff Tony, I noticed the same when using my Reca with more massy tonearms, seems the light headshells really make a difference here. Try increasing your VTF to 1.7g. :)

[Marco]

Yup, light headshells are as necessary for medium-to-high compliance cartridges as high-mass ones are to low-compliance cartridges - you just need to recognise that fact and act accordingly! :exactly:

Marco.

[Marco]

Mike, before getting new components (i.e., cartridge), I'd be inclined to identify what is causing the shrillness you are experiencing with your vinyl. Are you sure it's not a symptom of the stylus on your DL-110 being worn? Can you use a microscope to examine the diamond tip? Do you have another cartridge to try and see if the problem goes?

I also agree with this. However, let’s assume that the stylus is worn on the DL-110 and that Mike wants to try another cartridge, namely a DL-103, so what to do?

Well, first of all, even before we get to the new cartridge stage, can you try something, Mike? You mentioned that you were using the stock Technics tonearm cable… I’m afraid that it is more than a bit crap, and could well be a significant reason for the shrill sound you’re hearing - and most importantly which will thus affect every other cartridge you use.

Therefore, let’s sort that out first. So, if the tonearm cable is hard-wired, are you any good at soldering? If so, de-solder it and chuck the cable away, replacing it with something like this Van Damme stuff:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Van-Damme-Phono-Turntable-Tonearm-cable-RCA-RCA-version-/221619087738?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Other&hash=item339986e97a

You can always chop the plugs off at the source end and solder direct to the terminals, or most likely the cable will also be available with bare wires at one end (check the ad). Honestly, that will make a major difference to the sound of your T/T, for not a lot of dosh! You should really attend to that first before getting a new cartridge, otherwise the shrill sound is likely to persist with other cartridges you use.

Do that first, then we’ll talk about DL-103s :)

Marco.

[twotone]

Good stuff Tony, I noticed the same when using my Reca with more massy tonearms, seems the light headshells really make a difference here. Try increasing your VTF to 1.7g. :)

Quite amazing the difference here Neil, thanks for that.

Much cleaner sounding records, bit of sparkle too, it's not that I didn't like the sound with the MS headshell but this is different, defo more bass but not muddy, vocals are pretty clear too.

Currently on the lookout for a Denon Headshell or an ADC magnesium, there's a couple on e-bay at the minute but I'll see if there's anyone on the forum who has something similar to sell.

Every day is a school day on here:cool:

[Ali Tait]

I also agree with this. However, let’s assume that the stylus is worn on the DL-110 and that Mike wants to try another cartridge, namely a DL-103, so what to do?

Well, first of all, even before we get to the new cartridge stage, can you try something, Mike? You mentioned that you were using the stock Technics tonearm cable… I’m afraid that it is more than a bit crap, and could well be a significant reason for the shrill sound you’re hearing - and most importantly which will thus affect every other cartridge you use.

Therefore, let’s sort that out first. So, if the tonearm cable is hard-wired, are you any good at soldering? If so, de-solder it and chuck the cable away, replacing it with something like this Van Damme stuff:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Van-Damme-Phono-Turntable-Tonearm-cable-RCA-RCA-version-/221619087738?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Other&hash=item339986e97a

You can always chop the plugs off at the source end and solder direct to the terminals, or most likely the cable will also be available with bare wires at one end (check the ad). Honestly, that will make a major difference to the sound of your T/T, for not a lot of dosh! You should really attend to that first before getting a new cartridge, otherwise the shrill sound is likely to persist with other cartridges you use.

Do that first, then we’ll talk about DL-103s :)

Marco.

Good advice. The tonearm cable can make a significant difference.

[Marco]

Have we scared you off, Mike? :eyebrows:

:popcorn: :popcorn:

Marco.

[spikeyfaz]

Ha! No, I am still here. Been meaning to post, but have been a bit poorly. Prescription drugs to the rescue! Anyway, I have been experimenting with some different cartridges I managed to dig out. Bit of a rough collection which I suspect dates back to prehistoric times: - Shure Encore Me75ED and a 500.V3 (make unknown). Neither sound radically different to the Denon, but on balance I prefer the Denon as it sounds clearer.

To try and get the sound more balanced I have resorted to using the 'loudness' button...shock horror!! Sort of works but not ideal. Not too keen on rewiring the turntable rca cables at this stage. Like I said, the Technics was gifted to me and I don't want to upset the father in law by modding it too much at this stage. Beginning to wonder if the amp is simply too modern for me old Tannoys?

Mike.




Have we scared you off, Mike? :eyebrows:

:popcorn: :popcorn:

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Mike,


Ha! No, I am still here. Been meaning to post, but have been a bit poorly. Prescription drugs to the rescue! Anyway, I have been experimenting with some different cartridges I managed to dig out. Bit of a rough collection which I suspect dates back to prehistoric times: - Shure Encore Me75ED and a 500.V3 (make unknown). Neither sound radically different to the Denon, but on balance I prefer the Denon as it sounds clearer.

To try and get the sound more balanced I have resorted to using the 'loudness' button...shock horror!! Sort of works but not ideal. Not too keen on rewiring the turntable rca cables at this stage. Like I said, the Technics was gifted to me and I don't want to upset the father in law by modding it too much at this stage. Beginning to wonder if the amp is simply too modern for me old Tannoys?


With new year and stuff I haven’t been around much... Anyway, hope you’re feeling better now :)

With respect, I doubt your father-in-law would notice you fitting a new tonearm cable - you could always say that the old one was faulty and so needed replaced, which is pretty much true anyway. No biggie, I’d have thought… Trust me, that will make a BIG difference! :exactly:

The bottom line is that if you’re intending to keep the Technics (which if you like it, you should), then it makes no sense whatsoever to hobble its performance with a poor quality tonearm cable. I’m almost certain that the stock cable is a major contributory factor towards the shrill sound you’re getting, and so if you want to fix that problem, rather than simply paper over the cracks, by fitting another cartridge, then you must resolve the issue once and for all.

Therefore, let me know your feelings about that.

As for a DL-103, with some adjustments it will work on a Technics tonearm. However, as mentioned earlier, you’ll have to fit a heavier, higher-mass headshell, such as the AT (shown before), and furthermore fit a spacer/stabiliser between the cartridge and headshell, which will allow you to correctly set VTA.

The problem with the DL-103, on the Technics tonearm, is that as the cartridge is very ‘low-bodied’, and so unless you’re using a very thick record mat, the tonearm won’t wind down low enough (when adjusting VTA) to get the arm parallel with the record surface. Even with the arm wound all the way down as far as it’ll go, with a DL-103 fitted, it will still leave the arm slightly ‘tail up’, and that will seriously affect how the cartridge sounds.

Therefore, to compensate for that, you must fit a headshell spacer/stabiliser, which because of the extra ‘thickness’ it provides, will allow you to get the tonearm level. Do that, along with fitting a heavier counterweight at the back of the arm (such as is available from Speedy Steve, here on AoS), in order to balance out the high-mass headshell you’re fitting at the front of the arm, and you’ll end up with a pretty good sound.

However, if all that seems a bit of a fuss, then don’t buy a DL-103 - go for something else that you can simply bolt onto your existing headshell, without any faffing around. In many ways, the stock Technics arm is best suited for use with a quality MM cartridge, such as those available from Nagaoka, Ortofon, Goldring or Shure.

Hope this helps! :cool:

Marco.

[spikeyfaz]

Hi Marco.

Will definitely have a look at replacing the tonearm cable. I actually replaced the whole arm with a brand new one when I first acquired the TT. There was an intermittent fault with the internal wiring and it was easier to swap the whole arm over.

With regard to the extra faffing about to set up the 103, I have no problem with that as I have done a reasonable amount of hifi diy over the years. Mostly successful! I am guessing the 103 has a warmer sound to the 110. The trade off being a less detailed top end?

[Marco]

Good - I’m glad you’re going to get rid of that bloody cable! ;)

What you should do is fit one of those phono socket termination boards, below the hinge sockets (for the lid) at the back of the T/T, which will allow you to change tonearm cables quickly and easily, and even experiment with different types. The Van Damme ones I linked to earlier are pretty good, though :)

Yes, the DL-103 has a bigger, bolder, warmer and more ‘fleshed out’, expansive sound, compared with the 110. Also, when you partner and set it up right, there’s no shortage either of detail in the top end, even though the 110 has arguably the more ‘sophisticated’ stylus.

The main difference you will gain is by going from a high-output MC design to a low-output one. Quite simply, high-output MCs are a massive compromise and don’t really work fully in a hi-fi sense, as they’re caught in no-man’s land by neither sounding as good as a quality MM design or a low-output MC. Consequently, they have a rather ‘rushed’, spot-lit sonic and musical presentation, which lacks subtlety.

Anyway, if you do go for a 103, then I shall be on-hand here to offer any advice you need, and help you on your journey to enjoying some quality choons!

Marco.

[montesquieu]

However, if all that seems a bit of a fuss, then don’t buy a DL-103 - go for something else that you can simply bolt onto your existing headshell, without any faffing around. In many ways, the stock Technics arm is best suited for use with a quality MM cartridge, such as those available from Nagaoka, Ortofon, Goldring or Shure.


Marco.

Coming late to this thread but I think this - along with the tonearm cable suggestion - is the best bit of advice here. In this circumstance I'm not convinced the Denon is the right thing here at all. The Denon is a good enough cartridge but it's hard to get right (in the areas of arm/headshell mass, loading, height/setup and so on) and it does have its limitations (I've personally like many others been down the route of nude, rebodied and re-tipped 103s and I'm still unconvinced).

With the standard Techie arm in place, IMO you would be better picking up an Audio Note IQ2 or IQ3, Goldring 1042, Ortofon 2M Bronze or Black, or one of the higher end Nagaokas, depending on the precise budget. I believe this would also apply with a lower end Rega fitted, though one of the heavier Jelcos might well favour the 103 or 103R.

Indeed I'm convinced that for the vast majority of scenarios, in a typical arm, an upper end MM cart is a better bet than just about any budget MC cartridge. A recent experience with AN IQ3 (while my AN Io2 was away for a rebuild - they share the same tip and cantilever) convinced me that (based on new price) this admittedly relatively expensive MM cartridge pretty much bettered any MC under £1000 and in that I include stuff like the Shelter 501 and indeed some lower end SPUs, of which I still own a few.

Of course for those who love the fiddle factor and enjoy the hobby part of playing with step-ups, loading and so on, then great, MCs in general have more potential for buggering about with (and it would be hard for me to deny being a serial buggerer-about!), but it's not necessary to enjoy great music.

[Marco]

I’d agree with nearly all of that, Tom. As audiophiles, we’ve been ‘conditioned’ into thinking that MC cartridges are automatically superior to MMs in all circumstances, which simply isn’t true. As you’ve outlined, there many instances where a quality MM (and these days there are some VERY good ones around) is an all-round better solution :)

The only bit I’d disagree with is that the 103 is a ‘budget MC’. I guess it depends on what you mean by ‘budget’. It’s certainly ‘budget’ in comparison with some of the true exotica out there, priced similarly to the cost of a new car, but in terms of the sonic performance it can offer in the right system, when everything is going in its favour, it most certainly isn’t a budget design.

Let’s not forget that the *only* reason it costs so little is because it’s made by a huge, multi-national Japanese manufacturer, such as Denon, where they can mass-produce them in a way (and thus take advantage of economies of scale) that no other smaller, specialist cartridge manufacturer would be capable of doing.

If, for example, the DL-103 were made by Lyra (and fitted into a nicer body-shell), rather than the plastic one of the stock 103 (which incidentally is the only thing ‘budget’ about its design), it would sell for at least £1k, as when fitted inside a high-quality shell, that’s the type of sonic performance the 103 is capable of, and even beyond. One only has to listen to the ’Special Edition' DL-103SA to understand that fact.

However, the problem, as you correctly say, is that the 103 is a difficult cartridge to get right - and that’s simply because it harks from an era where hi-fi equipment itself and the approach/mentality to building it and assembling systems was radically different to what it is today. Therefore, in that respect, trying to successfully accommodate a DL-103 in a modern system is somewhat akin to attempting to fit a square peg into a round hole…

That’s why one has to mess around so much with headshell and tonearm mass, cartridge loading, etc, to get things right, whereas in the late 50s and throughout the 60s, when the high-mass approach ruled, along with valves and SUTs mostly, the 103 would’ve been a perfect fit into almost any system from that era.

Anyway, I get the feeling that Mike wants to try a 103, and there’s certainly enough collective knowledge here to help him achieve some good results! :cool:

Marco.

[montesquieu]

Up to a point Marco, the price is certainly something of an anomaly given where cart prices have headed in the last decade or so, but the 103 still has its limits and I'm not sure I'd quite agree to put it in the £1k bracket.

I've had many including 103D and 103SA variants in the past but quite recently, I had three for a bit- 103, 103R and a Sounsmith modified 103R Mono, including during the period my Io was away (I was up for a bit of experimentation).

The arm was a AO-rewired Jelco 750D with 6g weight/spacers/stablilisers fitted to all three, a heavy18g Oiyade headshell with silver wires, AN-Vx arm cable and a Kondo S6 SUT (£6k new!). Short of finding a mint FR64S, this is about optimum for the 103 I would say. The SUT had 1 ohm - for the Io - 3 ohm - for Ortofon - and 40 ohm inputs, the 40ohm being specifically for the 103. All on a well-sorted Thorens TD124 into a Longdog MM phono stage.

This is about as good as I've heard the 103 sound (of the three, the Mono was outstanding in this setup). But enjoyable as it was, the stereo cartridges were bettered in every way by the IQ3. Yes you can dial out the shrillness and a good SUT will ensure the detail comes through well, but at the end of the day the conical stylus and plastic body present limitations to the available resolution (as I say I've never been convinced with nuding rebody efforts or paratrace retips - I spent a few quid with Expert some years back giving this a go). The 103R was appreciably more refined than the standard 103 BTW so I suspect it's more than just something in the selection process that distinguishes them.

So while I would agree with you it's a bargain, I would caution any prospective owner not to expect miracles. Though I would add that it's a cartridge any vinyl lover should at least have a crack at - what it does may well float your boat sufficiently not to to encourage you to look any further.

[Marco]

Hi Tom,

Well, you can only comment on your personal experience of using something, so in that respect, yours is as valid as mine :)

On that point, however, whilst I understand where you’re coming from, we’ll have to disagree. In my opinion, a DL-103SA, for example (with its fibreglass composite housing), mounted in a suitable top-notch tonearm, and properly partnered, sounds every bit as good (and in some areas better) than most £1k cartridges I’ve heard - and I’ve heard plenty!

The ‘SA’ was about as good as a DL-103 gets, but sadly is now discontinued: http://www.lpgear.com/product/DENONDL103SA.html

Here’s mine when it was on my Jelco 750D (with FR headshell):

http://s560.photobucket.com/albums/ss49/aos_images/marco_system/2009-01/aosm01.jpg

However, I’d like to hear the DLA-100: http://www.lpgear.com/product/DENONDLA100.html

I’m not so big on the retips (as, IMO, they simply make the cartridge sound different, but not necessarily overall better), but the improved body-shells offer a substantial improvement over the (highly resonant) stock plastic item, and as such totally transform the sonic performance of the cartridge.

How much you agree with that, of course, will be directly proportional to which aftermarket shells you’re tried - and how successfully they've achieved synergy, sonically, with the partnering T/T and system. Not all of the aftermarket body-shells are good; some are simply cheap sleeves, and have only been designed to cash in on the current popularity of ‘nuding’ DL-103s!

Also, I’d have to disagree that a Jelco 750D, no matter how significantly tweaked, is about as good as it gets for use with a DL-103. I’ve ‘been there and done that’, and the Ortofon RS-212D arm I’m using is a significant step-up from the Jelco in every respect. This is especially so when fitted with a top-notch, high-mass headshell, such as the FR S/3, which itself cost me £150, and the arm £2100, so it should be better! ;)

When I come down to your place (and I will definitely arrange a visit this year), I’ll bring the 103 down, fitted to the FR headshell (along with my T/T), and let you hear the Denon in the context of your system, where I think that, even in its stock plastic headshell, fitted to the Ortofon, you’ll be surprised at just how good it sounds - perhaps in comparison to what you’ve been used to! :cool:

Marco.

[Marco]

Very interesting review here of all three cartridges (DL-103, 103R and 103SA), whose observations I wholly concur with: http://highfidelity.pl/!ev/artykuly/21_02_2009/denon.html

Marco.

[RobbieGong]

Very interesting review here of all three cartridges (DL-103, 103R and 103SA), whose observations I wholly concur with: http://highfidelity.pl/!ev/artykuly/21_02_2009/denon.html

Marco.

And a review of Denons DLA-100, 100th-anniversary cart here http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-108-page-2

[Ali Tait]

Didn't you buy another Denon cart recently Marco?

[Marco]

Yeah, just a basic DL-103, albeit one with a balanced output (matched channels), as I hadn’t used one for a while and wanted to be reminded of its charms. It’s that which I’m using now in the FR S/3 headshell - and it sounds superb!

I plan at some point to fit it inside a better housing/body-shell, although which one yet I’m not exactly sure. Need to do a wee bit of research :)

Marco.

[Marco]

And a review of Denons DLA-100, 100th-anniversary cart here http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-108-page-2

Cheers for that, Rob! :thumbsup:

Marco.

[Ali Tait]

No, before that, a special edition or anniversary one?

[RobbieGong]

No, before that, a special edition or anniversary one?

Oh!, Ali's right Marco, I think he's referring to the DL S1 you purchased a little while back ?

[Marco]

Ah, sorry, yes I also have the Denon DL-S1, which is Denon’s top-of-the-range MC cartridge. It’s very good indeed, but even that, in certain areas, is outperformed by the stock DL-103 (fitted on an appropriate high-quality, high-mass headshell and tonearm)! ;)

Marco.

[twotone]

Just a general question here guys but why does a Denon 103, or any cartridge, have to be installed into a heavy headshell and then a heavy weight attached to the end of the tonearm, why not just fit a light headshell and then there will be no need for the heavy counterweight on the end of the tonearm, surely, or is there a specific reason why some carts require a heavy headshell while others require lightweight ones?

I'm guessing compliance here although I've no idea what that means however I think that it means bendy or stiff cantilevers on the carts, so if that is the reason, what does a heavy cart do to a bendy cantilever and similarly a light cart do to a stiff cantilever?

Thanks

Tony

[Ali Tait]

Ah, sorry, yes I also have the Denon DL-S1, which is Denon’s top-of-the-range MC cartridge. It’s very good indeed, but even that, in certain areas, is outperformed by the stock DL-103 (fitted on an appropriate high-quality, high-mass headshell and tonearm)! ;)

Marco.

Aye, that was it. Interesting findings Marco.

[Marco]

Indeed, Ali. I don’t think there are any Denon ‘DL’ cartridges I haven’t had in my arsenal at one time or another, as I’ve been using these cartridges since 1982… I kinda know them better than my mother ;)

My favourite one, other than the ‘SA’ is the 103M - an absolutely gorgeous sounding cartridge, in every way, that would put to shame many of today’s so-called ‘high-end’ MC designs, and at a fraction of the price!

Anyway, if you wish to refresh your memory, here’s the thread I started about the DL-S1: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?31661-Just-pulled-the-trigger-on-one-of-these-babies

I’ll be taking all three of my main cartridges (SPU Royal GM, DL-103 and DL-S1), along with my T/T, to NEBO 5, and so will demonstrate the differences in presentation they offer. Are you going? :)

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Tony,


Just a general question here guys but why does a Denon 103, or any cartridge, have to be installed into a heavy headshell and then a heavy weight attached to the end of the tonearm, why not just fit a light headshell and then there will be no need for the heavy counterweight on the end of the tonearm, surely, or is there a specific reason why some carts require a heavy headshell while others require lightweight ones?

I'm guessing compliance here although I've no idea what that means however I think that it means bendy or stiff cantilevers on the carts, so if that is the reason, what does a heavy cart do to a bendy cantilever and similarly a light cart do to a stiff cantilever?


First of all, I’m not technically knowledgeable enough to give you a definitive answer to your question on compliance, but I’m sure there are others here who will be able to help in that respect.

What I do know, from experience, is that moving coil cartridges come into the category of either being low, medium or high-compliance designs, and this is usually reflected in the spec sheet provided with them, thus they have to be treated differently, as far as which tonearm and/or headshell should be used, in reference to mass. Low-compliance designs require the use of high-mass arms, high-compliance designs need low-mass arms, and medium-compliance one something in between. In that respect, it pays to experiment, especially as very little in audio is ever written in stone.

In terms of the DL-103, as it’s a (very) low-compliance design, it requires the use of a heavy arm and headshell, in order to satisfy its specific physical requirements, and thus optimise its performance. Therefore, if you’re fitting, say, an 18g headshell (with also a fairly large and heavy cartridge on it) to an arm that’s been designed for use with a much lighter ‘front end’, as it were, then you need to have sufficient weight at the ‘back end’ of the arm, in order to be able to balance things out and achieve 0 grams VTF, when you’re measuring and adjusting the tracking force.

Also, using a counterweight balance at or near the end of its maximum ‘travel’ (as it would be when positioned towards the very end of the stub on the tonearm, in order to balance out a heavy cartridge/headshell), isn’t ideal, sonically. What you want is the counterweight positioned as near as possible to the arm’s pivot point, when VTF has been optimised and dialled in, in order to reduce inertia. The use of a heavy counterweight balance will facilitate this, and will combine with the heavy headshell, to produce a superior sound when a low-compliance MC cartridge is used.

Hope that helps :)

Marco.

[Ali Tait]

Yes, should be there Marco, will bring the Kraken, reel to reel and a couple of WAD valve amps.

[Marco]

Nice one - that should be fun. Hope the weather doesn’t scupper my plans to be there! :)

Marco.

[twotone]

Thanks Marco, wasn't aware of the counterweight having to be near the pivot point of the arm, really interesting this stuff.

Just a thought but I think it would be really helpful to noobs, like me, who are completely clueless about the techical basics of playing records on a turntable for some sort of basic ten point to-do list or quick set-up guide if you will, was posted somewhere.

I've just really been stumbling through playing records these past three or four years without really understanding or knowing how to go about selecting a cartridge and then getting the best out of the cart by the use of headshells, tonearms and so on.

Tony

PS, apologies is such a thing already exists in the forum somewhere.

[RobbieGong]

Here's a link with a little bit of info about Denon carts. Heard of the others but never the 103 FLS :scratch:

[Marco]

No worries. That’s a good idea, Tony. Have a look through ‘The Knowledge’ section of the forum, and if such info isn’t already there, we’ll write it up. In any case, we’re always here to help members with any queries that they have.

After all, we all had to learn at one point - and indeed are continually doing so! :)

Marco.

[Marco]

Here's a link with a little bit of info about Denon carts. Heard of the others but never the 103 FLS :scratch:

You forgot to post the link, daftee! :D

Marco.

[RobbieGong]

You forgot to post the link, daftee! :D

Marco.

Ooops ! :o http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Denon.html

[NRG]

The 103SA is a very good cart, it's surprising how much better it is over the R or even a re-bodied R. Ultimately IME they are let down by the stylus profile. Since having my 103D rebuilt by Goldring I've had the perfect opportunity to compare directly what a better stylus profile can do many times. It does everything the SA does but with much more finesse. At some point I'd like to take a standard 103 and have Goldring work their magic and see what the result would be, it would certainly be interesting! ;)

[Marco]

Indeed, and I may get them to do that with mine, although it’d have to go some to beat the DL-S1 in the areas where it excels! ;)

Marco.

[daytona600]

Yup, light headshells are as necessary for medium-to-high compliance cartridges as high-mass ones are to low-compliance cartridges - you just need to recognise that fact and act accordingly! :exactly:

Marco.

these are idealhttp://snvinyl.co.uk/WebRoot/Daily/Shops/eshop943300/545A/BDE3/D742/92A0/BF74/0A0C/05ED/835A/IMG_0005_2.JPG


http://snvinyl.co.uk/EZ-Mount-Cartridge-Mounting-Screw-Set-The-EZ-Mount-system-allows-for-phono-cartridge-mounting-with

[Marco]

Nice! :)

Marco.

[Floyddroid]

:sofa::uhho:Neither for me i'm afraid.
Now come on, there must be more to this than some fancy copper coils with very little impurity in them...? Someone please tell me that the DL103R is worth the extra money because to me it resembles a waste of finances and the difference is fairly substantial.

[montesquieu]

these are idealhttp://snvinyl.co.uk/WebRoot/Daily/Shops/eshop943300/545A/BDE3/D742/92A0/BF74/0A0C/05ED/835A/IMG_0005_2.JPG


http://snvinyl.co.uk/EZ-Mount-Cartridge-Mounting-Screw-Set-The-EZ-Mount-system-allows-for-phono-cartridge-mounting-with


I have a set of these too - didn't realise you were selling them Scott I got them a few years back direct from Soundsmith. I've found them really handy in all sorts of situations over the years, there are 4 different weights including very lightweight nylon and apart from that they make fitting carts easy, so long as the length is sufficient.

As for the 103R it can't be just the wires as the internal impedance is different (12 ohm rather than 40 ohm).

[Marco]

As for the 103R it can't be just the wires as the internal impedance is different (12 ohm rather than 40 ohm).

Have a read here, Tom, under the section entitled: ‘A History and In-Depth Examination of the DL-103’: http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Denon.html

...noting this part in particular:


--the dl-103r sounds more HiFi-ish and less "organic" than the 103. no wonder, it's a VERY different cartridge with 40 ohms instead of 10. that "r" suffix is misleading and making the people think it's more or less the same cartridge just with better wire. bullshit. imagine you take two otherwise identical cartridges, one with a 10 ohm generator and one with a 40 ohm generator. don't you think they'd sound MUCH different?? the resonance points are much different because the 10 ohm winding will control the stylus/cantilever/coil assembly much better than the 40 ohm winding...


Interesting, eh? It certainly explains why I’ve always found the 103R somewhat ‘hi-fi sounding’, in comparison with the standard 103, when optimised. The former gives the impression of greater clarity, but IMO at the expense of tunefulness, fluidity and timbre - in short the very traits that the 103 excels at and is renowned for.

One other variance between both cartridges, no doubt created as a by-product of their different impedances, is that the standard 103 has a slightly higher output of 0.3mV, as opposed to the 0.25mV of the 103R, which in certain circumstances could also be significant.

Marco.

[Marco]

:sofa::uhho:Neither for me i'm afraid.

Not quite sure what you’re trying to say, Steve? :scratch:

Marco.

[montesquieu]

Have a read here, Tom, under the section entitled: ‘A History and In-Depth Examination of the DL-103’: http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Denon.html

...noting this part in particular:



Interesting, eh? It certainly explains why I’ve always found the 103R somewhat ‘hi-fi sounding’, in comparison with the standard 103, when optimised. The former gives the impression of greater clarity, but IMO at the expense of tunefulness, fluidity and timbre - in short the very traits that the 103 excels at and is renowned for.

One other variance between both cartridges, no doubt created as a by-product of their different impedances, is that the standard 103 has a slightly higher output of 0.3mV, as opposed to the 0.25mV of the 103R, which in certain circumstances could also be significant.

Marco.


Very interesting, Marco. I guess as in all things I guess it depends on the rest of the system, I was rather more taken with the 103R and the Soundsmith mono variant in particular.

[Marco]

Absolutely, Tom, all this stuff is system dependent, so at the end of the day, it’s simply about what makes the most acceptable noise for you! :)

However, I think it’s always useful learning from others who have tried something you haven’t, and achieved good results with it, so I never form conclusive opinions on anything in hi-fi until I consider that I’ve heard whatever it is at its best.

Marco.

[twotone]

Well blow me down with a bleeding feather:eek:

I've just recieved my new (to me) ADC magnesium headshell (6.7g with the cardas cables) and quickly changed it for the standard Technics headshell (7.7g with cables) and my oh my:cool:

Just amazed honestly, I would never have thought that a 4g difference from the Micro Seiki headshell to the lightweight ADC would make such a difference but I'm gobsmacked.

My wife, who really couldn't give a shit about all of this hi-fi malarky, actually commented that the sound is "quite a bit sharper!" by that she means attack and definition which is what I'm hearing like the snap of snare drums and clear instruments & vocals.

Thanks Neil:smoking:

Tony

[Marco]

Good stuff, Tony! That’s what it’s all about: listening to others with more experience in a specific area than you, trying what they suggest, and hopefully gleaning something positive from the experience :exactly:

Enjoy yer choons! :)

Marco.

[twotone]

Good stuff, Tony! That’s what it’s all about: listening to others with more experience in a specific area than you, trying what they suggest, and hopefully gleaning something positive from the experience :exactly:

Enjoy yer choons! :)

Marco.

Well Marco consider me stunned, four grammes? Feck me that's about a quarter of nothing:eek:

[Marco]

In Glasgow, 4 grams might actually equate to obtaining something quite interesting!! ;)

Marco.

[struth]

Well blow me down with a bleeding feather:eek:

I've just recieved my new (to me) ADC magnesium headshell (6.7g with the cardas cables) and quickly changed it for the standard Technics headshell (7.7g with cables) and my oh my:cool:

Just amazed honestly, I would never have thought that a 4g difference from the Micro Seiki headshell to the lightweight ADC would make such a difference but I'm gobsmacked.

My wife, who really couldn't give a shit about all of this hi-fi malarky, actually commented that the sound is "quite a bit sharper!" by that she means attack and definition which is what I'm hearing like the snap of snare drums and clear instruments & vocals.

Thanks Neil:smoking:

Tony

Got and adc mag myself and its very good. I switched it to a wood one and think it even better and about the same weight too.

[twotone]

In Glasgow, 4 grams might actually equate to obtaining something quite interesting!! ;)

Marco.

Aye quarter of # back in the day, or is it a half of a quarter:confused::drinking:

[twotone]

Got and adc mag myself and its very good. I switched it to a wood one and think it even better and about the same weight too.

Think I might treat myself to the Denon one that Neil advised Grant, they're about £50 from Japan posted, I paid £30 for the ADC from a guy in Edinburgh via ebay, it came with a wee plastic box too which is ideal for a load of headshells:eek:

[Marco]

Aye quarter of # back in the day, or is it a half of a quarter:confused::drinking:

Hehehehe…. Nowadays getting wrecked is probably cheaper with a few bottles of Bucky! :D

Anyway, back on topic, here’s a link to another interesting article about the DL-103 (together with pics of a rather sexy housing for one). Observe what the guy says in the third (long) paragraph, under the second image, about the types of T/Ts that were normally use with 103s ‘back in the day’, and then wonder why a 103 might not work so well in a TD-160, LP12 or some such:

http://truefi.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-perfect-ensemblea-bronze-body-for.html

:)

Marco.

[struth]

Think I might treat myself to the Denon one that Neil advised Grant, they're about £50 from Japan posted, I paid £30 for the ADC from a guy in Edinburgh via ebay, it came with a wee plastic box too which is ideal for a load of headshells:eek:

Got mine from the US. cherrywood I think and quite nice for the money Tony. got it via ebay.it was less than 50 with postage included.

[RobbieGong]

Well blow me down with a bleeding feather:eek:

I've just recieved my new (to me) ADC magnesium headshell (6.7g with the cardas cables) and quickly changed it for the standard Technics headshell (7.7g with cables) and my oh my:cool:

Just amazed honestly, I would never have thought that a 4g difference from the Micro Seiki headshell to the lightweight ADC would make such a difference but I'm gobsmacked.

My wife, who really couldn't give a shit about all of this hi-fi malarky, actually commented that the sound is "quite a bit sharper!" by that she means attack and definition which is what I'm hearing like the snap of snare drums and clear instruments & vocals.

Thanks Neil:smoking:

Tony

We now both share the MA 202 tonearm and the ADC magnesium headshell - Yes, the ADC is a brill compliment to the 202.

[twotone]

Got mine from the US. cherrywood I think and quite nice for the money Tony. got it via ebay.it was less than 50 with postage included.

Thanks Grant, I'll have a look about, the black HS doesn't really go on my arm looks wise, cherry would defintely look better on the arm:hijack:

[twotone]

We now both share the MA 202 tonearm and the ADC magnesium headshell - Yes, the ADC is a brill compliment to the 202.

Certainly is Rob:cool:

[struth]

Thanks Grant, I'll have a look about, the black HS doesn't really go on my arm looks wise, cherry would defintely look better on the arm:hijack:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-Cherry-Wood-Turntable-Headshell-with-OFC-gold-clip-cartridge-leads-AVID-REGA-/390613291803?pt=US_Record_Player_Turntable_Parts&hash=item5af25dd31b