Additional Headshell Mass with a 103R in a Standard SL1210 Arm?

[Dave the bass]

Hello,

I've got a Technics SL1210 Mk2 here in totally bog standard form, its in lovely condition thankfully. Does anyone here use a Denon 103R in a totally standard un-fettled SL1200 here? If yes, did you need any additional mass (and how much approx) added to the arm or head-shell as its a fairly low compliance cartridge in a medium mass arm (I believe).

I've got a DL110 too which I think is a straight drop-in with no additional mass needed, just toying with either going in.

Thought's?

Ta's!

DTB

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

How’s it going? Still building some nice DIY kit? Nice to see you popping in from audio talk :)

We’ve actually been discussing that very subject recently on a couple of threads. See this one (and my responses from post #10 onwards: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?35554-moving-coil-cartridges and also this one from the beginning: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?35814-Denon-DL103-or-103R

If you’ve got any other queries, just give us a shout! :cool:

Marco.

[Ammonite Audio]

Thin lead sheet strip, usually sold as 'dolls' house lead flashing' is useful for adding mass - it can be simply wrapped around the end of the arm tube and it's easy to find the optimum extra mass. Here's an example: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Real-Thin-Rolled-Lead-Dolls-House-Miniature-Ideal-for-Flashing-Dormer-Window-/191475620792?pt=UK_Dolls_House_Miniatures&hash=item2c94d61bb8

[Dave the bass]

Still building some nice DIY kit?

Marco.

Hi ya Marco, yeah, I only know how to build nice stuff, ugly ones are a no-no! Arf! :)

Ta for the links, I had a quick search through a while back but hadn't seen those threads. I'll have a read through at Lunchtime.


... and it's easy to find the optimum extra mass.

Thanks Mr A Acoustics, I've got some thin lead sheeting, thats 'andy 'arry! Y'say its easy to find optimum extra mass, I'm all ears tell me more please.

[The Barbarian]

Ive got a bag of these 3g Techy headshell plates. I fit extra long cartridge bolts so that the heads are under the cart, the extra long bolts sticking upwards, i just stack on top then till im happy.

You can temporarily make a Low Mass arm Higher Mass but you can't make an high mass arm lower

:)

[Marco]

Check if they’re magnetic, dude, ‘cos some are, and if so, next to useless…. The last thing you want is a big magnetic lump next to yer cart! :nono:

Marco.

[The Barbarian]

I don't use em i do massy experiments with em

[Marco]

Ah, gotcha :)

Marco.

[Dave the bass]

FWIW the Technics Headplate I got from Juno is magnetic.

I'm making up a small brass plate to add mass.

More news as it's made, whahey!

DTB

[Andrei]

You can temporarily make a Low Mass arm Higher Mass but you can't make an high mass arm lower

:)
Well of course you can. Just follow the surgeon's motto: 'When in doubt - cut it out'. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[The Barbarian]

:eek: i use Brass plates & copper plates depending.

[Dave the bass]

:eek: i use Brass plates & copper plates depending.
Wind direction? Flavour? Whats to hand? :)

[worrasf]

If you have a steady hand then a "better" way to go to add mass is to replace the plastic body on the 103R with a wood or better still aluminium one. This will take the mass up to a tad under 14g.

See: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?36063-The-Wyvern-DL-103R&p=611437#post611437

Steve

[Dave the bass]

Aaah yeah,I've looked at those solid aluminum 103 bodies before, tempted I must say. I used to run a nuded 103 in DIY 12" Schroeder clone and that was awethumne until my beluvved accidentally trashed it. The stylus and cantilever was totally exposed and she caught it whilst disengaging the Idler on my G99. Doh!

[The Barbarian]

Wind direction? Flavour? Whats to hand? :)

What day it is

[Dave the bass]

What day it is

Thats sound enough reasoning to me :)

OK, picture if you will a 103 on 10g headshell with a 9g spacer made of copper adding mass. Arm level with the LP surface. Tracking set to 2.5g, anti skate adjusted to perfection (!) and the whole caboodle ably tracking the 3rd 300Hz 'torture track' on the HFNRR Test LP. Schweet.

The Acid Test,... I love the LP 'Joan Armatrading', its got ace songs and and ace playing too but IME shows up 'problems' especially on 'Sss''s where Joan's voice is high in the mix. Last track side one, 'Save Me'. Its a killer track on so many levels IMO. It opens with the phrase 'Sinking...' which upsets my 103...eeek! The 103 doesn't track it aswell as a DL110 in the same arm on the same TT quite simply. Summats up. The opening 'S's are breaking up on the 103, the 110 nails it everytime BUT... now this is the odd thang, the 110 doesn't cope quite so well on the 3rd Torture trackon the Test LP which the 103 sails though!!! Oooerrr Missus.

I've got another 103 with a few hours on it plus a new 103R I can try too but at the mo the 110 out plays the 103.

[Stratmangler]

That track is sibilent to start with!
Have you listened to the CD version? :eek:

[NRG]

Dave try lowering the back of the arm as a first step, then review the alignment, not sure what the standard techie is but it may need tweaking. I'd also try some sort of damping like a soft plastic washer between the cartridge and headshell. I will add though that my rebodied 103R also exhibits a sibilant tendency but the SA less so.....

[Dave the bass]

:) Yups! Have the CD too Chris, sure the LP is 'hot' but its not OTT IMO. The 110 copes admirably, the 103 doesn't.

[Dave the bass]

Dave try lowering the back of the arm as a first step, then review the alignment, not sure what the standard techie is but it may need tweaking. I'd also try some sort of damping like a soft plastic washer between the cartridge and headshell. I will add though that my rebodied 103R also exhibits a sibilant tendency but the SA less so.....

Will do Neal, I can get the back lower so that pivot is lower than the Head shell a bit. Over hang is set at 52mm with the simple techie overhand gauge. It doesn't tie in with the standard 9" tonearm alignments strangely but a chum has found this too. His 110 tracks like a tracky track thingy too BTW!

I'm not giving up on the 103 variants yet, just very surprised at what the 110 is capable of.

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

That’s disappointing, mate!

Two things: increase VTF to 2.6g (as that’s the sweet spot for the 103), and also check that azimuth is spot on, with a headshell ‘bubble’ spirit level. If azimuth is out, it will adversely affect tracking ability.

At 2.6g VTF, anti-skate should be set to approx 2.5.

See what (if anything) happens.

Marco.

P.S You’re not still using the little rubber washer, which comes attached to the bayonet fitting of the headshell, are you? If so, lose it - the sound will improve that way.

[Marco]

Oh, also, which geometry have you used to align the cartridge? With the Technics arm, you must use Stevenson. Better still, use the little plastic Technics overhang tool to set alignment, as that’s what gives the best results.

If you don’t have one, you need to get one (cheap as chips on ebay) :)

Marco.

[anubisgrau]

i personally believe it's a waste of time trying to fit any of the 103 varieties into the 1210 arm. i tend to believe it's possible until i've heard how does it sound into a dedicated 12" broadcast denon arm of a high mass (304 i think). it's utterly impossible to get such a performance from a 1210 arm, no mod can take you there.

i don't know which cartridge plays optimal in a 1210 arm but neither 103 or 103R are.

[Marco]

Hi Gordan,

I have some sympathy with that statement, as indeed is confirmed by my (extensive) personal experience of using SL-1210s with many different arms and cartridges, including the 103. However, although a Denon DL-103 can never be fully optimised on a Technics arm, it can be made to work acceptably well.

In that respect, I think Dave’s almost there, but I suspect that the problem he’s encountering is largely due to the distortion created by incorrect cartridge alignment. The symptoms he’s described seem to point in that direction.

I believe that this can be fixed by realigning the cartridge using Stevenson, as opposed to the Baerwald geometry, used with most protractors. Indeed, with a Technics arm, the easiest way to align the cartridge is to use the little tool, supplied with all new turntables, and which is also available to buy on ebay:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Technics-SL-1200-1210-Overhang-Gauge-Cartridge-Stylus-Set-Up-Aid-SFK0135-01-/151080776456?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Performance_DJ_Par ts_Accessories&hash=item232d1db308

When using the Technics arm, I’ve always had great results aligning cartridges with those :)

Marco.

[anubisgrau]

hi marco,

i agree i was maybe harsh with my statement but i lived more than a year with 1210 and 103, tried everything known and possible, changed shells, added a mass, experimented with screws pressure, cartridge fixing, blu tac, oil damping etc etc. i've though i've achieved a satisfactory result and i kinda liked what i've heard, though it was far from perfect. but - given the price i was happy.

however the 103 results in the dedicated denon 12" arms are really astonishing for what you pay. in my opinion, this puts a completely new light on the performance of these cartridges and if anyone believes he heard the best 103 can do without hearing it in DA-304 or DA-308, i would honestly suggest to try to hear that combo too. i tried it in a FR64fx and while much better than in a 1210 arm, it's still not what it delivers in a heavy denon arm. it comes very close to what SPU delivers in FR64. people who are trying to achieve a good result on a lesser budget can save a lot of money and get a very competitive performance.

[Marco]

Yes, undoubtedly the 103 works best on the 12” Denon tonearms it was originally designed to partner, for broadcasting purposes.

However, superb results can also be obtained with a 12” Jelco (such as this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/HI-END-JELCO-SA-750LB-12-TONEARM-WITH-HEAVIER-AND-STANDARD-COUNTER-WEIGHT-/290788749714) or SME 3012, and also with some high-quality 9” arms (augmented with suitably high-mass headshells).

I agree that, used in that context, through a top-notch SUT (or head amp) and valve MM phono stage, the 103 is a veritable giant-killer! :)

Marco.

[Marco]

Hey, Dave, any more news about your 103? :)

Marco.

[Dave the bass]

"Back on the scene with a naff tracking machine"... as a Hip Hopper might say!


Hi Dave,

That’s disappointing, mate!



I share your disappointment Marco!!!

Yup's I tried increasing VTF a smidge to 2.6 but it made no difference in the real-world test with music, it was already tracing torture track 3 fine anyway unlike the 110, odd.

Will do, I'll check Azimuth with a bubble and also confirm using the mirror-method sighting down the handy painted line on the front of 103. Thats how I had to set up the Azimuth on the DIY Schroeder.

The little rubber O-ring is still in place, I'll remove it but I'd be interested to know why its recommended TBH.

I still haven't given up yet :)



Oh, also, which geometry have you used to align the cartridge? With the Technics arm, you must use Stevenson. Better still, use the little plastic Technics overhang tool to set alignment, as that’s what gives the best results.

If you don’t have one, you need to get one (cheap as chips on ebay) :)

Marco.

I used the proper Technics overhang gauge, its sets OH to 52mm if I understand correctly yeah? Any pointers as towhere I can confirm I'm using the Stevenson alignment?


Dave try lowering the back of the arm as a first step, then review the alignment, not sure what the standard techie is but it may need tweaking. I'd also try some sort of damping like a soft plastic washer between the cartridge and headshell. I will add though that my rebodied 103R also exhibits a sibilant tendency but the SA less so.....

Ta Neal, with the Copper spacer in place I can now get lower than horizontal at the back, I'll give it a try. I'll experiment with various cartridge/headshell interface materials too. I've got some thin Butyl rubber sheeting around the workshop amongst other 'stuff'', I'll see what I can find. The idea is to decouple slightly the cartridge + mass spacer from the headshell yeah?

[Marco]

Yup's I tried increasing VTF a smidge to 2.6 but it made no difference in the real-world test with music, it was already tracing torture track 3 fine anyway unlike the 110, odd.


No worries. However, 2.6g should sound better, overall, with all types of music played.


Will do, I'll check Azimuth with a bubble and also confirm using the mirror-method sighting down the handy painted line on the front of 103. Thats how I had to set up the Azimuth on the DIY Schroeder.


Excellent. Ensuring that azimuth is correctly adjusted is absolutely crucial with any cartridge, in order to get it to perform optimally. The nonsense one reads about spherical styli supposedly being virtually ‘immune’ to set-up issues is, quite frankly, nonsense!


The little rubber O-ring is still in place, I'll remove it but I'd be interested to know why its recommended TBH.


I believe the theory goes along the lines of, because the 103 (being of such low-compliance) chucks a lot of energy into the arm, and you want that energy to dissipate freely through a ‘lossy’-style of tonearm (such as all detachable headshell arms are, by nature) - that effect is better achieved when the headshell is directly coupled to the arm, rather than decoupled, when the rubber ‘O-ring’ is in place (and thus energy is stored, rather than dissipated) - summat like that, anyway! :)

Things should defo sound a little better without the ‘O-ring'.


I used the proper Technics overhang gauge, its sets OH to 52mm if I understand correctly yeah? Any pointers as towhere I can confirm I'm using the Stevenson alignment?


The Technics overhang gauge, I believe, conforms to Stevenson geometry, so if you’ve used it correctly (gotten the very tip of the stylus *absolutely* parallel with the little groove cut out of the ‘arm’ underneath, on the little plastic tool), all should be fine.

One other small thing too, experiment with how tightly you do up the cartridge screws on the headshell, as sometimes it sounds better with them ‘Linn tight’, and others, just lightly nipped up.

Marco.

[Jimbo]

Yes, undoubtedly the 103 works best on the 12” Denon tonearms it was originally designed to partner, for broadcasting purposes.

However, superb results can also be obtained with a 12” Jelco (such as this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/HI-END-JELCO-SA-750LB-12-TONEARM-WITH-HEAVIER-AND-STANDARD-COUNTER-WEIGHT-/290788749714) or SME 3012, and also with some high-quality 9” arms (augmented with suitably high-mass headshells).

I agree that, used in that context, through a top-notch SUT (or head amp) and valve MM phono stage, the 103 is a veritable giant-killer! :)

Marco.

Hi Marco,

hope all ok with you and things calmed down a bit after Christmas?

I was very impressed indeed with your Turntable after hearing it at NEBO and particularly impressed wth the Denon 103 through the head amp and my Croft.

I have been thinking of going down the MC route myself but have been put off by the price of many of the good MC cartridges out there. However the Denon 103 looks very reasonable for the price but I appreciate it needs to be sympathetically executed in a tonearm that will work well with the cartridge.

I am just wondering if the VPI JMW9T Tonearm I have would be suitable. it is a Unipivot design, and its effective mass is 9.5 -10 grams. The tonearm is also very well damped internally. Do you think it may be suitable to run a Denon 103 in this arm or is it a case of 'suck it and see' ?:scratch:

cheers

Jim

[Marco]

Hi Jim,

I’m fine (just bracing myself for the heavy snow predicted in our area). Hope you are well. Glad you enjoyed the T/T. I also thought that it produced some nice sounds, through your Croft and my Paul Hynes head amp :)

Ok, first of all, the cartridge you heard on my T/T at NEBO was a Denon DL-S1, not a DL-103 - the former being rather more expensive (£500 new, as opposed to £130)! ;)

This is what you heard, matey (see thread when I first got the DL-S1):

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?31661-Just-pulled-the-trigger-on-one-of-these-babies

However, the DL-103 can also sound superb, when used in the right context. Your VPI JMW9T would work, but you’d need to add about 19g of mass to the headshell (in the form of a ’spacer’), in order for the cartridge to perform near its potential - and then have the ability to balance out the added mass at the counterweight end…

Therefore, there’d be a bit of work needed to get things right, but nothing too daunting. There are other cartridges, however, you could use that would be more of a simple ‘drop in’.

Marco.

[NRG]

Ta Neal, with the Copper spacer in place I can now get lower than horizontal at the back, I'll give it a try. I'll experiment with various cartridge/headshell interface materials too. I've got some thin Butyl rubber sheeting around the workshop amongst other 'stuff'', I'll see what I can find. The idea is to decouple slightly the cartridge + mass spacer from the headshell yeah?

Yo Dave, as Marco said use without the rubber O ring, I use a copper washer (with a slot cut in it) on all my detachable 'shells. By all means try rubber between cart and 'shell but I found soft plastic tended to work better...and yes don't over tighten..

[Jimbo]

Hi Jim,

I’m fine (just bracing myself for the heavy snow predicted in our area). Hope you are well. Glad you enjoyed the T/T. I also thought that it produced some nice sounds, through your Croft and my Paul Hynes head amp :)

Ok, first of all, the cartridge you heard on my T/T at NEBO was a Denon DL-S1, not a DL-103 - the former being rather more expensive (£500 new, as opposed to £130)! ;)

This is what you heard, matey (see thread when I first got the DL-S1):

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?31661-Just-pulled-the-trigger-on-one-of-these-babies

However, the DL-103 can also sound superb, when used in the right context. Your VPI JMW9T would work, but you’d need to add about 19g of mass to the headshell (in the form of a ’spacer’), in order for the cartridge to perform near its potential - and then have the ability to balance out the added mass at the counterweight end…

Therefore, there’d be a bit of work needed to get things right, but nothing too daunting. There are other cartridges, however, you could use that would be more of a simple ‘drop in’.

Marco.

Cheers for that Marco, the DL-S1 is a stunning cartridge and this is where I would like to start with a MC so thanks for the links regarding your review of this.
I would be happy to spend £500 on a MC as this sounds comparatively cheap compared to some of the highly priced exotica out there!

However before I pursue this avenue maybe I need to take into account other MC cartridges that may be worth looking at at this price point such as the AT33PTG ii. You mentioned other cartridges that may be a more simple drop in for my tonearm, could you suggest which ones I should consider?:thumbsup:

I know I will be looking also at a head amp or SUT to facilitate this move with the Croft which I need to add in to the total expenditure although I might get my preamp modified to work with MC cartridges internally:eyebrows:

I currently use a 2M Black MM with the Croft which does sound very good indeed, however I recently heard a MC cartridge which left the 2M Black dead hence my interest in the MC route. The MC Cartridge was however £1700!:eek:

Sorry if I crashed the 103R post but I was presuming this was the cartridge you were using at NEBO:doh:

[anubisgrau]

Yo Dave, as Marco said use without the rubber O ring, I use a copper washer (with a slot cut in it) on all my detachable 'shells. By all means try rubber between cart and 'shell but I found soft plastic tended to work better...and yes don't over tighten..

this is interesting re copper washer. back in the days when i'd been trying to squeeze the most out of 103 in 1210 arm, the best results were provided with placing a circle made of hair-thin copper wire (of a enameled transformer wire type) between cartridge and shell, plus loose coupling.

have no idea why like that, but that's how it was.

[Tarzan]

l use an ART Q damper between my SME V and Denon DL103 with rather fine results, dunno how much it weighs though.......:lol:

[Dave the bass]

Ta for the O ring advice Marco and Neal, I've removed the rubber O rings on all three headshells I'm currently playing (ooopppsss... I mean carrying "out experiments on"...) and am making/modding bits every day. I'll report back when there's more definite results in but preliminary tests with the O ring removed on the 103 Headshell and 23g (!) of Copper Mass WITH 0.5mm thick rubber decoupling is poor, I took the mass too far (as an experiment) and it results in a dull lifeless sound overall and still can't navigate 'Save Me' with the confidence the 110 does. Removing the O ring from the 110 Headshell moves it even further ahead at the mo, L + R imaging seemed to open up further.

I'm going to play with the .5mm thick rubber decoupling on some lighter mass spacers and see how that performs this weekend.

Lowering VTA to as low (below horizontal at the rear) as I can go maybe helps the 103 in its Sibilance struggle but to me it seems to strangle the music and that only added to the dull sound in last nights 'sperrymentalism's.

Still not giving up! :)

EDIT. Couple of pictures. Latest 'offering to the great God(s)s of fine-tracking' is a Rubber damped/Copper spacer in combo with the Technics Headshell weighing in at 15.2g (plus the weight of the 2 mounting bolts + Nuts). A smidge lighter than recommended but we'll see how this performs at the weekend.
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z109/davethebass1/CIMG0547_zpsc480337f.jpg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/davethebass1/media/CIMG0547_zpsc480337f.jpg.html)

and here he is having a little sleep, its been a big day for him... Ssshhhh!
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z109/davethebass1/CIMG0546_zps795883a4.jpg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/davethebass1/media/CIMG0546_zps795883a4.jpg.html)





Sorry if I crashed the 103R post but I was presuming this was the cartridge you were using at NEBO:doh:

No prob's Mr Jimbo, don't worry about it.


this is interesting re copper washer.... the best results were provided with placing a circle made of hair-thin copper wire (of a enameled transformer wire type) between cartridge and shell, plus loose coupling.

have no idea why like that, but that's how it was.

I'm-a-gonna-get-me some copper wire to play with too.

Whahey!

DTB

[Dave the bass]

Still haven't given up!

Right, so I'd removed the little rubber O-rings on each headshell and I've made up some nice neat copper replacements.

See...
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z109/davethebass1/CIMG0551_zpse7d25715.jpg (http://s195.photobucket.com/user/davethebass1/media/CIMG0551_zpse7d25715.jpg.html)

I'd like to say thats totally resolved the prob's with the DL-103, but nope! I still dread listening to any tracks with high level HF in knowing its gonna hurt my ears! No really. I just cant get lost in the music like I can with the DL-110, I'm a bit on edge listening ahead in preparation with the 103, thats not right surely.

But, still not given up. I've purchased a mirrored alignment protractor which will help get the Azimuth nailed accurately. I've recently noticed (and hadn't before I admit) that where the pin on the headshell socket slots into the Arm socket groove there's a tiny amount of clearance which can affect Azimuth, its tiny, but its there. The mirrored gauge will help get that tweaked to perfection.

The 103, its certainly a high level of attention cartridge innit :)

I've got a brand new boxed 103R to try if I can't get either of the 2 x 103's to play ball nicely. If that doesn't work I'm selling all 3 and buying a bucket load of summat else.... :)

[NRG]

Sometimes Dave things are just not meant to be....I know you've set the cart alignment to manufacturers spec but if you want to exhaust all or any possibilities (not that I think this will resolve your issue...but.....) have a read of this: http://www.vinylengine.com/twisting-your-cartridge-headshell.shtml

[Dave the bass]

Sometimes Dave things are just not meant to be....
Eeeeeek, wot, y'mean me an' vinyl!?:) But....but...I've got tons of the stuff, I started collecting in 1973!

OK, Ta Neal, that link has got the brain cells ticking. I've got more experimenting to do. The Alignment protractor on the way is based on the Baerwald Alignment I believe so I'll try more a-fettlin' this weekend again and report back in. Thanks again for the guidance, really appreciate it.

[Dave the bass]

Major fettling this weekend. Interesting results. Does anyone know if there's any differences in stylus profile between the 103 and 103R?

I understand the generator is lower Z, and the coils use a higher spec copper wire IIRC. Anything else between a 103 and it's 'R' brethren?

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

No difference in stylus profile. The only difference between them is what you’ve stated, and the fact that, as a result, they measure differently.

Given your latest shenanigans, trying to get your 103 to ‘sing’, I have arrived at two possible conclusions:

1) It’s working as well as it possibly can on the Technics arm, and you’re simply picking up on the sonic limitations of the latter, and how they affect the performance of the cartridge (as what you’re describing now, I’ve also heard in the same context).

2) The 103 you’ve got is a duffer!

;)

Marco.

[Dave the bass]

Ta Marco. Well if the 103 is a duffer, its got an identical twin!... as I've got 2 x 103's that both exhibit the same HF 'characteristic'. They've both been previously used (by me) on my other TT which is a massive plinthed Goldring G99 with a 12" DIY Schroeder Clone where they sounded lovely (IMO!). One cart was in use for ~12 months, the other for about 3 months. I used to replace the 103 every year in January as the TT was our main source until Vortexbox came along about 3 years ago so the Vinyl set up took a back seat while we embraced the Digital world (we like it).

Neither of the 103's are damaged as far as I know. So, this weekend seeing I was going nowhere with either 103 in the standard arm I fitted a brand new 103R, now then, this is a different kettle of fish! It works! No really! :) Sure, it's 'bright' in the high mids upwards but it tracks all 3 Torture tracks easily but more importantly doesn't induce fright like the 2 x 103's do in the same arm using the same alignments and tracking etc etc etc. The 103R I can happily live with, as it's brand new (well, 5Hr's old as a my fellow HiFi tweaker chum Thomas borrowed it as a compare/contrast Cart against some others he was trying) I'm going to leave it in for a few weeks and put a few hours on it and see if the soound flattens out a smidge. Failing that I can adjust the cartridge loading, I've got a series of resistors across the SUT Primary IIRC to tweak the loading the cart see's. It been an interesting time! The mirrored Baerwald Alignment protractor helped a lot in combo with the Technics overhang gauge.

Getting there (possibly!).

[Marco]

Whilst I’m glad that the 103R is hitting the spot, it simply doesn’t make much sense that it’s tracking better than your 103 (in the same arm), as both cartridges are fitted with the same type of stylus (spherical/conical).

However, as I’m never one to dwell too much on the ‘whys and wherefores’ in hi-fi, as long as something sounds good, I’d simply say: sit back and enjoy the music! :cool:

Marco.

P.S The ‘R’ is a bit brighter sounding than the stock 103. That sonic characteristic in inherent in its design, although the sound will ‘flesh out’ a little once the cartridge has run-in properly.

[NRG]

I have a feeling as the coil assembly it different the Effective Tip Mass is different between the two despite the same stylus profile hence the better HF performance of the R, this could be what Dave is hearing...

[RichB]

Alright lads!

I've just read through this thread as I've been considering the dl-103 for my at1005mkii arm with sumiko headshell. Like Jimbo, I'd also mistaken Marco's cart for one at NEBO (no offence intended Marco, I mean it in a good way);) and it was hearing your deck which got me inspired to look upon the 1210 with a fresh pair of eyes and give it the love it deserved.

Some of what I've read here has put me off, even though I understand it might be a better match for the at1005/sumiko rather than the stock techy arm/headshell.

I'm of limited patience when it comes to tt set ups and think I'd have thrown the towel in before Dave tbh. (btw Dave, think we met at Owston and I very much enjoyed hearing a bit of 'specialist' music through your amps:eyebrows:)

So, that led me to looking at the dl-110 instead. Is this any less pernickity in set up, sounds like it. If so I'll give it a go, also negating the need for a SUT or MC stage.

I've also just picked up an at440ml at a very good price from the bay, so when its here I'll compare with the dl-110 if the collected wisdom declares its a good choice.

I was just intrigued by what I've heard about the AT and was hoping for a bit of mojo with the arm.

[Marco]

I have a feeling as the coil assembly it different the Effective Tip Mass is different between the two despite the same stylus profile hence the better HF performance of the R, this could be what Dave is hearing...

Sounds feasible, but then all the bog-standard 103s I’ve ever used (on proper arms) haven’t exhibited the traits Dave has mentioned…..

Marco.

[Marco]

Yo Rich, hows it hangin’? :D


Alright lads!

I've just read through this thread as I've been considering the dl-103 for my at1005mkii arm with sumiko headshell. Like Jimbo, I'd also mistaken Marco's cart for one at NEBO (no offence intended Marco, I mean it in a good way);) and it was hearing your deck which got me inspired to look upon the 1210 with a fresh pair of eyes and give it the love it deserved.


No problemo. ’Twas a DL-S1 you guys heard - a rather different beast from a DL-103. Glad you enjoyed it, though! :cool:


Some of what I've read here has put me off, even though I understand it might be a better match for the at1005/sumiko rather than the stock techy arm/headshell.


Yes, I’d concur with that.


I'm of limited patience when it comes to tt set ups and think I'd have thrown the towel in before Dave tbh. (btw Dave, think we met at Owston and I very much enjoyed hearing a bit of 'specialist' music through your amps:eyebrows:)

So, that led me to looking at the dl-110 instead. Is this any less pernickity in set up, sounds like it. If so I'll give it a go, also negating the need for a SUT or MC stage.

I've also just picked up an at440ml at a very good price from the bay, so when its here I'll compare with the dl-110 if the collected wisdom declares its a good choice.

I was just intrigued by what I've heard about the AT and was hoping for a bit of mojo with the arm.

Either cartridge would work well on the Techy. Just make sure that the sonic signature of the partnering phono stage is nice and meaty and has some ‘balls’, to counteract the ‘lean and punchy’ (but detailed) sound of the carts. Something good with valves would be ideal, such as a Firebottle or Croft :)

Marco.

[RichB]

Yo Rich, hows it hangin’? :D



No problemo. ’Twas a DL-S1 you guys heard - a rather different beast from a DL-103. Glad you enjoyed it, though! :cool:



Yes, I’d concur with that.



Either cartridge would work well on the Techy. Just make sure that the sonic signature of the partnering phono stage is nice and meaty and has some ‘balls’, to counteract the ‘lean and punchy’ (but detailed) sound of the carts. Something good with valves would be ideal, such as a Firebottle or Croft :)

Marco.

Both very different in their presentation though aren't they... a valve phono stage was what I had mind.

[walpurgis]

I was using an EAR 834P (mc version) valve phono stage when I bought my Denon DL-103R. It sounded good enough, but I then got a Graham Slee ERA Gold V solid state stage (to use with my Osawa SUT) and compared the two units with the Denon in the TT.

The Slee ran circles around the EAR, far more neutral, great depth, tight bass and a really sweet treble, no SS signature at all. You'd not tell whether it was valve or SS.

I've since moved on to a Graham Slee Reflex M, also used with my SUT and it sounds superb. I'm astonished such good phono stages can be bought for such reasonable prices as the two Slees mentioned.

[Dave the bass]

I have a feeling as the coil assembly it different the Effective Tip Mass is different between the two despite the same stylus profile hence the better HF performance of the R, this could be what Dave is hearing...
I confess I had to look into what 'Effective Tip Mass' was, huzah for Vinyl Engine. OK, as I understand it the lower electrical Z of the 'R's generator coils reflects back mechanically through the suspension and cantilever assembly and to inertia appears as a lower mass than (say) a 103 with it's higher Generator Z. I think thats the gist of it.

Taking it further I was browsing the Data on the two copies of operating instructions that come with the 103 and R variants thinking I could see something alluding to this in the published spec for Compliance... unfortunatley the value for each cartridge is in different standards! The 103 is spec'd at 5 x 10(-6) cm/dyne whilst the 'R' version seems to be rated in m/N @ 5x10(-3). Doh!

I'm thinking of comparing the 'good sounding' R stylus to the 'manky sounding' 103's under a microscope, <adopts silly voice > "I just can't let it lie"!


Whilst I’m glad that the 103R is hitting the spot, it simply doesn’t make much sense that it’s tracking better than your 103 (in the same arm), as both cartridges are fitted with the same type of stylus (spherical/conical).

However, as I’m never one to dwell too much on the ‘whys and wherefores’ in hi-fi, as long as something sounds good, I’d simply say: sit back and enjoy the music! :cool:

Marco.

P.S The ‘R’ is a bit brighter sounding than the stock 103. That sonic characteristic in inherent in its design, although the sound will ‘flesh out’ a little once the cartridge has run-in properly.

I agree Marco, I don't understand it either why I'm getting these differences. Personally, I like the 'whys and wherefores'... thats part of the appeal of DIY HiFi so I'm gonna go in deeper, hand me my Microscope Curruthers! :)

Glad to hear the 103R settles in a little bit more after run-in, cheers Marco, thats given me even more hope for its longevity in the SL1210.


Alright lads!

I've just read through this thread as I've been considering the dl-103 for my at1005mkii arm with sumiko headshell. Like Jimbo, I'd also mistaken Marco's cart for one at NEBO (no offence intended Marco, I mean it in a good way);) and it was hearing your deck which got me inspired to look upon the 1210 with a fresh pair of eyes and give it the love it deserved.

Some of what I've read here has put me off, even though I understand it might be a better match for the at1005/sumiko rather than the stock techy arm/headshell.

I'm of limited patience when it comes to tt set ups and think I'd have thrown the towel in before Dave tbh. (btw Dave, think we met at Owston and I very much enjoyed hearing a bit of 'specialist' music through your amps:eyebrows:)

So, that led me to looking at the dl-110 instead. Is this any less pernickity in set up, sounds like it. If so I'll give it a go, also negating the need for a SUT or MC stage.

I've also just picked up an at440ml at a very good price from the bay, so when its here I'll compare with the dl-110 if the collected wisdom declares its a good choice.

I was just intrigued by what I've heard about the AT and was hoping for a bit of mojo with the arm.

Hello Rich, yeah, its all coming back to me now! 'Specialist Music'...... :lol: Mind you it was for a very 'specialist audience', did you see 'em? Bunch of 'erberts... I'm in!!

In my limited experience here and given that you're of self-confessed limited patience WRT TT carts, DL110 slips into a 1210 but I've no experience with the TT you mention at all! Nuff said.

[NRG]

Sounds feasible, but then all the bog-standard 103s I’ve ever used (on proper arms) haven’t exhibited the traits Dave has mentioned…..

Marco.

Maybe the Techincs OEM one isn't up to the job as noted further up-thread...

[Marco]

Yeah, Neal, but the thing that doesn't make sense is that, in Dave's set-up, the Technics arm seems perfectly 'up to the job' with a DL-103R, but not the bog-standard 103...

If the arm is good enough to work with one cartridge, then it should be the same with the other... There's nothing about the 'R' that should make the Technics arm handle it better than it does the bog-standard 103... :scratch:

Marco.

[Dave the bass]

Remember this thread?!

Well so had I too until I was reading through HiFi World readers letters the other day when lo and behold, a fella was having exactly the same prob on the same LP and same track.

Yup's, groove wall damage was the excuse offered, sounds reasonable. 103R reveals damage more so than the DL110 on my copy of Joans finest.

Elsewhere on every other LP I have the 103R continues to impress, huzah!

Moral of the story, know thy test records are perfect before coming to conclusions, duh, yer a wally DTB :-)

[Marco]

How's it going, Dave? Hope you are well :)

Lol - glad you got to the bottom of it in the end! Yup, groove wall damage is common, particularly on second-hand LPs.

I've suffered the effect of that too, especially on classical music records, during orchestral crescendos, where it's obviously that the poor quality of the styli previous owners have used and/or incorrect set-up of their cartridges, has caused such damage - and as you've found, there's no way of eliminating it.

Enjoy the 103 - it's a remarkably good sounding design, when correctly partnered and set-up properly :cool:

Marco.

[Dave the bass]

Hi ya Marco, its actually my own copy that I've owned from new IIRC. We did have 2 copies, I gave one away so any damage would've been done by me. When I 1st got into 'hifi' as a teenager I had all manner of tatt, still have the uncharitable might say!... so I'd have to apportion blame to a particularly nasty Garrard SP25 Mk4 and possibly a crystal cart at the time. :)

[daytona600]

you don,t have a change the mass of the headshell to get better tracking

Test equipment: Technics SL-1200MK3 turntable, Denon DL-103R cartridge
-Test LP: Hi-Fi News Test LP

*Generally considered desirable frequency ranges (from a point of view of a cartridge): Lateral: 8-15Hz / Vertical: 8-15Hz

Just by changing the headshell Now

Lateral resonance test, 25-5Hz
Vertical resonance test, 16-6Hz

headshells are all the same !!!





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Sc7UgQNkfc

[daytona600]

Nasotec Swing Head Shell - a new solution to an old problem

Korean Nasotec Corporation Intoduce the Swing Headshell for all you vinylistas.

This ‘Swing Headshell’ has a very soft and flexible joint designed to make your cartridge always align with the tangent of the groove The joint precisely machined joint has small miniature bearing inside making the “swing” of the headshell very smooth and sensitive & will ensure the stylus keeps delicate and unbiased tracking.

Swing Headshell will reduce tracking angle error when installed properly and should give a better sound quality than fixed headshells.

Most of the vibration from the cartridge will be dissipated at the joint and should reduce arm resonances.

In effect Nasotec the Swing Headshell acts almost as if it were another, and very short, tonearm and will offer up a more stable stereo image than fixed headshell cartridges.

Swing Headshell to your arm will extend the life of your stylus.

The Swing Headshell is available in three different styles to suit different tonearm and cartridge set ups

This ‘Swing Headshell’ has a very soft and flexible joint designed to make a cartridge always align with the tangent of the groove circle. In addition, the joint machined precisely has small miniature bearing inside and makes the very flexible and sensitive swings. Therefore, the stylus keeps delicate and unbiased groove tracking. The sound has no strained but dynamic, high resolution, firm bass and low vinyl noise

The problem with angular deflection when playing vinyl is about as old as the turntable itself. Nasotec have found a new solution to the problem - a sort of tangential head-shell?

Choice of solution for arm on turntable is often a choice between one of many evils. There are many parameters that must be met, and horizontal angle playback is one of these parameters. As is known, traditional radial arms introducing angular errors most places on the disc. And a shorter arm produce bigger angle deviation towards the center. If you increase the length of the arm, deviation is reduced. But simultaneously other parameters are introduced, such as increased effective mass.

Tangential arm is the optimum solution for the angular deviation. It provides perfect horizontal tracking angle through the entire board. But then, there are also here new concerns, such as displacement mechanism..

Nasotec have found a different solution to provide tangential playback. They have made a head shell they call Swing Headshell. The concept is extremely simple, and is based on a part of the head shell providing automatic orientation adjustment relative to the groove direction. Those of us who have tried towing a boat knows that it finds out the direction of speed, at least if the rope is attached to the center of the bow. And we also know that there may be some oscillation from time to time ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ4UKLMWetM

[Dave the bass]

Very interesting Scott, ta for the heads up. I've not heard of that device before.

Out of interest, have you got a video of how well it navigates the Torture Tracks on the same disc?

[daytona600]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASezaLkTaVshttp://snvinyl.co.uk/WebRoot/Daily/Shops/eshop943300/56D0/A296/3104/6CCB/D058/0A0C/05BE/47FD/0300050000052.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASezaLkTaVs

no video on the hifi news torture tracks , will see if i can make a video with mine before & after
video resonance test dave

[Dave the bass]

will see if i can make a video with mine before & after
video resonance test dave

Nice one ta.