Denon 103M + Orsonic headshell porn

[Wakefield Turntables]

Had 10 minutes so I posted these pix.

171661716717168

Sound's great pretty low output though.

[struth]

Looking good Andy..

[danilo]

Well Dohh.. Who cares if it even works.. it certainly looks trick enough for the job.

[Firebottle]

Style in monochrome :wow:

[anubisgrau]

What is so special about that headshell?

[Wakefield Turntables]

What is so special about that headshell?

They work very well with the SME 3012 and Garrard 301 combination.

[anubisgrau]

They work very well with the SME 3012 and Garrard 301 combination.

with any pickup? koetsu?

[Clive197]

Love the look of the headshell. My only regret is that my Origin Live arm has a fixed headshell which makes changing cartridges a bit of a faff. Back in the day it was thought that the SME type collar was inferior against the fixed type which was acknowledged by SME themselves.

[Barry]

Any arm offering a detachable headshell introduces an extra mechanical junction or interface, and hence can compromises rigidity and allow additional resonances to occur. The trade-off is mechanical rigidity and integrity for convenience. If you only use one cartridge, then an arm with a fixed headshell is the way to go. If however you like to experiment with different cartridges, then using an arm having a detachable headshell is much more convenient.

The Orsonic headshell permits a wide variety of adjustments, but in doing so introduces at least one extra mechanical interface. You don't get anything for free!

[RobbieGong]

I'd go as far as to say that in the context of a good arm with a good securing collar (some are not great) good cart, good system etc, any possible negative in terms of what your ears would hear, fixed against non fixed is a non issue.

[Barry]

Most of my pick-up arms have a detachable headshell, as I like to experiment with different cartridges. The mechanical resonance spectrum of an arm with a fixed headshell can be shown to present fewer resonances compared with a nominally identical arm offering a detached headshell option (for example the SME 3009 FH vs. the 3009/S2), but like you I would argue that an arm with a well designed bayonet headshell coupling can 'sound' equally as good as a fixed headshell design.

[Marco]

Any arm offering a detachable headshell introduces an extra mechanical junction or interface, and hence can compromises rigidity and allow additional resonances to occur. The trade-off is mechanical rigidity and integrity for convenience.

Yes, but it's not quite as simple as that: you have to ensure that you're comparing like with like. Undoubtedly, if one were comparing two arms (fitted with the same cartridge), otherwise identical but for one having a detachable headshell, it's almost certain that the one with a fixed headshell would sound better, for the reasons you describe.

However, if one were comparing, say a Jelco SA-750 (with detachable headshell), and a Rega RB300 (with a fixed headshell), the former *could* produce superior performance simply because, detachable headshell aside, it could be overall the better arm, as let's not forget that there's rather more to the design of a good tonearm than simply the headshell arrangement - bearings for one thing...

Also, you have to consider that some cartridges, notably low-compliance ones, such as the Denon DL-103, chuck a lot of energy into the arm, and so in that scenario, a 'lossy fixing', such as a detachable headshell, can actually be beneficial.

That's one of the reasons, convenience aside, why pretty much every Japanese arm made made has a detachable headshell.

Yes, the Japs tend to be types who own many different cartridges, and so that need is facilitated by using arms with detachable headshells, but they also know that, in certain applications (especially as they also tend to be fans of low-compliance cartridges), that 'lossy fixing' can be a good thing.

Another example in hi-fi of not everything simply being 'black or white' ;)

Marco.

[Barry]

Yes, but it's not quite as simple as that: you have to compare like with like. Undoubtedly, if one were comparing two arms (fitted with the same cartridge), otherwise identical but for one having a detachable headshell, it's almost certain that the one with a fixed headshell would sound better, for the reasons you describe.

However, if one were comparing, say a Jelco SA-750 (with detachable headshell), and a Rega RB300 (with a fixed headshell), the former *could* produce superior performance simply because, detachable headshell aside, it could be overall the better arm, as let's not forget that there's rather more to the design of a good tonearm than simply the headshell arrangement - bearings for one thing...

Also, you have to consider that some cartridges, notably low-compliance ones, such as the Denon DL-103, chuck a lot of energy into the arm, and so in that scenario, a 'lossy fixing', such as a detachable headshell, can actually be beneficial.

That's one of the reasons, convenience aside, why pretty much every Japanese arm made has a detachable headshell.

Yes, the Japs tend to be types who own many different cartridges, and so that need is facilitated by using arms with detachable headshells, but they also know that, in certain applications (especially as they also tend to be fans of low-compliance cartridges), that 'lossy fixing' can be a good thing! ;)

Marco.

It depends how the loss is achieved. With Decca cartridges the loss can be achieved through the slightly compliant cartridge mounting bracket used, for some others a compliant foam rubber 'isolator' is used. However the mechanical headshell-to-arm coupling may not be lossy - in fact it might have the opposite effect: the junction could present an mechanical impedance mismatch, so excess energy is reflected back to the cartridge and affect the sound.

There is another way in which excess energy can be dealt with. This is to use a rigid arm that allows the energy to ducted down the arm tube and through the bearings, where it is then dissipated in the mass of the arm base and turntable chassis. For the latter to work well, arm bearing quality is of the utmost importance.

[RobbieGong]

Interesting stuff .....

[Marco]

Indeed, Barry - all of which proves that you need to focus on things collectively, rather than JUST individually, when assessing the efficacy of tonearms, or indeed pretty much anything else in audio.

Quite simply, there is no 'one size fits all' answer to these things :)

Marco.

[Wakefield Turntables]

I'll comment more on this later, I have a 2 year old to look after. :)

[Barry]

Indeed, Barry - all of which proves that you need to focus on things collectively, rather than JUST individually, when assessing the efficacy of tonearms, or indeed pretty much anything else in audio.

Quite simply, there is no 'one size fits all' answer to these things :)

Marco.

I never said there was. All I was saying was that when comparing like with like (and I cited the fixed hadshell and detachable headshell version of the SME 3009 arm), the detachable headshell version will display more mechanical resonances than the fixed headshell version. Depending on the frequency of the resonances, their amplitude and their width (Q-factor), they may or may not have an impact on the sound.

Even if the mechanical interface is done up infinitely tight, there will still be an impedance mismatch if the interface is between different materials. I wouldn't say one should worry about the additional interfaces present with the Orsonic headshell, but it's worth bearing in mind if low compliance cartridges are used, which as you correctly state, can put out a lot of excess energy.

I could liken the effect to that of minimising the number of contacts in the mains supply (something which you are keen to pursue), but the analogy would be false.

[Marco]

I never said there was.

I know you didn't. I was simply highlighting the fact that one must often look beyond the 'obvious', to find out why stuff works or it doesn't, and that audio rarely operates on 'black or white' rules - and both of what you and I have written here on the matter proves that point :)

Marco.

[Wakefield Turntables]

I used to get really strung out about the whole headshell argument. Now I don't give a shit. It's the music which matters. If I fancy buying a Orsonic headshell and a £2K cartridge to go on the end of it, I will simply open the wallet and pay. I'm now more into buying bits of kit trying things out, finding out what sounds good, just trying different Thimgs for the fun of it. Life is too short worrying about getting maximum efficieny out of a cart or max SPPV. Just enjoy your kit and play music.

[Clive197]

As I said changing cartridges (I have 3) on my OL arm is a bit of a faff. I have often thought of getting a different arm and very nearly bought an Ortofon model which I believe is made by Jelco. I decided to stay with the OL as I actually like the idea of the fixed headshell and the continuous phono wires that go from headshell to amp without a join. I think that the SQ from that works well for me, so have made the decision to suffer the lack of convenience and ability to change the resonant frequency of an arm by headshell weight.
There is no right or wrong about this discussion, just each ones own take on the matter.

[Wakefield Turntables]

As I said changing cartridges (I have 3) on my OL arm is a bit of a faff. I have often thought of getting a different arm and very nearly bought an Ortofon model which I believe is made by Jelco. I decided to stay with the OL as I actually like the idea of the fixed headshell and the continuous phono wires that go from headshell to amp without a join. I think that the SQ from that works well for me, so have made the decision to suffer the lack of convenience and ability to change the resonant frequency of an arm by headshell weight.
There is no right or wrong about this discussion, just each ones own take on the matter.

i have both fixed and non fixed headshell systems by owing the SME V with continual wiring etc and the SME 3012. The V sits in the reference systems and does not get changed. The 3012 sits in a evolving valve based system which regularly sees updates, mods, tweaks etc. I don't worry about why or how a mod works just so long as it does! I get the best of both worlds I can tweak to my hearts content with one system and i have the reference which undergoes very little if any changes at all. It's just like you say Clive, whatever works for you ;)

[pure sound]

I really like the Orsonic headshell. I have the heavy version. I didn't want it to do anything positive but compared with the other headshells I have (mostly ADC's) it just does.

That said, this is my current fave retro combination.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh107/pure_sound/20160609_111705.jpg

[jusbe]

I really like the Orsonic headshell. I have the heavy version. I didn't want it to do anything positive but compared with the other headshells I have (mostly ADC's) it just does.

That said, this is my current fave retro combination.

How's that arm (Audio Creative)? Does it compare well to a Jelco, do you know?

[pure sound]

I have a 750L which is a nice arm & very good value for money but the Audio Creative is in a different league performance wise. The 750L can sound a little blurred or vague by comparison. Earlier this week I was looking at & listening to the banana shaped Mk2 version of the AC which has what seemed to be very fine bearings and adjustable anti-skate. that may be the one to go for if your budget would stretch that far. It'd certainly be my first choice if I were looking for an aesthetic match to the 301 or 401.

[anubisgrau]

Interesting combination, how did you end with FR-7 or whatever it is?

[Barry]

I really like the Orsonic headshell. I have the heavy version. I didn't want it to do anything positive but compared with the other headshells I have (mostly ADC's) it just does.

That said, this is my current fave retro combination.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh107/pure_sound/20160609_111705.jpg

I note the Ortofon SL15E (Mk. I) and the Shure M3D, two cartridges I have used in the past. :)

[paulf-2007]

A less than perfect fixed head shell tonearm V a very well made tonearm with removeable head shell. I believe the Stax arm with removeable head shell is way better than any of the fixed head shell tonearms I've owned.

[walpurgis]

I note the Ortofon SL15E (Mk. I) and the Shure M3D, two cartridges I have used in the past. :)

So have I.

[jusbe]

I have a 750L which is a nice arm & very good value for money but the Audio Creative is in a different league performance wise. The 750L can sound a little blurred or vague by comparison. Earlier this week I was looking at & listening to the banana shaped Mk2 version of the AC which has what seemed to be very fine bearings and adjustable anti-skate. that may be the one to go for if your budget would stretch that far. It'd certainly be my first choice if I were looking for an aesthetic match to the 301 or 401.

[Sorry to the OP for straying off topic - please see a photo of my 103Pro and Orsonic by way of apology!]

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8596/15504811653_bd77ce108f.jpg

[off topic]

[struth]

Have heard these plinths from Austria are good for money. Slate though is a great material, especially for Idlers. I use a DD with slate plinth.

[pure sound]

I note the Ortofon SL15E (Mk. I) and the Shure M3D, two cartridges I have used in the past. :)

There's also a borrowed Shindo SPU and the rear end of a Technics EPS310MC in that pic.

[pure sound]

Interesting combination, how did you end with FR-7 or whatever it is?

It is an FR-7, borrowed from another friend as I thought it might go well with this arm. It does.

[walpurgis]

a Technics EPS310MC in that pic.

That's a nice MC, I've used one. I used the very similar EPC-305MC for many years. Very fine sounding cartridge.

[pure sound]

Sadly it doesn't really lend itself to an arm as heavy as this one or even the Jelco 750L really. But yes, very nice sounding in the right arm.

[jusbe]

Guy, is that Technics resting on/attached to a slate plinth, or something else?

[pure sound]

It's actually 2 60mm slabs of slate separated by some brass spacers (actually 3 volume knobs) and both slabs then stand on 4 springs. The sprung bit weighs in at about 65 Kg and bounces very slowly. On a suspended floor it's pretty much earthquake proof. I can jump up & down next to it with no effect

But as with any SP10 it needs to be sympathetically matched to the arm & cartridge. It isn't difficult to make one sound relentless with the wrong arm choice particularly. I use the RB250 & Goldring 1042 at the rear for testing phono stages or non critical (elsewhere in the house) listening and it's ok but no match for the Jelco or the Groovemaster.

[Wakefield Turntables]

How can a discussion about the or sonic headshell morph into something about a bloody sp10, thread drift does my head in.

[danilo]

Seems as product endorsement is fairly common here.
Just perception.. could may/be wrong tho.

[Marco]

How can a discussion about the or sonic headshell morph into something about a bloody sp10, thread drift does my head in.

Andy, with respect mate, lighten up. Thread drift is part and parcel of a lively discussion, and inevitable at some point when the original thread topic runs out of 'legs'... When you're in the pub talking to your mates, do you rigidly stick to one topic of discussion, and frown upon someone who dares to bring up something else? ;)

Well, discussions here are no different! :)

Anyway, how's the 103M sounding now? I remember that you were struggling with it at the beginning - has the Orsonic helped to get it singing? :cool:

Marco.

[Marco]

Seems as product endorsement is fairly common here.
Just perception.. could may/be wrong tho.

Nothing whatsoever to do with that.

Marco.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Andy, with respect mate, lighten up. Thread drift is part and parcel of a lively discussion, and inevitable at some point when the original thread topic runs out of 'legs'... When you're in the pub talking to your mates, do you rigidly stick to one topic of discussion, and frown upon someone who dares to bring up something else? ;)

Well, discussions here are no different! :)

Anyway, how's the 103M sounding now? I remember that you were struggling with it at the beginning - has the Orsonic helped to get it singing? :cool:

Marco.

Thread drift is a pet hate. Anyway, I'm currently snowed under with upgrades to the valve system. The orsonic headshell was one such upgrade since then I have a very nice solid copper record weight which is helping things along with the 301. The Orsonic headshell and 103 are ok, but I'm going to start looking for my reference headshell and then reference cartridge to go with it. So the headshell I'm about to purchase is this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFSrethphqc :eyebrows:. I already have a set if cartridge tags organised. The cartridge itself is still in the mix, I'm addicted to the sound of the SPU. The 103M could be a giant killer if set up probably, hence the purchase of the ARCHE headshell.

[Barry]

Versatile and superbly made, but far too many mechanical junctions for my liking.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Versatile and superbly made, but far too many mechanical junctions for my liking.

I agree with every word. The junctions are an issue for me too, I'm hoping however that it will be the final cartridge headshell for me.

[pure sound]

Seems as product endorsement is fairly common here.
Just perception.. could may/be wrong tho.
If that was aimed at me, I have no connection with Technics, Jelco, Fidelity Research, Shure, Ortofon, Audio Creative, Shindo, Goldring, Rega etc etc.