View Full Version : Cartridge loading - Denon 103
Hi all,
Last night I was comparing CD and vinyl, and cam to the conclusion that the vinyl sounded 'thin' compared with CD - not something I'd really clocked previously when using carts other than the 103. I'm currently running in to a MF X-LPS2 phono stage, and wondered if the loading on this was correct for the 103... I've no idea what it is on the X-LP, and haven't been able to find this on the interweb. Would incorrect loading make the 103 lose bass weight? Treble seems fine - imaging is good, but the lower bass registers seem to be non-existant compared with CD. On Paul Simon's 'Late In The Evening' for example, the kick drum and bass seems very recessed. Can't think of anything else that would account for it.
Any thoughts?
Jason
Maybe simply because the CD has been remastered.
I own Michael Jackson, Off The Wall in three flavours:
* Vinyl, Jap press
* CD not remastered
* CD remastered.
Vinyl and not-remastered CD sound equally poor of... ehm... everything.
More brilliant and bass punch on remastered CD.
Last night I was comparing CD and vinyl
A true comparison cannot be made unless you compare a CD and LP that are known to be cut from the same master. Even then the LP may will be differently equalised on the fly during the cutting of the lacquer depending on the amount of HF or LF information on the master when total playing time of each side is taken into account.
'Cutting' a Cd is a case of pressing a few buttons, anyone can do it. Cutting a lacquer is an art form that takes many years to perfect.
IMO it is impossible to properly compare a CD and an LP.
Kris.
P.s.
On Paul Simon's 'Late In The Evening' for example, the kick drum and bass seems very recessed.
Yeah, probably eq'd at the cutting stage IMO. Otherwise the cartridge would jump out the groove when played.
OK, I'm not trying to get the same sound from CD and vinyl; I'm aware that differnt masterings will have different sonic character. I've merely noticed a difference (detrimantal) to the sound whereas before, when I've run my ADC XLM, ATOC5 etc. they haven't been thin sounding. Different yes, better sometimes, but never 'wrong'. So my specific question remains - loading for the 103, is this something wildly different to other MC carts?
Marco, I've read in your posts that the 103 requires correct loadind to 'sing' - how would you describe one incorrectly loaded?
EDITED: I've just found out the loading on the X-LP MC stage is 100ohms - good for a 103 or no?
Jason
Hi Jason,
Loading value will most certainly affect how a cartridge sounds, but 100 Ohms is pretty much ideal for a 103, as the A23 (designed specifically for the 103) loads it at just a shade over that.
I note that you're using the 103 in a Sumiko, which is a good headshell, but unfortunately its stock mass isn't sufficient, as ideally, a 103 needs (approx) 16.5g at the headshell for optimum performance, which could explain why the sound is rather bass-light.
The Sumiko headshell weighs around 12g, so you'll need to add approximately another 4.5g to the headshell (perhaps using a blob of Blu-Tak or similar?) to get the mass right. 103s can sound quite horrible otherwise: bass-light and rather course and 'spitty' at the top-end.
Also make sure that the arm is bang-on level in terms of VTA, which is very difficult to achieve with the 103 in the Techy arm, unless you're using an extra-thick mat (or combination of mats), as the arm adjustment doesn't have sufficient downwards travel to get the arm absolutely level with a cartridge as 'low-bodied' as a 103. I know this from experience, as I had the same problem!
If VTA is out, and thus sub-optimal, and there is insufficient mass on the headshell, this would definitely explain the type of sound you're getting at the moment. Also try tracking the cartridge at 2.6g, instead of the quoted 'ideal' of 2.5g - optimal VTF varies from system to system.
Try all of the above and let me know how you get on :cool:
Marco.
Kris - no worries! I know what you mean, and I maybe didn't make myself clear enough in the original posting... :)
Marco - forgot to add, I am using a stick-on weighty-vta spacy thingy wot I got from the 'bay - designed for the 103. Dunno about the mass but it must be at least 3g. My 103 has been nuded, btw.
Jason
There are too many variables then, Jason, for me to give the ideal advice, as I've no idea what effect your "stick-on weighty-vta spacy thingy" is having on the arm... Is VTA definitely bang on level, and I mean anally so?
I would also try adding more mass to the headshell, as I suspect there isn't quite enough.
Marco.
OK Marco, thanks for that. When I've more time I'll have a serious set-up session to check all the variables; I must admit, having nuded the 103 it's opened up the sound but made it harder to align! At least I know the loading is OK from the phono stage end.
Cheers,
Jason
There are so many variables here; the issue could be any number of things. Generally speaking, though, most people with properly set up 103/103R's would not consider them to be bass shy.
I'm assuming you're using the Isokinetic spacer which does weigh 3 grams, but if you've nuded the 103, the plastic body weighs 1.6 grams so you've only bumped up by 1.4 grams. That might be part of the problem-the Denons do perform better in higher mass arms-my experience running them in arms from 14 to 25 gram effective mass is that it just gets better as you increase the mass, which is what Marco is alluding to.
While attaching the cartridge nude to a metal plate may increase detail and sharpen things up it's also quite possible that the cartridge might get a bit more zingy as well, at least that is consistent with what I've read from people who have experimented along those lines.
If your 103 is brand new, there is also the issue of break-in. Out of the box the Denons are actually a bit steely and thin. After about 15 hours there will be a considerable change and then further gradual improvement through to about the 50 hour mark. The change at 15 hours or so is pretty huge though.
I find the ideal tracking weight for the 103R to be almost exactly 2.6 grams. Less than this and I find things get a bit thin and strident and above that a bit muddy. 100 ohms should be fine for loading the stock 103.
As Marco has said, setup is critical. I agree with him that just about dead even for VTA is a pretty decent spot to be. You can read lots of opinions on how the Denon concical is supposedly immune to changes in VTA-frankly, I don't agree with that; I think it's as sensitive to VTA as any other cartridges I've used with more exotic stylus profiles.
Nuding the cartridge and glueing it to the metal plate is pretty much going to necessitate that you align the cantilever/stylus, so unless you are doing that I'd suggest you find/print a protractor that will allow you to do that.
The 103/103R may be cheap, but they are very demanding of tonearm and phono preamp. Getting the right arm, setup and phono preamp will all help in getting the most out of the cartridge.
If you really want a bass champion and can balance out a heavier cartridge, spend the money on an ebony body from Uwe.
Use a SUT. When I got the Cinemags it was a night and day difference compared to the MC input on my phone stage. The extra weight makes a huge difference too and I'm using around 20g at the headshell.
Good advice there, guys! I'm sure Jason will find it useful :)
Yes, undoubtedly in my experience, the 103 works best through an SUT and into a MM phono stage. I'm not saying that one doesn't exist, but I've yet to hear any active MC stage allow the 103 to produce the magic I get with it going through the A23, or my Denon HA-500 head amp.
Jason, does your MF X-LPS2 have an MM input?
If so, and if you fancy it, I'm selling my HA-500 (shown below), which would really make your 103 sing!
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/1430/denonha500.jpg (http://img442.imageshack.us/i/denonha500.jpg/)
These were designed by Denon to partner the DL-103, and so the sonic match is perfect. They were sold throughout the 70s and 80s, but are now long since discontinued. It would make a significant improvement to the sound.
All you do is plug the unit into the mains, your T/T into the input, and the output into your X-LPS2.
If you're interested, I'll do you a good deal on it. PM me for details :cool:
Marco.
I run a denon 103r wood body in a mission mechanic into an arcph5 at 100ohms and swap in a 103r titanium body into 47k either on the mechanic or something else, sometimes I also use a stock 103 into 47k....all sound very fine indeed....but when I use my sp10 all the 103s sound 'better' at 100
all sound good through my old AI L1 and the MF X- pre as well
a 103 and all flavours thereof are as finnicky and fiddly and fettly as a decca
a 103 is one hellova superduper piece of magic*
*subject to pages of debate of course
Indeed. As with Deccas, the 103 is a true enthusiast's device, and thus rewards like-minded people accordingly :)
Marco.
Hi Jason,
I have used the 103 range of cartridges since the seventies and they have always given me satisfactory results. At the moment I am using a stock 103 in a Modded Rega 300 arm and I don’t think it is an ideal match but still its bass is deep and very powerful with decent punch. I assume the culprit may be due to the MF phono stage, with which I have had no experience so it is an unknown quality to me, though I used some of MF’s preamps with built in phono stage many years ago. I advice, if possible, try to borrow another phono stage from a friend or dealer and see what happens.
Thanks all for the excellent advice - I'll digest and cogitate when I have more time!!
Marco - thanks for your kind offer, and I'll certainly consider it. I'll see if setup and a little more mass works first - like a numpty, I forgot that nuding it would yield less mass - DOH!
Jason
No worries, mate. The offer is there... You can even try it first to see if you like it before buying. Anyway, keep us posted how you get on :)
Marco.
So.... I took the time to set up the cart with more mass (I had a drilled weight lurking in my 'bits' box - probably around 3g) and reset the cart. On doing so I noticed my VTA was wayyyy out - for some reason I'd missed that last time I set it up, and I remember on installing the modded arm I couldn't get the VTA right, but I thought I'd sorted that. So I've done the 'quick n dirty' method of putting the original rubber mat under the SoundHiFi mat. Not ideal I know, but better than nothing...
Wow. Bass is back, but more than that the imaging and treble has improved vastly. Everything has 'snapped in to focus' with regard to soundstage and air around individual instruments. Really quite a difference - with other carts, I've found VTA increase tends to just affect sibilance and top end, but it seems to affect the 103 more profoundly. So until I can take the arm off and re-fit to allow a lower VTA, the bodge stays!
Thanks all for the advice!
Jason
Hi Jason,
Nice one - I thought it might have something to do with VTA, as having been in a similar situation to what you described, I could relate to what you were hearing :)
The 103 is very sensitive (as most cartridges are) to correct VTA. Only when the arm is bang on level will it sound as it's supposed to do.
The mat trick will work reasonably well as a temporary measure, but you'll need to fit an arm with better facility for VTA adjustment to get things right properly. To optimise a DL-103, the best modern option is undoubtedly the Jelco SA-750 :cool:
Marco.
...To optimise a DL-103, the best modern option is undoubtedly the Jelco SA-750
Watch this space, I have a cunnning plan ;)
Jason
Magna Audio
04-03-2010, 11:54
Yep, I've been playing with load imp that my SPU sees.
Ortofon reccommend >100ohm :-)
i have a pair of LL-1681 Lundahl SUT's DIY'd in a little box.
i wanted to use the 1:26 but that means I have a load imp of just ~60 ohms - sounds very dull. The 1:13 allows me to adjust from below 100 to 247 ohms.
100 isn't too bad - could be more lively.
I wired in a switch to all open = 247ohm, and then 2 of my choice.
247 - wow bit bright. Then I tried 150ohm still to bright, 120 good but tried 110 and think I have found the perfect balance.
When I modify an existing LCR phono stage I am taking on I will be able to set the imp to the right value 47000 is no good for 1:26 step up.
I used the MC step up calculator program - you can do it by calc but this one takes the small internal impedance into consideration...
With the 103 and its high o/p impedance I find a loading of 100R too low, it kills the sound for me. The cartridge comes alive to my ears from 220R on but 470R it too much, around 330R seems about right to me. The R though seems OK at 100R
Hi Neal,
Where have you been, mate? Good to see you posting again! :)
With the 103 and its high o/p impedance I find a loading of 100R too low, it kills the sound for me. The cartridge comes alive to my ears from 220R on but 470R it too much, around 330R seems about right to me.
That is most bizarre...
The A23 loads the 103 at just a shade over 100 Ohms (105, I think), and it is head and shoulders beyond question *the* best SUT I've heard for the 103, and gives a sound that is the complete antithesis of what you describe (it couldn't sound more open, crystal clear and dynamic if it tried!) - indeed you heard it with my deck at the last Owston fest we were at, where we compared T/Ts, and you loved the sound of my deck, so WTF is going on there? :scratch:
Hi Marco, I've taken a bit of a rest from 'forum' life...does the soul good once in a while :) and I've just been listening to music and doing other stuff.
We where using my PhonoII at Owston with switchable loading...I'll give you a couple of guesses at what loading we where using ;)
Hi Neal,
Where have you been, mate? Good to see you posting again! :)
That is most bizarre...
The A23 loads the 103 at just a shade over 100 Ohms (105, I think), and it is head and shoulders beyond question *the* best SUT I've heard for the 103, and gives a sound that is the complete antithesis of what you describe (it couldn't sound more open, crystal clear and dynamic if it tried!) - indeed you heard it with my deck at the last Owston fest we were at, where we compared T/Ts, and you loved the sound of my deck, so WTF is going on there? :scratch:
It's hard to compare the loading between SUTs and head-amps because with head-amps you want to match the impedence only and with SUTs you're more worried about matching output levels(voltage) and the impedence will take care of itself. I've had similar experience to Neal in that with my Hagerman Piccolo the Denon 103 likes the 220 setting and with my Cinemag step-up it's using the 100 Ohm tap but sounds better than the Piccolo at any setting.
--Dave
Hi Marco, I've taken a bit of a rest from 'forum' life...does the soul good once in a while and I've just been listening to music and doing other stuff.
We where using my PhonoII at Owston with switchable loading...I'll give you a couple of guesses at what loading we where using
Yes, but we also switched to the A23 (using my Croft) at one point, which loads the 103 at 100 Ohms (or so), and both of us enjoyed the result! :)
Your Phono II is undoubtedly excellent, but no more so than the Croft with A23 was, hence my confusion with your inference to loading values.
Basically, I'd put the combination of the valve MM stage in my Croft and A23 SUT up against anything else in conjunction with a DL-103, and of course this involves loading it at 100R (or thereabouts) ;)
Like I said though, good to see you back, as I always enjoy your contributions :cool:
Marco.
Yes, but we also switched to the A23 (using my Croft) at one point, which loads the 103 at 100 Ohms (or so), and both of us enjoyed the result! :)
Your Phono II is undoubtedly excellent, but no more so than the Croft with A23 was, hence my confusion with your inference to loading values.
Basically, I'd put the combination of the valve MM stage in my Croft and A23 SUT up against anything else in conjunction with a DL-103, and of course this involves loading it at 100R (or thereabouts) ;)
Like I said though, good to see you back, as I always enjoy your contributions :cool:
Marco.
Oh, hang on, you've got a 103SA(?) if I recall that uses the generator assembly of the R so lower o/p impedance (14Ohms) than the cooking 103 which is 40Ohms.
So 100R for the SA is just about perfect and its what I use on my re-bodied R....the cooking 103 really needs more than this.
Oh, hang on, you've got a 103SA(?) if I recall that uses the generator assembly of the R so lower o/p impedance (14Ohms) than the cooking 103 which is 40Ohms.
So 100R for the SA is just about perfect and its what I use on my re-bodied R....the cooking 103 really needs more than this.
That's what I noticed too but somehow they both like the 100Ohm tap on the cinemag SUT.
Hi Neal,
Oh, hang on, you've got a 103SA(?) if I recall that uses the generator assembly of the R so lower o/p impedance (14Ohms) than the cooking 103 which is 40Ohms.
So 100R for the SA is just about perfect and its what I use on my re-bodied R....the cooking 103 really needs more than this.
Interesting observation; I wouldn't disagree with it in principle... However, as right you are about the 103SA, I disagree with what you're saying about the cooking 103 - at least when an A23 SUT is in use.
Why?
Because I also own one of the latter (including a detachable headshell tonearm), and so can swap back and forth between it and the 'SA' version, in a matter of seconds (as the VTA and VTF settings are the same), with the A23 in use on both occasions, and the cooking 103 sounds very good indeed (and certainly not as you describe) loaded at 100R through the A23.
Yes, there are sonic differences (as one would expect) but those are solely down to the detrimental effect of the stock 103s resonant plastic body shell and the lack of OFC internal wiring; not as a result of loading issues. Trust me, I know the difference ;)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not disputing your observations (I don't doubt you heard what you heard), but I think perhaps there's more to this than you think :)
Marco.
Trust me, I know the difference ;)
So do I ;) and at 40ohm o/p impedance the cooking 103 needs more that 100R to be at its best. :eyebrows:
Perhaps in some circumstances, Neal, but not so through the A23, where it sounds wide-open, expansive and sparkly, like a very wide-open and expansive sparkly thing, loaded at (just a shade over) 100R ;)
I'll gladly demonstrate it to you sometime, whereby you'll very quickly agree :)
Marco.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.