In praise of the Denon 103...

[Martyn Miles]

I have been running an Entre MC cartridge ( purchased in 1979 ) with an LP12 / Misson 774 combination for as long as I can remember.
The Entre has had many new styli over the years, fitted by Expert Pickups.
Recently a broken Denon 103 came into my possession, so I thought I’d get Expert to fit a new cantilever and stylus. After about 4 weeks it returned and I removed the Entre and fitted the Denon.
What a revelation.
A vast soundstage and a bass end I had never experienced with the Entre.
As the Entre had a recently fitted stylus I sold it very easily and the buyer is very happy with it.
If anyone is considering a ‘103, don’t hesitate.

[RobbieGong]

The 103 has a great reputation and is well regarded as a wonderfully musical thing for relatively small change, in the scheme of things.

It's not everybodies cup of tea but although I've never heard one myself, I've read untold instances of very happy audiophiles who use one in its many guises / variants.

It is a cart that clearly has something that hits the spot, hence it being that 'go to' cart for so many, for so long.

[karma67]

the one i had was a bit special,its been said before but the 103 is so musical,i enjoyed it a lot.

[nickbaba]

I have both a standard DL-103 and a DL-103-SA (Jamie's one). The SA is indeed a bit special, more detailed and refined presentation than the 103, but the 103 absolutely great too, and I'm a fan.
I think they used to be industry standard for broadcast transcription turntables, so that tells you something.

[montesquieu]

Dissenting voice here, I have owned many of all sort of flavours, stock and modded, over the years, and could never get worked up about them. Their charms do not outweight their flaws in my book and if strapped for cash I'd rather run a decent MM (as, indeed, I do on the 401 in my study system).

[walpurgis]

Dissenting voice here

More or less the same here.

For the money I suppose you can't really complain, at least the 103 is a taste of MC sound at (comparatively) minimal cost.

I've had a few basic 103's and one 103R, which I thought was a much better cartridge and again good value.

However, for about eighty quid extra, the Goldring Eroica LX is available and that is much more fun.

[tlscapital]

A vast soundstage and a bass end I had never experienced with the Entre.


I am running with a DL-102 since 8 years now. And have learn to play it more and more optimistically through the gradual conversion of my SME3009 'Improved' S II into a heavy and heavier effective mass tonearm to hear the DL-102 perform good to end-up with a big and deep sound stage presentation.

Mind that my DL-102 is a HOMC (103 is LOMC) and so likely even more "exotic" on it's loads, gains and impedances the the DL-103 is. But I wouldn't be surprised if the DL-103 wouldn't benefit from a preamp with adjustable settings (more than the preconfigured switch from MM to MC) like mine if ever.

Off course other or higher-end MC cartridges will prove of other standards in comparison. Such Denon's DL 'as-is' won't proved as detailed, rich and deep. But for my money and use for my vintage 45 rpm on my phono set-up, I can say that I am proud, happy and impressed with what this cartridge delivers.

The DL-102 cartridge was design and build for radio broadcast and so aim at retrieving the most of the groove to present music in the first place. Which I find they can be really good at on an appropriate phono system. Musicality and soundstage is what I need. This DL-102 of mine does give me that :)

[Barry]

IMO the Denon 103C is a pretty good 'cooking cartridge'. I have a couple and would rate it alongside the Ortofon MC25FL as a low cost introduction to the joys of MC cartridges. It also offers ample scope for fettling/nuding/stylus profile changing, for those who like to experiment.

Remember the stock DL 103 has a conical stylus and was designed for use by the Japanese NKT broadcasting company back in 1962. A better cartridge was the later 103D fitted with an elliptical stylus. There was also the 103S, fitted with a Shibata profile stylus, designed for playing quadiphonic records.

[montesquieu]

I am running with a DL-102 since 8 years now. And have learn to play it more and more optimistically through the gradual conversion of my SME3009 'Improved' S II into a heavy and heavier effective mass tonearm to hear the DL-102 perform good to end-up with a big and deep sound stage presentation.

Mind that my DL-102 is a HOMC (103 is LOMC) and so likely even more "exotic" on it's loads, gains and impedances the the DL-103 is. But I wouldn't be surprised if the DL-103 wouldn't benefit from a preamp with adjustable settings (more than the preconfigured switch from MM to MC) like mine if ever.

Off course other or higher-end MC cartridges will prove of other standards in comparison. Such Denon's DL 'as-is' won't proved as detailed, rich and deep. But for my money and use for my vintage 45 rpm on my phono set-up, I can say that I am proud, happy and impressed with what this cartridge delivers.

The DL-102 cartridge was design and build for radio broadcast and so aim at retrieving the most of the groove to present music in the first place. Which I find they can be really good at on an appropriate phono system. Musicality and soundstage is what I need. This DL-102 of mine does give me that :)

DL102 is (internally) a HOMC stereo cartridge strapped for mono of entirely different design to the DL103 and specifically created for a particular broadcast purpose, which is playing stereo tracks including 45s for broadcast on frequency limited AM radio stations - that’s why if you check you will find the specification only runs to 10khz. It’s not in any sense a like for like comparator for the 103.

I quite like the 102 as an intro to the world of mono but it’s quickly outshone by most *true mono* cartridges - at least for playing mono. For its intended purpose of safely rendering stereo records into bandwidth-limited mono for AM broadcast it really has no rivals! The benefit over most single coil mono cartridges for this purpose is its ability to have the stylus move in all dimensions to follow a v shaped groove as opposed to horizontal only motion required for mono pressings.

[tlscapital]

DL102 is (internally) a HOMC stereo cartridge strapped for mono of entirely different design to the DL103 and specifically created for a particular broadcast purpose, which is playing stereo tracks including 45s for broadcast on frequency limited AM radio stations - that’s why if you check you will find the specification only runs to 10khz. It’s not in any sense a like for like comparator for the 103.

Indeed the DL-102 is another beast that also came in for air-play purpose. It is a MONO cartridge that was designed to play STEREO records as well without inducing wear in a satisfactory way. And it does that well I do find. Although it's favored by few only. My understanding is that most of the time it isn't properly combined and even when it is, likely not enough of the "Hi-Fi" signature type...

Predeceasing the DL-103 by some years, that which is a LOMC STEREO cartridge, it is often also disregarded for similar reasons as the DL-102. When I believe that they might actually perform much better set on an adjustable preamp and on a matching heavy effective mass tonearm. Implying that maybe the OP phono set-up has just all that and allows his DL-103 in trial to shine in comparison.


I quite like the 102 as an intro to the world of mono but it’s quickly outshone by most *true mono* cartridges - at least for playing mono. For its intended purpose of safely rendering stereo records into bandwidth-limited mono for AM broadcast it really has no rivals! The benefit over most single coil mono cartridges for this purpose is its ability to have the stylus move in all dimensions to follow a v shaped groove as opposed to horizontal only motion required for mono pressings.

The DL-102 is NOT a stereo cartridge strapped internally for mono, but is specially designed to output a mono signal from a stereo LP, so there is no danger of damaging a modern record by its use. Denon's own instruction sheet states "The DL-102 is a monophonic output moving coil cartridge designed for monophonic replay as well as the monophonic playback of stereo recordings."

This is exactly why I went ahead for this DL-102 cartridge in the first place; as a one phono set-up, one turntable, one arm, one cartridge... for my thousand of vintage records, most MONO, some STEREO and some "unknown", a compromising MONO cartridge was a good argument to go for it. After all the tweak-in journey was long, surprising but so rewarding as revealing of it's true potential. PRAISE !

[Vrajbasi]

Dissenting voice here, I have owned many of all sort of flavours, stock and modded, over the years, and could never get worked up about them. Their charms do not outweight their flaws in my book and if strapped for cash I'd rather run a decent MM (as, indeed, I do on the 401 in my study system).

Have to agree on this I never got on with the cartridge, I can see the attraction because of the price etc I just find them rather uninspiring, while if I had more to spend a good moving coil wins, you do get alot more bang for your buck with a decent MM with alot more body and scale while not the ultimate detail of the great MC cartridges out there.

[montesquieu]

The DL-102 is NOT a stereo cartridge strapped internally for mono, but is specially designed to output a mono signal from a stereo LP, so there is no danger of damaging a modern record by its use. Denon's own instruction sheet states "The DL-102 is a monophonic output moving coil cartridge designed for monophonic replay as well as the monophonic playback of stereo recordings."

This is exactly why I went ahead for this DL-102 cartridge in the first place; as a one phono set-up, one turntable, one arm, one cartridge... for my thousand of vintage records, most MONO, some STEREO and some "unknown", a compromising MONO cartridge was a good argument to go for it. After all the tweak-in journey was long, surprising but so rewarding as revealing of it's true potential. PRAISE !

Totally agreed on the need for a heavier arm on either of these but most of all on the 102.

There is variable information out there on how many coils are in the 102 but there are certainly some people asserting it only has one. Denon is not specific in their information and I haven’t seen one opened up. However it is set up to have zero output from vertical position and that’s exactly what you want here.

It’s certainly great value for what it sells for. The only caveat from a mono point of view is the small stylus size - early mono and even some stereo 45s really need a bigger tip.

[nickbaba]

No-one would claim they are the last word in MC cartridges, I think the point is that for the money they do a surprisingly decent job. Paired with a Jelco 750D on my 1210 the 103 sounds fine to my (cloth) ears, but then I can't bring myself to spend +1k on a cartridge that's only going to last a limited time anyway...

[tlscapital]

Have to agree on this I never got on with the cartridge, I can see the attraction because of the price etc I just find them rather uninspiring, while if I had more to spend a good moving coil wins, you do get alot more bang for your buck with a decent MM with alot more body and scale while not the ultimate detail of the great MC cartridges out there.

This is where I was trying to see if maybe the DL-103, that which I don't have nor know, was actually on the exotic side like it's forefather the DL-102 that I have set by ear (nothing like in the book) on my adjustable preamp with the Load impedance @ 100 ohms, the Capacitance @ 100 pF and Gain @ 60dB. Since I done that, believe me I do get much more juice out of my cartridge and it's a pleasure to hear it. Before those adjustments and the tonearm mass consecutive enhancements, it was simply good (cleaner MONO groove pick-up) without much "charm, character or depth" to it...

[Marco]

I always find these discussions about the 'ol DL-103 quite fascinating. I've been using various versions of it now, on and off, for the last 35 years (as when optimised I love how it plays music), and so trust me, I know what this cartridge is all about - and also exactly how to hear it at its best.

With that in mind, it's clear that many of its detractors, for perfectly understandable reasons, haven't had that experience and enjoyed what this truly wonderful cartridge is capable of when used optimally in the right context. I say that because I *know* that if I demonstrated my own DL-103, in my system, or even took my turntable, fitted with one (and perhaps also my preamp/phono-stage and head amp) to a bake off, that most would be very impressed indeed with the sound, even if they still ultimately preferred something else:)

Ok, so let's establish a few facts about the DL-103, and also what it needs to perform *optimally*:

1) Price: it's only 'cheap' because of economies of scale, having been in commercial production by Denon (Nippon Columbia Co. Ltd) since 1968, and so many thousands have been made in that time, and therefore the associated costs of production have long since been paid for.

Every part contained on the cartridge, aside from its stock plastic shell, is of the highest quality, and if it were produced instead by a smaller 'renowned high-end cartridge manufacturer', not tooled up to make it in the way Denon are, and priced to appeal to 'audiophile snobs', it would cost around £1000, instead of its current £250, especially if housed in a metal body-shell.

2) The latter is key, because that's where the bulk of the cost cutting has been done. It's also the SINGLE most contributory factor towards its sonic limitations. Remove said plastic shell (and use it 'nude') or house the cartridge in any of the superb aftermarket wooden or metal body-shells available, and quite simply it becomes a different animal.

3) DL-103s produced by Nippon Columbia, up until the mid 1990s, sound markedly better than those produced after that era, especially those in current production. I believe that's largely because of the switch from alnico to rare-earth magnets.

4) Therefore, bearing the above in mind, you simply *haven't* heard a DL-103 properly unless:

a) It's been 'nuded' or rehoused in a superior body-shell, as the stock plastic one massively limits its performance.

b) It's fitted onto a high/medium-mass classic Japanese tonearm, with detachable headshell, and the partnering headshell in particular is of the optimum mass (minimum 15g) and very rigid/well-damped. DL-103s simply do not work on the vast majority of modern tonearms!!

c) It's preferably used with a direct-drive or idler-driven turntable, fitted with a high-torque motor unit, which is able to combat the effect of stylus drag, generated from the existence of the above mass/weight, combined with high tracking forces of 2.5g+

d) It's preferably used with a valve MM phono stage and SUT or head amp, the combination of which loads it optimally and provides sufficient gain, but *most importantly* is a correct match, sonically/tonally, in order to release its true potential. I've never heard a DL-103 sound right through a standalone MC phono stage.

e) The example you own, or have heard, is from the Nippon Columbia era, pre-1995.

Therefore, folks, because I *really do* know what I'm talking about on this particular subject, I can say with absolute certainty that unless you can tick ALL of the above boxes, you simply haven't heard what this deservedly iconic cartridge is capable of, and therefore that will naturally influence your opinion of it accordingly:cool:

Marco.

[Beobloke]

The DL103 is a funny old thing, but, as Marco says, it needs very careful matching to give of its best.

In my experience, most of the time it sounds "nice" - inoffensive and certainly enjoyable and good value for money, but nothing special. In an Empire 598 it sounded superb. In a Yamaha GT-2000 it sounds nothing short of spellbinding.

In fact, the GT-2000 experience has impressed me so much that I've even found myself eyeing up the posh versions on eBay... :rolleyes:

[montesquieu]

I always find these discussions about the 'ol DL-103 quite fascinating. I've been using various versions of it now, on and off, for the last 35 years (as when optimised I love how it plays music), and so trust me, I know what this cartridge is all about - and also exactly how to hear it at its best.

With that in mind, it's clear that many of its detractors, for perfectly understandable reasons haven't had that experience, and enjoyed what this truly wonderful cartridge is capable of when used optimally in the right context. I say that because I *know* that if I demonstrated my own one, in my system, or even took my turntable, fitted with one (and perhaps also my preamp/phono-stage and head amp, to a bake off, that most would be impressed with the sound, even if they still ultimately preferred something else.

Ok, so let's establish a few facts about the DL-103, and also what it needs to perform *optimally*:

1) Price: it's only 'cheap' because of economies of scale, having been in production by Denon since 1968, and so many thousands have been made in that time, so the associated costs of producing it have long since been paid for. Every part contained on the cartridge, aside from its stock plastic shell, is of the highest quality, and if it were produced instead by a smaller 'renowned high-end cartridge manufacturer', not tooled up to make it in the way Denon are, and priced to appeal to 'audiophile snobs', it would cost nearer £1000, than it's current £250, especially if housed in a metal body-shell.

2) The latter is key, because that's where the bulk of the cost cutting has been done: the plastic body-shell. It's also the SINGLE most contributory factor to its sonic limitations. Remove that (and use it 'nude') or house it in any of the superb aftermarket wooden or metal body-shells available, and quite simply it is a different animal.

3) Therefore, bearing the above in mind, you simply *haven't* heard a DL-103 properly unless:

a) It's been 'nuded' or rehoused in a superior body-shell, as the stock one massively limits its performance.

b) It's fitted onto a high/medium-mass classic Japanese tonearm with detachable headshell, and the headshell in particular is of the correct mass (minimum 15g) and very well-damped. DL-103s simply do not work on the vast majority of modern tonearms!

c) It's preferably used with a direct-drive or idler turntable, fitted with a high-torque motor unit, which is able to combat the effect of stylus drag, from the existence of all of the above mass, combined with tracking forces of 2.5g+

d) It's preferably used with a valve MM phono stage and SUT or head amp, the combination of which loads it optimally and provides sufficient gain, but *most importantly* is a correct match, sonically/tonally, in order to release its true potential.

Therefore, folks, because I really do know what I'm talking about on this particular subject, I can say with absolute certainty that unless you can tick ALL of the above boxes, you simply haven't heard what this deservedly iconic cartridge is capable of, and therefore that will naturally influence your opinion of it accordingly:cool:

Marco.

Got to disagree with you on some of this Marco.

Totally agreed that many people who express disappointment in the 103 aren't using it right - agreed it's best in heavy arm, on a DD or idler, with a decent amount of tracking force, and the correct loading - yes all that is a given. I concur that all too often people stick them in lightweight Rega arm with inappropriate loading and pronounce them crap. But I really don't think that's what the discussion here is about.

I too have had familiarity with this cartridge for 20 years or more, and I've never got one to give me anything like the same pleasure I get from many other cartridges. And I have tried all sorts of variants - standard 103, 103R - an undoubted improvement but not quite there, SA, 103D all spring to mind, as well as Soundsmith and ESCO paratrace variants, Uwe and other bodies in rosewood, ebony and metal, also tried adding mass by fixing weight to the cartridge body itself. I really tried to get along with it. (The 109D, by contrast - a superb Denon moving magnet that was more expensive than the 103 in its hey day, was superb).

Funnily enough the only 103 I ever really liked was a Soundsmith mono version where the coils had been rotated 90 degrees - giving double mono output along the lines of what Lyra do, but quite effective.

I'm not quite in agreement that economies of scale are the sole reason for cheapness - I suspect there's also high tolerance for production variability, and while the flexible body is certainly an issue, even fixing that never quite did the trick for me. There's something more holding it back, a combination of design limitations and materials I think.

All in all - it just does nothing for me. It probably doesn't help that I've always had 'better' cartridges to hand (even a long time ago these would have included the AT OC9 and some top notch MMs). I would never encourage people to splash out on expensive retipping or rebody work because in my view a 'designed from scratch' higher performance cartridge is always going to perform more coherently and consistently than the phono equivalent of a home-modified Ford Escort with aftermarket wide bore exhaust and go faster stripes. The versions improved by Denon themselves are better - but even so you still hit its limitations.

[martian sunrise]

i've still got that 109D and it is sensational. just this morning i set it up on my arm so that i could hear it through the trilogy and it gives the hana sl a good run (early doors!)

[Marco]

Dissenting voice here, I have owned many of all sort of flavours, stock and modded, over the years, and could never get worked up about them. Their charms do not outweight their flaws in my book and if strapped for cash I'd rather run a decent MM (as, indeed, I do on the 401 in my study system).

Interesting comments, Tom. Of almost anyone here, you've got all the right 'tools' to potentially hear a 103 at its best, so can I ask what you perceive as its flaws and also have you heard one in superior body-shell - and if so, in your opinion how much did that help address the flaws you perceive with one housed in its stock plastic shell?

The other thing I'd say, as a fellow fan of the SPU, is in my opinion, a fully-optimised DL-103 (as detailed in my last post) sounds every bit as good as a conical-tipped SPU, although of course they both have slightly different 'sonic flavours', but that aside, there's not much in it, and certainly a DL-103 optimised thus is not disgraced by an entry-level conical-tipped SPU.

In fact, they have much in common with the sound that they produce!

It's only when you go up the SPU range and play with ones fitted with fine-line styli (and such like) that things notably change, as ultimately any stylus with a spherical tip will have its high-frequency (and distortion) limitations, and the 103 is not alone in that respect.

What are your views on that? :cool:

Marco.

[Marco]

Lol - Tom, just read your last post! I'll get to it later:)

However, in the meantime, feel free to address my last post. One quick thing, I've got to completely disagree with an OC-9 being "better" - yes maybe if you're a detail freak and like a lean/bright sound, which majors on 'hifiisms', rather than musicality, but not otherwise!

The DL-103 also has FAR better (more realistic) bass. Talk more after lunch:cool:

Marco.

P.S Adam, interesting post also. I'll get to it later!

[Marco]

I too have had familiarity with this cartridge for 20 years or more, and I've never got one to give me anything like the same pleasure I get from many other cartridges. And I have tried all sorts of variants - standard 103, 103R - an undoubted improvement but not quite there, SA, 103D all spring to mind, as well as Soundsmith and ESCO paratrace variants, Uwe and other bodies in rosewood, ebony and metal, also tried adding mass by fixing weight to the cartridge body itself. I really tried to get along with it.


Fair enough, at the end of the day you hear what you hear... Just two points I'd make:

1) Have you heard a re-bodied one with the combination of a valve MM phono stage and MC head amp (not an SUT)? This also presumes use of the right arm, headshell and turntable, as discussed.

2) I'm wondering how much your specific tastes in music is a contributory factor to your relative dissatisfaction with the 103?

In my experience, it is fundamentally NOT the best cartridge for playing classical music, particularly the stuff you're into, and is much more at home banging out a meaty rock or dance bassline, which the 'bouncy'/rhythmic characteristics of its weighty bass delivery makes come alive, especially with 80s electronic pop on 12" singles.

It's also great at reproducing classic jazz albums, on the likes of Blue Note, as its rich, vibrant midrange makes the likes of sax and trumpet come alive.

For me, conical-tipped cartridges aren't best suited at reproducing the subtleties of classical music, especially at ends of sides, where that big fat tip often shows its limitations... You really need a nice fine-line stylus, and a cartridge with better high-frequency response/more subtlety and finesse, to make the most of classical music recordings.

Therefore, perhaps that's a significant reason why, despite trying your best, you simply can't get on with a 103?


I'm not quite in agreement that economies of scale are the sole reason for cheapness - I suspect there's also high tolerance for production variability, and while the flexible body is certainly an issue, even fixing that never quite did the trick for me. There's something more holding it back, a combination of design limitations and materials I think.


There's no doubt that production variability is an issue, as I've heard good ones and bad ones, where the only variable was the batch number/year of production, so I'll buy that, and of course the plastic shell is a major hindrance, in terms of the ability of the cartridge to release its full potential.

However, in my view, the quality of the stylus (and its assembly), magnets, coils suspension, etc, is top-notch, and I'm very confident it would cost much more if made by, say, Lyra, Dynavector, or someone else of that ilk. There's always a price to pay for the 'right badge'!;)

Audio Technica, for me, come under a similar category to Denon, in that the massive size of the respective companies (and their level of expertise), allows them to produce 'giant-killing' cartridges at prices that smaller, more 'specialist' Jap manufacturers simply couldn't do, for a variety of reasons. Look at the AT-33PTG, for instance...

What was it new at one point - £300? Yet it performed as well, and in some areas better, than some 'posher' MCs at more than three times the price!

And it's similar with Denon, and the DL-103. Therefore for me, the know-how of such huge companies and the respective economies of scale is largely responsible for the fact that the DL-103 only costs £250. It certainly doesn't sound like a £250 cartridge in the right set-up/system!:nono:


I would never encourage people to splash out on expensive retipping or rebody work because in my view a 'designed from scratch' higher performance cartridge is always going to perform more coherently and consistently than the phono equivalent of a home-modified Ford Escort with aftermarket wide bore exhaust and go faster stripes. The versions improved by Denon themselves are better - but even so you still hit its limitations.

I would agree with that. There's a reason why no DL-103 Denon has ever produced has been fitted with a fine-line stylus or ruby cantilever.... Fit such to one and you'll 'improve' certain areas of its sound, but subsequently ruin others, particularly what it's best at!

As such, the only mod I'd do to a 103 is replace the plastic shell with something better, which strangely enough (ahem) Denon do will all their improved versions, simply because they know it works.

Marco.

[montesquieu]

Hi Marco - at work and can't take too many tea breaks but let me briefly respond rather than attempt a point by point which might take me into next week to find the time to do

You could well have identified my issue as its suitability for what I listen to, which is mainly smaller ensemble classical music - various sorts of chamber music, piano and harpsichord music, Lieder, baroque ensembles - where fine shades of expression, micro-dynamics, timbral accuracy and ability to present an intimate acoustic are what it's all about, rather than big canvas drama. In this context I have found the 103 to be not bad necessarily - it's a perfectly competent cartridge - but a bit smooth, undetailed and ultimately uninvolving / lacking in subtlety. Funnily enough I find the SPUs (especially the elliptical ones) handle this better though I agree there is something of a similarity in presentation notably in the bass and in overall size and impact. Though if I do want to 'bop' as you put it I'm more inclined to go moving magnet - something about recreating lost youth I suspect.

It's been a while since I owned a head amp, but I have owned the Denon HA500 and its HA1000 counterpart (both unmodified) and the Slee Elevator XP (the latter I rate very highly indeed). I can't recall specifically whether I would have tried a 103 with the Denons (you'd think I would but I don't think either stayed more than a month or two), but I did try it with the Elevator and again was disappointed. I've had a few others as well but none that jump to mind. But I'm normally an SUT guy as you know.

[Marco]

Hi Tom,

No worries, I can go with that:)

I do think that the main thing is that a DL-103 (any version) simply doesn't do sufficient justice to the type of music you listen to.

Marco.

[anubisgrau]

Interesting talk - I'm kinda on both sides. I used to run it in Stogi, Stogi S and Technics 1210 arms, never to a full satisfaction, never got it to cross the line of mediocrity. I sold it for entry level Benz Micro (MC Gold) and it was miles better. Some years later a friend paired stock 103 (no nude, no other stylus profiles) with a Denon 12" broadcast arm, can't remember the model (could it be DA-308), on G401 - I was shocked, utterly shocked how good it was. Strongly resembling a character of old Koetsu Black (with black plate underneath). In the end I'm pretty confident that the Denon engineers designed for a closed Denon TT broadcast system, not for an average hifi domestic setup.

[Marco]

In the end I'm pretty confident that the Denon engineers designed for a closed Denon TT broadcast system, not for an average hifi domestic setup.

I completely agree, Gordan, which is why it pays to replicate that "broadcast system" as far as possible, by using similar equipment and ancillaries at home, to partner the 103, as would've been used by the NHK in their broadcasting studios.

The mistake most folk make with the DL-103 is not using it in the type of 'environment' it was originally designed to perform optimally in (and worse, on completely inappropriate arms and turntables), and as such creating a situation akin to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole!;)

How can you possibly accurately assess the merits of a 103, based on that?

Btw, I'm also a big fan of the original (Sugano designed) Kotesu Black K, from the 1980s, which was voiced rather differently from its current equivalent. It's that type of change in 'voicing' that I'm trying to make a point about on the Denon DL-S1 thread.

Koetsu aren't alone in that either. It's also happened with the likes of Ortofon: the 'house sound' of their cartridges now has markedly changed from what it once was, to reflect the current 'fashion'.

Quite simply, as years have gone on, our ears have slowly become attuned to preferring a brighter and more forward sound, thus considering that such is 'correct' or superior to something that is less so, when that's not always necessarily true.

In my view, we've lost our way a little, in terms of what genuinely constitutes as a 'natural sound'. It's an interesting subject that probably deserves a thread of its own:)

Marco.

[martian sunrise]

for a cart that has been in production for so long and sold so many, it seems a bit ridiculous that they need absolutely everything to be perfect for them to sound any good.

[Marco]

Why? I'm afraid your thinking is a little flawed. It's not a case of what's needed for them to sound 'any good', but rather what's required for them to sound at their BEST/be optimised. Are you happy settling for mediocrity? I'm not.

The DL-103 harks from an era where fashions in audio were very different from now, and where the high-mass/low-compliance route, with tonearms and cartridges (often turntables, too), ruled the roost, so it only makes sense that if something was designed to perform optimally in that context, then that's how you should use it, if you want it to perform as intended, and thus hear it at its best.

After all, you wouldn't put a vintage car engine inside a Ford Focus, and expect it to work, so similar principles apply when attempting to marry vintage and modern audio equipment.

In many respects, the DL-103 is a victim of its own success. The fact that it can still sound good, when used sub-optimally, is testament to its inherent quality.

Had it not remained in production for so long, and been 'consigned to history' like other cartridges from a similar era, and crucially not sold so cheaply to the masses (for reasons previously discussed), then it wouldn't have been bought by those who don't really understand what it's about or how to use it properly, and thus arrive at less than accurate conclusions as to how it sounds;)

Marco.

[martian sunrise]

perhaps i was being a bit flippant.

i am not talking about the revelation that "a cart sounds it's best in an optimum set-up", i am suggesting that if it can only sound its best if it is 23+, years old, has had £500+ spent of mods, is fitted to one of very few suitable tonearms, is in a japanese broadcast tt, etc, etc... that the point of the 103 has been missed.

their MO was to produce a cart that punches above it's weight and is an entry-level mc cart. you are moving the goalposts slightly if i need to spend what you have on a set up to hear a £250 cart at its best. i reckon most people could spend 500 on a versatile cart that sounds much better in a more normal system which sounds better and therefore dismisses the 103.

you are right, they may not have heard it at it's best, but it takes a multi thousand pound set up to do that. to me that is ridiculous and no doubt, there are many people with proficient, but modest set ups that would not be prepared to go to that extent to hear a £250 cart at its best.

[Marco]

i am not talking about the revelation that "a cart sounds it's best in an optimum set-up" (shock, horror), i am suggesting that if it can only sound its best if it is 23+, years old, has had £500+ spent of mods, is fitted to one of very few suitable tonearms, is in a japanese broadcast tt, etc, etc... that the point of the 103 has been missed.


Lol... I'm afraid it's you who are missing the point, and I'll get to that in a second.

You don't *have* to use it with a Japanese broadcast turntable or arm (I don't), but the key thing is to use it with equipment that shares similar principles, so I use mine with an Ortofon RS-212D, which is the right kind of tonearm, in terms of it being a detachable headshell type of the correct effective mass, and crucially, in conjunction with the right type of headshell (an AT-MG10 with added mass), on a modified Technics SL-1210 (direct-drive), all of which allow the cartridge to perform as intended.

Therefore, what I'm saying is that if you plonk a DL-103 on, say, a Rega RB300, fitted to an LP12, or something similar, then you simply will NOT hear it as its best. If you want to hear its true potential, then some effort is required to partner it in the correct way.


their MO was to produce a cart that punches above it's weight and is an entry-level mc cart.


No, that's fundamentally *not* what the DL-103 was originally designed as. You're being wrongly influenced by its low cost, which has already been explained. It was never designed as an 'entry-level' MC cartridge, or even one intended for commercial use. You need to study its history properly.

The Denon DL-103 was originally designed (the very first ones looked quite different from those now) as a high-quality transcription cartridge, for professional use and broadcasting purposes (on FM radio stations), particularly the NHK, in demanding situations where the highest standards of sound quality were sought. And that's how it sounds when you partner it correctly.

It was only later (in 1968) that Denon decided to release the cartridge commercially, and that's where some of the cost-cutting occurred, but the commercial item still shared much of the original's DNA. Those are the facts. You're making the same mistake people do who refer to the Technics SL-1200/1210 as a 'DJ deck', and judge it on the £300 it sold for, for many years until production ceased, and then restated again recently.

However, look at how much the new ones cost now! It's the very same economies of scale, which allowed Technics to sell SL-1200s/1210s so cheaply once, that has allowed Denon to do the same with the DL-103 - and the performance either are capable of does not reflect in their respective price tags (or in the case of the Technics, when it was once sold for £300).


you are right, they may not have heard it at it's best, but it takes a multi thousand pound set up to do that. to me that is ridiculous and no doubt, there are many people with proficient, but modest set ups that would not be prepared to go to that extent to hear a £250 cart at its best.

I presume now, given what I've just explained, that you can see how the above is rather missing the point?:)

You don't have to spend multiple thousands, to get a DL-103 to 'sing'. You can do so for FAR less, with a little experience and know-how, and most importantly a willingness to think 'outside of the box' and embrace an unfashionable approach to turntable building/listening to vinyl - and as a result end up with a sound that considerably outperforms current more 'fashionable approaches';)

Honestly, I've been there, done that and bought the t-shirt!

Marco.

[Marco]

Have a look here for info and pictures of an original DL-103 (NHK version): http://soundgate.net/product/MzMw.highend

Note the use of Bakelite, for the bodyshell, instead of plastic.

Marco.

P.S Just to clarify, the NHK is the Japanese equivalent of the BBC.

[Marco]

Hi Andrew,

Basically, it comes down to stuff like high, versus low/medium-mass tonearms, and low-compliance, versus medium-compliance cartridges. The former is the 'unfashionable' way of doing things, along with using direct-drive and idler turntables, as opposed to belt-driven ones, and even things like 'S' or 'J'-shaped tonearms with detachable headshells, instead of straight ones with fixed headshells.

There's other stuff too (such as using an SUT or head amp, with a low-output MC cartridge, as opposed to solely a standalone MC phono stage), spherical styli versus line-contact [and the high VTFs often needed with some spherical/conical tips] - and all of this highlights the contrast in both approaches. The DL-103 requies one to adopt an 'unfashionable' approach to turntable building/vinyl listening, in order for it to perform optimally.

The Japs have been adopting said 'unfashionable' approach for years, with great success, and when I tried it for myself, I discovered what I'd been missing for a long time with vinyl replay!:cool:

Marco.

[Antinchip]

An interesting discussion.

Until recently I have never explored the realm of MC cartridges in my set-up. As often the case I have (for many years) been on a hi-fi journey swapping boxes on the way seeking so called audio nirvana, all subject to budget constraints of course.

For the last few years I have been using a modified LP12 with Infinity Black Widow tonearm and Shure V15iii with Jico SAS stylus. This into a Croft RIAA R phono stage. Quite happy (reputed synergy between Black Widow and the Shure) but a few months back decided to explore a new direction to hopefully escape the LP12 "upgradeitus" and went for a pre-loved Well Tempered Amadeus GT. I had a spare V15 so was able to run the two decks side by side and was very happy to let the LP12 go.

I thought the WTA would allow me to explore MC carts so picked up a used Harmonius Audio MPA-1a mk-ii battery operated head amp on pfm for £50. Chance had it that the seller also had a Denon 103GL he was looking to move on so I made a spontaneous purchase for a few hundred notes. A refurbished item originally purchased from an E-Bay seller with carbon fibre body, additional damping and new cantilever with Shibata stylus. The chap I bought it from had added a brass shim to the cart also. Clearly no chance of me experiencing the "true" 103 experience then Marco.

I had to add an after-market heavier counterweight to the the WT arm to make it all work. However taken on its own merits my subjective view was that I had moved several notches up the ladder. Notwithstanding I have been encouraged to take things a bit further and a Rothwell Headspace has arrived this morning so I am looking forward to hooking that up and spending a few hopefully even more enjoyable hours of listening this evening.

I have certainly found the comments on this thread interesting and your informed input on others Marco very valuable. I guess from my perspective I have to limit my adventures due to budget constraints. Thus I "suck it and see" and swap things around from time to time. Subjectively I have been delighted with my 103GL whilst this might not be in ideal circumstances in absolute terms.

Looking forward to seeing what the Headspace brings to the party. Maybe in due course I will end up with a Dynavector cart as these are supposed to be "best" for the WTA. Meanwhile I will carry on enjoying the party.

Cheers and thanks again for all the informative comments here and elsewhere on Aos.

Anthony

[Marco]

Hi Anthony,

Good post and I'm glad you're enjoying AoS:)


I thought the WTA would allow me to explore MC carts so picked up a used Harmonius Audio MPA-1a mk-ii battery operated head amp on pfm for £50. Chance had it that the seller also had a Denon 103GL he was looking to move on so I made a spontaneous purchase for a few hundred notes. A refurbished item originally purchased from an E-Bay seller with carbon fibre body, additional damping and new cantilever with Shibata stylus. The chap I bought it from had added a brass shim to the cart also. Clearly no chance of me experiencing the "true" 103 experience then Marco.


Lol! Well, that aside, what you bought was still very good and clearly capable of performing to a high standard, which is the important thing. A fully optimised DL-103 may not even be your thing [you don't know], especially if you value the filigree detailing and super-sparkly highs, which a Shibata stylus will deliver.


I had to add an after-market heavier counterweight to the the WT arm to make it all work. However taken on its own merits my subjective view was that I had moved several notches up the ladder.


Nice one. Now you see the potential advantages of adopting an 'unfashionable' approach? Sometimes it pays to be an heretic!:eyebrows:;)


Notwithstanding I have been encouraged to take things a bit further and a Rothwell Headspace has arrived this morning so I am looking forward to hooking that up and spending a few hopefully even more enjoyable hours of listening this evening.


Good move. I'd expect the Rothwell to be notably better, especially in areas such as overall resolution and it acting as more of an 'open window' onto recordings.

One tip I'd give with your battery head amp, if you haven't done so already, is if it utilises a 9V one, use a Duracell, as apposed to any other makes, especially cheap supermarket varieties, as for some reason they seem to improve sound quality. That's certainly the case with my Lentek.

Also, if you can, plug the Headspace into its own dedicated wall socket, and isolate it as far as possible from any items liable to inject noise into the mains supply, such as computer/phone-related items with poorly designed switch-mode power supplies. Or if you use a mains block/distribution unit, plug the Headspace into the socket nearest the mains inlet, and any 'noisy' stuff at the other end. Better still, use two separate mains blocks, one for 'noisy' and one for 'clean' stuff.

The difference isn't liable to be 'night and day', but experience has taught me that such things can often subtly improve matters.


I have certainly found the comments on this thread interesting and your informed input on others Marco very valuable. I guess from my perspective I have to limit my adventures due to budget constraints. Thus I "suck it and see" and swap things around from time to time. Subjectively I have been delighted with my 103GL whilst this might not be in ideal circumstances in absolute terms.


Firstly, you're welcome. For me, it's all about sharing our respective experiences for the benefit of the community.

Secondly, and most importantly for you, hold onto that GL, or if you sell it on, get the right price for it! The GL (Gold Limited) is one of the best 103s ever made, featuring coils constructed from 4N high-purity gold wire, similar to what's used in the DL-S1.

It's a rather special cartridge, and combines some of the best features of the 103SA (such as its fibreglass composite housing and 6N OFC internal wiring) and DL-S1. You will struggle to better that cartridge in the areas it excels in, no matter how much you spend!


Looking forward to seeing what the Headspace brings to the party. Maybe in due course I will end up with a Dynavector cart as these are supposed to be "best" for the WTA. Meanwhile I will carry on enjoying the party.


Sure, if that's the route you choose to go down, and let's face it, given the lovely turntable you've got, it makes perfect sense. Enjoy the Headspace and I look forward to reading your views:cool:

Marco.

[paulf-2007]

Dissenting voice here, I have owned many of all sort of flavours, stock and modded, over the years, and could never get worked up about them. Their charms do not outweight their flaws in my book and if strapped for cash I'd rather run a decent MM (as, indeed, I do on the 401 in my study system).
I'm interested to know which mm you would prefer if strapped for cash against a very reasonably priced 103 Tom

[paulf-2007]

I always find these discussions about the 'ol DL-103 quite fascinating. I've been using various versions of it now, on and off, for the last 35 years (as when optimised I love how it plays music), and so trust me, I know what this cartridge is all about - and also exactly how to hear it at its best.

With that in mind, it's clear that many of its detractors, for perfectly understandable reasons, haven't had that experience and enjoyed what this truly wonderful cartridge is capable of when used optimally in the right context. I say that because I *know* that if I demonstrated my own DL-103, in my system, or even took my turntable, fitted with one (and perhaps also my preamp/phono-stage and head amp) to a bake off, that most would be very impressed indeed with the sound, even if they still ultimately preferred something else:)

Ok, so let's establish a few facts about the DL-103, and also what it needs to perform *optimally*:

1) Price: it's only 'cheap' because of economies of scale, having been in commercial production by Denon (Nippon Columbia Co. Ltd) since 1968, and so many thousands have been made in that time, and therefore the associated costs of production have long since been paid for.

Every part contained on the cartridge, aside from its stock plastic shell, is of the highest quality, and if it were produced instead by a smaller 'renowned high-end cartridge manufacturer', not tooled up to make it in the way Denon are, and priced to appeal to 'audiophile snobs', it would cost around £1000, instead of its current £250, especially if housed in a metal body-shell.

2) The latter is key, because that's where the bulk of the cost cutting has been done. It's also the SINGLE most contributory factor towards its sonic limitations. Remove said plastic shell (and use it 'nude') or house the cartridge in any of the superb aftermarket wooden or metal body-shells available, and quite simply it becomes a different animal.

3) DL-103s produced by Nippon Columbia, up until the mid 1990s, sound markedly better than those produced after that era, especially those in current production. I believe that's largely because of the switch from alnico to rare-earth magnets.

4) Therefore, bearing the above in mind, you simply *haven't* heard a DL-103 properly unless:

a) It's been 'nuded' or rehoused in a superior body-shell, as the stock plastic one massively limits its performance.

b) It's fitted onto a high/medium-mass classic Japanese tonearm, with detachable headshell, and the partnering headshell in particular is of the optimum mass (minimum 15g) and very rigid/well-damped. DL-103s simply do not work on the vast majority of modern tonearms!!

c) It's preferably used with a direct-drive or idler-driven turntable, fitted with a high-torque motor unit, which is able to combat the effect of stylus drag, generated from the existence of the above mass/weight, combined with high tracking forces of 2.5g+

d) It's preferably used with a valve MM phono stage and SUT or head amp, the combination of which loads it optimally and provides sufficient gain, but *most importantly* is a correct match, sonically/tonally, in order to release its true potential. I've never heard a DL-103 sound right through a standalone MC phono stage.

e) The example you own, or have heard, is from the Nippon Columbia era, pre-1995.

Therefore, folks, because I *really do* know what I'm talking about on this particular subject, I can say with absolute certainty that unless you can tick ALL of the above boxes, you simply haven't heard what this deservedly iconic cartridge is capable of, and therefore that will naturally influence your opinion of it accordingly:cool:

Marco.nail head

[montesquieu]

I'm interested to know which mm you would prefer if strapped for cash against a very reasonably priced 103 Tom

Totally depends on the arm. There are some at every compliance point and not just vintage ones. I see you run a Shure Ultra which makes the point precisely!

I'm a big fan of the Audio Note cartridges and an IQ1 would be preferable to me than a Denon 103 but also the Goldring 1022 and AT150MLX. I'm also a fan of Nagaokas and the more expensive ones put your average low end (up to £1000) MC to shame. On the high compliance side the Musicmaker cartridges are excellent and reasonable second hand..

In my Garrard 401 / AT 1503 Mk1 (a broadcast arm designed for NHK) into a tube MM phono stage, I alternate between a Shure SC35C and a Tonar Diabolic E - either of which I prefer to the DL103 - alternating at times with an Ortofon SL15 MC with the accompanying vintage Ortofon SUT. This is more refined for sure than the MMs, but not necessarily hugely more musical than the other two. (The MMs I have loaded up in their headshells to 30g Ortofon SPU sort of mass with heavy counterweight, the SL15 I have on the lighter counterweight as it doesn't need the mass loading).

Despite my general misgivings about hot rodding cartridges, I have been pondering a wood body for the Tonar - a practice much in vogue over on the Lenco forum ... Thomas Schick actually has a commercial offering based on it at more than 400 Euros, basically a Tonar rebody with a graphite headshell. Before you write off the Tonar - new it's about £60 - do consider that it's made by Nagaoka and identical in the mechanics and electronics to some of the more desirable vintage Technics MMs (the Technics low-compliance styli are fully interchangeable).

I am pretty firm in my belief that pound for pound, the better MMs offer more musicality and overall performance than cheap MCs.

I could list loads more.

[Antinchip]

Marco, thanks for your observations at post No 34.

I have previously picked up most of your nuggets of advice from previous threads, thank you. The Headspace psu was first in an extension block but then moved to its own power socket. However given the distance away the lead was at full extension so somewhat bizzarely I picked up a local radio station or taxi firm! Back to the extension block.

Unfortunately opportunity for serious listening last evening was limited (my wife was supposed to be out but decided to stay in!). Nevertheless a few sides of vinyl produced the sweetest sounds I have experienced with my own system. The battery head amp seems to be a fine entry level item but the Headspace is clearly a premium piece of kit allowing the 103 to really sing. The sound was clear, detailed, expansive and even more enjoyable than previously. I'm looking forward to the next session.

Cheers

[paulf-2007]

Totally depends on the arm. There are some at every compliance point and not just vintage ones. I see you run a Shure Ultra which makes the point precisely!

I'm a big fan of the Audio Note cartridges and an IQ1 would be preferable to me than a Denon 103 but also the Goldring 1022 and AT150MLX. I'm also a fan of Nagaokas and the more expensive ones put your average low end (up to £1000) MC to shame. On the high compliance side the Musicmaker cartridges are excellent and reasonable second hand..

In my Garrard 401 / AT 1503 Mk1 (a broadcast arm designed for NHK) into a tube MM phono stage, I alternate between a Shure SC35C and a Tonar Diabolic E - either of which I prefer to the DL103 - alternating at times with an Ortofon SL15 MC with the accompanying vintage Ortofon SUT. This is more refined for sure than the MMs, but not necessarily hugely more musical than the other two. (The MMs I have loaded up in their headshells to 30g Ortofon SPU sort of mass with heavy counterweight, the SL15 I have on the lighter counterweight as it doesn't need the mass loading).

Despite my general misgivings about hot rodding cartridges, I have been pondering a wood body for the Tonar - a practice much in vogue over on the Lenco forum ... Thomas Schick actually has a commercial offering based on it at more than 400 Euros, basically a Tonar rebody with a graphite headshell. Before you write off the Tonar - new it's about £60 - do consider that it's made by Nagaoka and identical in the mechanics and electronics to some of the more desirable vintage Technics MMs (the Technics low-compliance styli are fully interchangeable).

I am pretty firm in my belief that pound for pound, the better MMs offer more musicality and overall performance than cheap MCs.

I could list loads more.the Shure ultra was £500 used, obviously, around the same figure was a decca c4e and Benz wood sl, all very nice, the decca a bit "seat of yer pants " and needing more care on set up and records needed to be spotlessly clean. The Shure is just more musical. I tried a Denon 103 and 103r, I preferred the 103r but the step up was made for it with the correct resistors, but not much in it. Well set up they are very good but I couldn't see going to the trouble of nuding it or putting in a wood body with the risk of breaking it. Not that I'm against anyone else doing that, as Marco has found it very rewarding.

[Barry]

RFI can be caused by pickup by the coils within the cartridge, if the cartridge body is not shielded and earthed.

Many years ago, whilst using an AKG cartridge (a fixed-coil design) I picked up the communication from a taxi that was parked outside my house. I was playing a record at the time, so the breakthrough (which was quite intelligible) came as quite a surprise! A couple of ferrite beads fitted on the leads from the RCA phono sockets within the preamp cured the problem.

[Antinchip]

Thank you for your comments Andrew and Barry. It may be a one off oddity, never happened before.

On first use the Headspace psu was connected to a power block and no such issues during 30 minutes listening. Later on I spent 10 minutes enjoying a track first having plugged the psu into the nearest available free power socket. When I lifted the stylus without muting volume I noticed a quiet, sibilant noise from the nearest speaker. Ear next to the speaker revealed what could have been "radio", there were certainly voices. Same with the other speaker, and stayed even when volume was muted. I just moved the psu back to the power block and normality was restored.

First impressions of the Headspace are very positive Andrew. I am not really au-fait with loadings and so on but based on my research set the Headspace to 100ohm and 25dB for first listen. The Harmonious Audio unit has fixed 100ohm at 32dB and 180ohm at 28dB. I tried both but settled on 32dB. The Headspace on first use seems marginally quieter but far superior overall. I will have more time to listen/experiment over the weekend so will try various settings and see what suits me best. I will let you know how I get on. Many thanks.

Cheers

[Simon75]

This isn't something I'm planning to do in the immediate future, but would really value members views on: Would a denon 103r be suitable to mount on an Sme 3009 series2 (non improved)(detachable headshell)arm? I'm currently using a Shure M55E to good effect but think in the next 6 months or so I will be ready to try something different. Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

[montesquieu]

This isn't something I'm planning to do in the immediate future, but would really value members views on: Would a denon 103r be suitable to mount on an Sme 3009 series2 (non improved)(detachable headshell)arm? I'm currently using a Shure M55E to good effect but think in the next 6 months or so I will be ready to try something different. Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

The non-improved is a better match than the later arms but if it were me I'd put the money into a Jico stylus for the M55.

[Simon75]

It's got a jico stylus already, not a SAS however, I can't bring myself to pay out the required amount for one, I think they are around £200 at the moment.

[montesquieu]

It's got a jico stylus already, not a SAS however, I can't bring myself to pay out the required amount for one, I think they are around £200 at the moment.

That's the one I meant.

[Jimbo]

It's got a jico stylus already, not a SAS however, I can't bring myself to pay out the required amount for one, I think they are around £200 at the moment.

The Jico SAS transforms the M55e into something very special, nothing like the standard stylus. Nice and quiet in the groove but masses of detail retrieval. In the right arm this combination will compete with any of the top MM cartridges out there around the £500 mark. I loved mine in the Lenco GL75.

[Simon75]

I would love to try one, anyone know the going rate for a 2nd hand one?

[Jimbo]

I would love to try one, anyone know the going rate for a 2nd hand one?

Around £100

[Simon75]

Unless I am getting completely confused by their website it looks like jico are not selling any neo SAS at the moment. They do have information about them but it's from 2016. A quick google brings up a neo SAS N55e for $250 shipping from the US.

[tlscapital]

Hi Andrew,

Basically, it comes down to stuff like high, versus low/medium-mass tonearms, and low-compliance, versus medium-compliance cartridges. The former is the 'unfashionable' way of doing things, along with using direct-drive and idler turntables, as opposed to belt-driven ones, and even things like 'S' or 'J'-shaped tonearms with detachable headshells, instead of straight ones with fixed headshells.

'Unfashionable' of the 'unfashionable' I run my Denon DL-102 (even more eccentric than the DL-103) on a belt driven turntable with suspended sub chassis. So I get all the benefit like the "airy sound" and the very evolutive potential around it. To counter the Wow & Flute hazard (that are the down side of those belt turntables I totally agree) I feed the motor with an external PSU & tachometer combo for sturdy speed accuracy and constancy. I don't dream anymore to own a Garrard 301 (grease bearing). For real !


There's other stuff too (such as using an SUT or head amp, with a low-output MC cartridge, as opposed to solely a standalone MC phono stage), spherical styli versus line-contact [and the high VTFs often needed with some spherical/conical tips] - and all of this highlights the contrast in both approaches. The DL-103 requies one to adopt an 'unfashionable' approach to turntable building/vinyl listening, in order for it to perform optimally.

The Denon DL-102 has 3mV signal output, so it's considered a HOMC (the DL-13 has 0.5mV signal considered a LOMC) and thanks to my adjustable preamp, I can set it right to the cartridge requirements. A pre-set MM or MC preampfification won't make these "exotic" cartridges sing as they should. This I have experienced with mine and the "conventional" MM/MC settings ! So even though I am good now, I am contemplating the addition of a 1:2 passive SUT as this could broaden some more the "sound stage" I've read.


The Japs have been adopting said 'unfashionable' approach for years, with great success, and when I tried it for myself, I discovered what I'd been missing for a long time with vinyl replay!:cool:

Marco.

Old timer record collector with no phono geek knowledge nor money to put into my previous phono set-ups, I've been running SL-1200 and such turntables for decades before. Worry less of such consideration, my gears were merely second hand plug & play combinations. Lately in my life, with the DL-102 this has taken another turn. It did require a lot of reading and understanding of the basics before DIY tweaking and some money as well... And now my playback times are a party and ear pleasure as well.

[paulf-2007]

The Denon DL-102 has 3mV signal output, so it's considered a HOMC (the DL-13 has 0.5mV signal considered a LOMC) and thanks to my adjustable preamp, I can set it right to the cartridge requirements. A pre-set MM or MC preampfification won't make these "exotic" cartridges sing as they should. This I have experienced with mine and the "conventional" MM/MC settings ! So even though I am good now, I am contemplating the addition of a 1:2 passive SUT as this could broaden some more the "sound stage" I've read.
[/QUOTE]i just happen to have a1:2 step up I had made by klaus Hurler in Germany, he sells on eBay. I had it made to work with an SAE 1000, if necessary it could have resistors changed to match a 102

[tlscapital]

i just happen to have a1:2 step up I had made by klaus Hurler in Germany, he sells on eBay. I had it made to work with an SAE 1000, if necessary it could have resistors changed to match a 102

OK, yes it's exactly one of his I am looking at/considering. Am already been in touch with him on the matter. I'm trying to fund this purchase in the first place.

Can I ask; did you find some sound quality improvement in comparison before and after the SUT addition in your chain ? And if so how, what and where...

[paulf-2007]

OK, yes it's exactly one of his I am looking at/considering. Am already been in touch with him on the matter. I'm trying to fund this purchase in the first place.

Can I ask; did you find some sound quality improvement in comparison before and after the SUT addition in your chain ? And if so how, what and where...

It's been a good while since I used it so I couldn't describe the differences but was definitely much better all round. If you wanted to save a substantial amount of money I could do you a deal on the one I have, it's in as new condition. Message me if interested.

[Barry]

I just happen to have a 1:2 step up I had made by klaus Hurler in Germany, he sells on eBay. I had it made to work with an SAE 1000, if necessary it could have resistors changed to match a 102



Hello Paul

Can you provide a link to this ebay site please? I would be interested in a 1:3 SUT.

Thanks
Barry

[Floyddroid]

It's an ok cartridge, though as discussed adnauseum above it has It's issues. To simplify my experience of the 103, It's champion on vintage turntables with more compatibility issues on modern day units. The Denon sounded mediocre in my VPI though absolutely cracking in my Sony PS 6750.

[Marco]

The Denon sounded mediocre in my VPI though absolutely cracking in my Sony PS 6750.

Did you use the same arm on both T/Ts, Steve? Bet you didn't!;)

Plus, what you've said simply reinforces the point I've made about the 103 performing best on direct-drive (and also idler) T/Ts....

Marco.

P.S Some good recent posts here chaps, which I'll get to later:)

[worrasf]

..... but *most importantly* is a correct match, sonically/tonally, in order to release its true potential. I've never heard a DL-103 sound right through a standalone MC phono stage. Marco.

:exactly:

My experience of 103's various bears this out. They were always close but no cigar until I bought a Rothwell Headspace which enables variable loading and gain. The 103R needs totally different loading to the 103.

I suspect the reason why many folk are disappointed is that the 103 is "sold" as a budget entry level cartridge that punches above it's weight. The problem is unless you fork out for a suitable SUT/headamp (another plug for the headspace) then it won't dance, and after you do fork out it's no longer a budget cartridge.

However, once this is understood and the correct partnership is made then the results can be spectacular.

Just saying.

Steve

[Floyddroid]

Did you use the same arm on both T/Ts, Steve? Bet you didn't!;)

Plus, what you've said simply reinforces the point I've made about the 103 performing best on direct-drive (and also idler) T/Ts....

Marco.

P.S Some good recent posts here chaps, which I'll get to later:)

No I didn't. I do agree with your notion about the 103 sounds good on dd and id turntables. I am selling a Lenco on here fore a friend of mine with a 103 on board and it does sound superb. I acquired my first one free in the late 70's when I bought a large Denon integrated amp from Gilson Audio (now gone the way of the dodo) in Middlesbrough. I had it on board a Rotel RP1500 which I still have fond memories of. I replaced it with an AKG P7E and later a P8E, which to my ears at the time was a more detailed sound than the Denon.

[CageyH]

I love my 103, but it is modified with a brass body and boron cantilever and Shibata stylus.
It sounds fantastic, probably due to the extra weight that is needed with my arm. I tried a lovely C1 that I bought from Marco, and sold it because I was not getting the best out of it in my set up. They really do something right, that is just so engaging to listen to.

[kambo_z]

Can i ask you guys, from where you refurbish Denon 103 with a new cantilever and stylus and how much it costs? thanks

[walpurgis]

There's a list of some on the forum: https://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?46490-Cartridge-Repairs-Retipping-and-Replacement-Styli-Suppliers-A-list!

[paulf-2007]

Hello Paul

Can you provide a link to this ebay site please? I would be interested in a 1:3 SUT.

Thanks
Barryi can't provide a link but if you go to home audio and hifi separates and search for step up transformer you will find them in a black case with the two transformers in silver sticking out of the top. They are £217 these days.

[Barry]

i can't provide a link but if you go to home audio and hifi separates and search for step up transformer you will find them in a black case with the two transformers in silver sticking out of the top. They are £217 these days.

Thanks Paul,

I did manage to find the link, but more importantly found out the name of the manufacturer of the transformers used.

Cheers
Barry

[CageyH]

Can i ask you guys, from where you refurbish Denon 103 with a new cantilever and stylus and how much it costs? thanks

I bought mine from a seller in Germany through eBay.

[vs_jk]

Although my experience is with DL103R's, I'm sure this would translate well to The DL103.

The stock DL103R was a nice improvement over the other Denon cartridges I had heard in my system. However, the stock cartridge has a little bit of unrefined midrange and graininess to the sound. Also, I think it lacked a bit of the detail that I was getting with the DL301MKII.

So, I got another DL103R and had it potted into a Paradox Pulse body. This was a significantly heavier beast! The sound was much smoother and the graininess was gone. The bass also seemed better yet the cohesiveness and magic of the original cartridge remained. More of the musical information comes through the entire frequency range. With this, there was no going back to the stock DL103R for me.

I decided to have the spare stock DL103R potted into a Paradox Pulse Guard body and then sent it to phono cartridge retipping for a sapphire cantilever and micro ridge stylus. With these upgrades, there was increased realism to the sound. I could hear details in recordings that I thought I was familiar with. Now I could hear further into the nuanced details of the recorded performance. This extra detail really unlocks a good deal of information that before went unnoticed. For example, in well recorded live albums, the venue acoustics and crowd sounds come through vividly. However, none of it sounds forced in any way. This is the best cartridge I’ve ever had in my system. It’s kept the magic of the DL103R and unlocked a whole lot more detail and nuance.

[worrasf]

Although my experience is with DL103R's, I'm sure this would translate well to The DL103.

The stock DL103R was a nice improvement over the other Denon cartridges I had heard in my system. However, the stock cartridge has a little bit of unrefined midrange and graininess to the sound. Also, I think it lacked a bit of the detail that I was getting with the DL301MKII.

So, I got another DL103R and had it potted into a Paradox Pulse body. This was a significantly heavier beast! The sound was much smoother and the graininess was gone. The bass also seemed better yet the cohesiveness and magic of the original cartridge remained. More of the musical information comes through the entire frequency range. With this, there was no going back to the stock DL103R for me.

I decided to have the spare stock DL103R potted into a Paradox Pulse Guard body and then sent it to phono cartridge retipping for a sapphire cantilever and micro ridge stylus. With these upgrades, there was increased realism to the sound. I could hear details in recordings that I thought I was familiar with. Now I could hear further into the nuanced details of the recorded performance. This extra detail really unlocks a good deal of information that before went unnoticed. For example, in well recorded live albums, the venue acoustics and crowd sounds come through vividly. However, none of it sounds forced in any way. This is the best cartridge I’ve ever had in my system. It’s kept the magic of the DL103R and unlocked a whole lot more detail and nuance.

Agree. I also have a Paradox Pulse Guard 103R and find it the best 103R version I’ve heard. Again, as I’ve posted above the Rothwell Headspace really makes it dance.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk