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
Marco.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Antinchip
