In praise of the Denon 103...

[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!

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.