Denon DL-103 and 103R - Page 5 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analogue Source

Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26th November 2012, 06:53 PM   #41
diyAudio Member
 
vdi_nenna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: PA, USA
Blog Entries: 1
Send a message via Yahoo to vdi_nenna
Quote:
How is the 103r vs 103 and has anyone listened to the DL110
I picked up a Denon DL-110 today. Will have it by Saturday.

I have a DL-103R with Soundsmith Ruby cantalever, because I broke the original trying to install an aluminum body. Also have another 103R with broke cantilever for the same reason.

Just finsihed the Pearl II this weekend. Not enough gain with 103R.

The 103R output is .25mV. The 110 is 1.6, but some have said the output measures higher, like 2.0 or more. Seems great for the money. We'll see.


Vince
__________________
I build, therefore I am.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2012, 07:11 PM   #42
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
 
bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York State USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinkr View Post
The ones I have seen all had the original generator assembly, damper ring, etc. - the only thing replaced was the cantilever and stylus which is generally glued into the the end of the old one which is cut somewhere near the mounting bushing.

FWIW as a long time user of LOMC cartridges including SPU and DL-103 one tames the HF resonance by varying the loading R, capacitance is generally ineffective. A number of people I know use rebuilt DL-103 loaded into a couple of hundred ohms and have not observed unusually large resonances in the pass band. (They have the hardware and motivation to make measurements)
Kevin,

Who does this?
I have two carts that need just this work... a slightly lighter cantilever shoved in making up the diff in mass with the inevitable glue would be peachy keen... probably good enough.

PM if you wish...

The one that I saw had the resonance, as did the "new" product, and it was measured using the computer based hardware/software package for that job. Other carts did not show this at all.

And even if R loading *would* knock the resonance down, the slope was 2nd order or higher, so that wouldn't solve the problem... just saying what was seen.

Kevin, you know the fellow too, local to me...

_-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear
http://www.bearlabs.com -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ]
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2012, 07:16 PM   #43
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
 
bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York State USA
Scott,

It may be merely anecdotal and not truly representative but I have yet to hear a spherical cartridge that had the HF "openness" of an eliptical or shibata, or whatever.

Now, that might just be because the fancy stylus is almost always associated with the better suspension and cantilevers and the spherical is almost always the less expensive and heavier aluminum cantilever...

They used to say that the elliptical had less distortion...

_-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear
http://www.bearlabs.com -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ]
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2012, 08:51 PM   #44
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear View Post
Scott,

They used to say that the elliptical had less distortion...

_-_-bear
If you have the chance read one of the articles, many LP's were predistorted so a spherical stylus tracked "perfectly" and any other would be distorted. The reasons were some complex geometry issues that I have not gotten down into. Thorsten L. posted some very thought provoking information and that author from Italy's stuff is very good too.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2012, 09:05 PM   #45
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
 
bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York State USA
hmmm... predistortion... inner testing. I am wondering how they did that via some electronic altering of the signal, or did they physically adjust the cutter head?

drat! stupid antique mechanical reproduction...

_-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear
http://www.bearlabs.com -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ]
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2012, 01:29 AM   #46
kevinkr is offline kevinkr  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
kevinkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Blog Entries: 6
Hi Bear,
Yes I know exactly who you are referencing. I've not measured one of these cartridges myself so the information I have heard is second hand (anecdotal) to me. I have inspected several and can attest to the fact that the generator assembly remains stock on these carts. I've never had one of the retip cartridges in my system however and have to admit that the elliptical SPUs blow every DL-103 I've owned/borrowed right out of the water. (Zu DL-103, DL-103D, and DL-103SA)

I've always understood that it really was only RCA and its affiliates that used Dynagroove. (At least here in the USA) I've not found the DL-103 with its spherical stylus the last word in reproduction of old RCA dynagroove recordings and much prefer the "wrong" SPU GM E or Meister Silver subjectively speaking on these recordings.

Undoubtedly I still have a lot to learn, am never entirely sure about what I "know."
__________________
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2012, 01:53 AM   #47
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinkr View Post
I've always understood that it really was only RCA and its affiliates that used Dynagroove. (At least here in the USA) I've not found the DL-103 with its spherical stylus the last word in reproduction of old RCA dynagroove recordings and much prefer the "wrong" SPU GM E or Meister Silver subjectively speaking on these recordings.

Undoubtedly I still have a lot to learn, am never entirely sure about what I "know."
The "guys" from Europe claimed otherwise, but I don't know either way. As it stands I have never seen a single actual measurement to substantiate any claims of stylus geometry and distortion.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2012, 09:14 AM   #48
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
The real original SPU's work with spheric tips like the DL 103, because spheric tips with radius 17 mikrometer for stereo and 25 mikrometers for mono tracks better than any other kind of stylus geometry, when a usual cantilever construction is used, because cantilevers have a different mechanical lay-out than any cutting heads, and thus the spheric tip makes lesser distorsions. Its a much better compromise.

Any other geometry creates more non controlable distorsions , depending on the groove modulation.

Predistorsions or precompensation was used on very many records.

Dr. Shiga from Nippon Columbia showed this clearly around 1961 with his works and measurings. The DL 103 was the result of his works.

Using parallel resistors just damp the cartridge resonanace ( different Q), but the point of resonance is the same.

Repaired MCs having a Fres around 10Khz simply have to much moved mass.
People like this maybe when they begin to get deaf due age, because the sound is brighter.

DL 103 is not the last word, but still very good value and needs heavy arms and low noise prepre or transformer.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2012, 12:03 PM   #49
expert in tautology
diyAudio Member
 
bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York State USA
Groove-T, do I understand you to say that the rebuilds that use apparently smaller, thinner, stiffer cantilevers like boron or ruby are actually *higher mass* than the original seemingly heavy, fat aluminum ones??

It makes sense that the Fres got moved *down* but what the reason is/was seemed unclear to me entirely, as I would have expected that the opposite would happen.

I am thinking perhaps it is the result not of the cantilever, but the bonding agent. In tweeters the bonding agent and amount used to adhere the VC to the diaphragm is quite critical (for example).

Comments?

_-_-bear
__________________
_-_-bear
http://www.bearlabs.com -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ]
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2012, 01:13 PM   #50
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Hi bear

Original they used for the DL 103 hollow alu tube cantilevers, made a small hole trough it and pressed the stylus in, thereafter fixed the stylus with a little bit of glue.
This way they had to use very low mass tips and thus the F Res could be tuned around 20 Khz and frequency response was pretty flat with a small rise at the top end.
Alu has good damping properties, making this possible.

Making the cantilever short, give lesser mass, more output, but more distorsions and lesser trackabilty.
Ruby cantilevers are massive and thus not really light. You cannot drill a hole to fix the tip, you must glue it = more mass
To fix a broken cantilever, you must cut it and fill the hollow body with glue = more mass
Now you wanna good trackability, make it longer= more mass
Now you have lesser output , thus stronger magnet or more coil windings, more windings= more mass. Stronger magnets are bigger, thus more strayfield and similar problems with the armatures, holding the the wholes system toghether.
Those kind of cantilevers are always embedded into a another part of alu or similar, which carries the suspension wire, so its not pure Rub y, Boron or whatever.

Then we have lesser damping with super stiff cantilevers. To avoid ringing, you need more damping, this is achieved with the damping rubber, suspension stiffness and also the body of the whole thingie and the coupling to the arm via headshell.

So you see it is very sensible game .

If you turn volume down, usually you can hear your MC playing music.

Very good ones are very silent= nearly no resonances= very low loss of transition.

So its everyones own decision, if he wants to listen whats on the record or which sound the cartridge makes.

I use one with spheric tip, it never has tracking distorsions, has very low sound of itself ( colorations) and pretty good output level. Need a heavy arm.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Denon Dl-103 resonance frequency northernsky Analogue Source 4 12th October 2011 05:31 PM
whats best step up for denon DL-103 vinylflo Analogue Source 7 27th September 2011 04:22 PM
Head Pre for Denon DL 103 gpapag Analogue Source 86 20th December 2009 10:08 AM
WTB broken Denon Dl 103 IZHAKKATZ Swap Meet 2 9th January 2009 07:12 AM
help- retiping denon dl 103 IZHAKKATZ Analogue Source 20 20th November 2008 03:20 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:58 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2