Denon dl 103 Tracking error question

[fergs1]

Greetings Ladies and Gentlemen, regarding the dl 103 and its conical stylus does this make it immune to tracking error or just less sensitive. The reason I ask is if it is the former then by rights you yould run the cartride to the outer specs of normal tracking for a period and then move the cartridge angle to. the inner specs of normal tracking and thus share around the wear and thus extend stylus life. I know eliptical and the more exoitic stylus profiles are supposed to be very sensitive to to tracking error. This leads me to the question as to which typically is the greater source of distortion, tracking error or tracing error.
All these questions appear in my head since I have read the asbsolutely polarised views regarding the dl 103 and a lot of the critisism stems from the conical stylus, and thus am trying to acertain the real advantages to conical vs eliptical, fineline,etc
Would anyone care to enlighten me
peace and goodwill fergs
.

[audio-kraut]

a lot of the critisism stems from the conical stylus

I have used in direct comparison two shures with microridge(shibata) stylus versus the denon dl 103.

I also run a goldring 1042 with a fineline stylus.

I prefer the denon to either the shure V15VxMR or Ultra 500 with the microridge stylus or the fineline stylus goldring to any of the microridge sgures I had.

I had noticed that especially in the inner groove any misalignment of the tracking angle in the shures seenmed to be immediately apparent.
Now, I have taken more effort because of that to make sure the denon is always properly aligned - after a change of cartridges so that I cannot compare if they are more or less prone to distortion.

Comparing the goldring 1042 with the denon dl 1o3 I find that the goldring has a less neutral, more bass heavy reproduction, while the denon is much more neutral and balanced. I like both systems, depending on what I play.

It is hard to say where the differences come from - I doubt it is the stylus that makes the difference, it is probably more the difference between an MC vs. an MM system

[cubastreet]

I don't think the conical stylus is a selling point of the 103.
The tracking angle is still important as the cantilever has to be moved in the correct direction in order to give the coils the correct movement and hence give the correct sound output.

[Fox]

I don't think the conical stylus is a selling point of the 103.

It is my opinion that the conical stylus of the DL-103 is one of its virtues . Of all the cartridges I owned, the DL-103 is the best in tracking the inner grooves. Also, the surface noise is much less with worn records.

One should know that in the early sixties the researchers at Columbia/Denon figured out scientifically (i.e. it was published) that the distortion due to thermal deformation of the groove while tracking was cancelled out at 20 degrees Celsius (room temperature) as a result of a specific type of suspension and a conical stylus. With other types of styli, the cancellation did not take place. In the late sixties this finding was confirmed by research at Decca.

To cut a long story short, there is more to the conical stylus of the DL-103 than meets the eye. So do not rule out the Dl-103 because of its conical stylus. You may like the cart or you may not but the conical stylus should not be regarded a weakness.

Just my two cents,

Fox

[cubastreet]

I certainly don't rule it out, despite the conical stylus and the heavy tracking weight it's still gotta be the best MC bargain.
My mate has one on a SME 3012 / Garrard 401 and it sounds great. My tonearm is too light to hold the 103 rigidly enough so it just doesn't quite sing.
I've heard great things though about 103s that have been retipped with an elliptical diamond - the same natural sound but with the greater detail that the elliptical tip can extract.