If they do, they have nothing to do with mold release. CDs don't use them either. Google turn up audiophile legends, and nothing else. Not surprising if you know anything about mold releases.
I caught up on all the recent action in this thread and the most important thing I've realized is that there really are people who legitimately like the DL-103R and DL-103. I can't imagine a decent 2k server system that could sound worse than a denon DL-103R based analog system, but that speaks more to different taste than anything else.
You may have missed that all were modified ( in my case) They were no longer 103/103r, only the bodies were used for the modifications involved , they don't sound anything like a stock103. you will have to spend more than 1K to better these cartridges.
http://www.sound-smith.com/denon/
http://www.sound-smith.com/denon/
Last edited:
That's strange, I distinctly remember Winston Ma (Owner, First Impression Music) and Bruce Brown (Recording/ Mastering Studio and HDTracks processing) with a couple of the guys of our audio club talking about washing the mold release off of CD's with distilled and de-ionized water. We were at Gary Koh's (CEO, Genesis Loudspeaker) warehouse in Seattle!
Best Regards,
TerryO
Ok, only body is a marginal improvement...read...mainly in your mind.
In other words, if you have a blind test I challenge you to get body modified and stock 10 out of 10.
Major improvement comes from stylus. Body does a nice complementary job.
Beside, soundsmith's modifications are not the best..also had a very bad experience with him and I would recommend people to steer away from him.
Best stylus comes from expert stylus...unfortunately there is a long waiting list.
However again, when 103 is fully modified doesn't come cheap and a $1k cart will easily better it!!
Also a $2K music server makes no competition. If your analogue front end is based around 103 modified...all I have to say is that anybody got to be def not to hear its superiority or conclude that never really listened to one.
So let's make two calculations... $250 for cart including shipping (again you don't get the one with tightest specs but that's ok) plus $350 for stylus change plus $25 for shipping.
And other $100 for body plus $25 for shipping...takes to a grand total of $750.
So basically if you find a good deal for the $1000 Ortofon I auditioned, basically with probably $80-$100 more you get a much better cartridge. Now, even with that, unless you have a very good phono stage and pretty decent table, you won't better a $2-2.5K music server and in the end you have spent significantly more.
Yes, you have vinyl, you can play LPs and it isn't bad at all, but yet, being realistic and objective the digital at this price point will be your best bet...sorry...I bet it must not be easy to accept
Stefano, easy, .😛 and yes there are others modifying Dl103 and no it's not my reference i had already stated that ...
Ortofon sound don't work for me, i prefer XYZ if going over 1K and above i still have my koetsu and there's a clearaudio I'm looking at , anyway we digress, the modded Dl103 represents good value and with proper arm mas and phonostage sounds very capable ...
Yes better a 2 k music server everyday of the week sans sunday ...
Ortofon sound don't work for me, i prefer XYZ if going over 1K and above i still have my koetsu and there's a clearaudio I'm looking at , anyway we digress, the modded Dl103 represents good value and with proper arm mas and phonostage sounds very capable ...
Yes better a 2 k music server everyday of the week sans sunday ...
Last edited:
Ok that is a different perspective, which I might agree with....except for the last statement 🙂
Nope. You don't use mold release on compression molded polycarbonate; Slide makes a product used for certain compounds in other processes (not flat discs). Dieco as well. Chemically, that claim makes no sense, either- would a lipid wash off with distilled water? Of course not, other than placebo. Likewise, a couple of microns of a lipid on the surface will not impede optical reading.
Mold release is used on certain thermosets, one thermoplastic (Surlyn), and most elastomers (rubber). I'm intimately familiar with both molding processes and the product lines/applications of all of the top mold release manufacturers. I rarely pull the "Believe me, I'm an expert" card, but as Technical Director of a Fortune 200 company's mold release division, and someone with 30 years of experience in plastic molding, I have to do so this time.
edit: I limit the term "mold release" to "external mold release," i.e., stuff that's sprayed onto the mold. You cannot wash off an internal release- and if you could, you'd ruin the part surfaces.
Yup, I agree it's quite common here. I have a Goldring Super Exstatic brush for dry cleaning my lp's but it doesn't remove this gunk. It eventually comes off with use but until then it makes the record sound bad and some of it gets left on my stylus 🙁
I have a trick which I use when it's really bad. I place the record on a clean dampened cotton dish towel on top of our kitchen worktop. Then I use a new dampened microfiber duster with a spot of dishwashing detergent on it and go round the record in a circular motion following the groves and applying very LIGHT pressure. I do this to both sides then I rinse the record with cold purified water. It then gets placed on one end of another clean but dry cotton dish towel and I gently pat the surface dry using the free end of the towel. Once it's properly clean and dry, it gets put in a new plastic inner sleeve. Done carefully, this works very well.
I used to only do this with dirty second hand vinyl bought from charity shops, it removes sticky fingerprints and ingrained dust.
I have had to do this several times now with brand new records which have that sticky gunk on them.
Hi Stefano,
5000$ for a cartridge wont happen here.
But I do wonder what ZYX has done to this cartridge to make it work better, and what made it cost that much.
Thanks SY;
Mold release in record pressing: Google only returned posts from users in other forums, all of which used "I heard", "someone said", and like unsubstantiated nonsense.
If external release agent were used, stamper would need to be cleaned between each pressing. A press working at 150 tons works out to about 2600 pounds per square inch; likely not enough to insure uniform thickness of agent between stamper and vinyl.
Stefanoo;
You are still clinging to $$$$ approach to quality. Pure self indulgent nonsense.
Mold release in record pressing: Google only returned posts from users in other forums, all of which used "I heard", "someone said", and like unsubstantiated nonsense.
If external release agent were used, stamper would need to be cleaned between each pressing. A press working at 150 tons works out to about 2600 pounds per square inch; likely not enough to insure uniform thickness of agent between stamper and vinyl.
Stefanoo;
You are still clinging to $$$$ approach to quality. Pure self indulgent nonsense.
@BW: That assumes a sacrificial release (which is the unstated assumption for claims of mold release on the surface); the release would also have to be resprayed on every cycle, and that's some major cost and impact on production rate.
If it's a semipermanent mold release, there's essentially no transfer. It would be nice if they used semiperms, I could sell them product.😀 They don't, so I don't. Sacrificials are pretty much confined to marginal operations these days, and again, no-one pressing vinyl or PC discs would use them. Internal MR is a different story, but that's a highly dispersed additive to the molded compound and, as I said, removing it would be very difficult, accomplish nothing, and ruin the product.
If it's a semipermanent mold release, there's essentially no transfer. It would be nice if they used semiperms, I could sell them product.😀 They don't, so I don't. Sacrificials are pretty much confined to marginal operations these days, and again, no-one pressing vinyl or PC discs would use them. Internal MR is a different story, but that's a highly dispersed additive to the molded compound and, as I said, removing it would be very difficult, accomplish nothing, and ruin the product.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.