DL103R rather? I have one too. Its very nice but low compliance spherical. Has that vintage vibe. The 301 series is sturdier body higher compliance special elliptical. All Denon cartridges are overachievers for the price. Haven't tried this exact 301MKII but from what I have heard its a spacious full sounding cart that prefers a rather low mass arm and >470Ω load selection. At 0.4mV nominal its strong enough for direct connection in UFSP's HMC mode.
At 13cu 6g the 301MKII seems compatible enough to the RB250. Its a medium mass arm that can host many different carts. Have you kept the Rega left phono plug weird grounding method?
Interesting whats that? As far as I remember I terminated the ground wire as far out on the arm and soldered it. Sins it is a aluminum arm.
Interesting I dont think I have that arrangement I have also changed that plastic soldering plug for a metal one ande soldered all new wires. But I will double check. But on the other hand, yes its already fixed sins Regas solution dont have any separate ground in the tonearm and that I got and soldered I remember. 🙂
Last edited:
I was planning to get the Denon 301MkII cart to use with my UFSP. I have a technics SL-1200 mk2 with a low mass audiomods series 5 tonearm.
Seems like it will also match that arm. Tracks light too at 1.4g downforce that cart which is nice to records. Just don't expect super definition boron and line contact type of renditions. Those higher compliance aluminum and elliptical Denons are mellower style cartridges. They take it easy on coarser mixed and overplayed old pop and rock records.
Vintage carts have appeal. If you listen with flat enough response headphones, A is the better revealing and smoother cart over B IMHO. But see how many people in the comments preferred B over A. Later revealed A was the AT-33SA B was the Denon DL-103R. Much cheaper to the AT. Denon offers a high value for money range of carts with different strengths and flavors that became longtime popular. Either talented in setting tech priorities vs build cost for tone and tuning or more realistic in suggested retail price policy. One way or another they obviously do something well.
Trying to see what deck he used for the comparison. Both cart need a high mass arm to provide there best sound. The Denon more so that the AT, as it has double the compliance. That arm does not look suitable to play either cart, especially the Denon.
Cheers
Cheers
If it is then the Eff Mass is 13.5 grams, no good for either cart!! (maybe A/T would just sneak in) Wish people would learn how to choose the compatibility of arm & cart correctly. Even do called professional reviewers get it wrong!!
Cheers
Cheers
The AT-LH11H head-shell shown in the video has 11g mass. The 100Hz compliance figures listed by Denon and Audio Technica should be multiplied by 1.5 for calculations at very low frequencies. But that's an uncertain approximation.
Regardless, lets try calculate for the DL-103R and the Jelco TK-850S. 13.5g arm 8.5g cart 0.5g screws 11g shell make 33.5g M. Compliance 5x1.5=7.5. When plugged in the f=1000: (2 x π x √ (M x C)) formula we get a 10.04 Hz answer !
Regardless, lets try calculate for the DL-103R and the Jelco TK-850S. 13.5g arm 8.5g cart 0.5g screws 11g shell make 33.5g M. Compliance 5x1.5=7.5. When plugged in the f=1000: (2 x π x √ (M x C)) formula we get a 10.04 Hz answer !