This is the famous Denon DL103 cartridge, to which they change the weak original plastic casing (one of the complaints of the users is that they do not allow a firm fit) for a solid and beautiful metal casing (anodized aluminum) and wood to choose .
All of which will make you enter a musical nirvana never imagined according to what the manufacturer promises.
The cost of the Denon cartridge is U$S 400 and the retail price of the Nitro 3200 U$S.
So does this fall into the category of the thread title ?
Clear Anodized Aluminum Nitro 1 - Nitro Series Cartridges - Audio MusiKraft
All of which will make you enter a musical nirvana never imagined according to what the manufacturer promises.
The cost of the Denon cartridge is U$S 400 and the retail price of the Nitro 3200 U$S.
So does this fall into the category of the thread title ?
Clear Anodized Aluminum Nitro 1 - Nitro Series Cartridges - Audio MusiKraft
Last edited:
Your answer then is that it should be in this thread ?
Funniest snake oil theories
Beyond the difference in price, my question is whether it will be justified (improved sound - SQ) on a conventional night, assuming the buyer has no money problems?
Funniest snake oil theories
Beyond the difference in price, my question is whether it will be justified (improved sound - SQ) on a conventional night, assuming the buyer has no money problems?
Last edited:
I say this modestly, but am something of a legend in the Cartridge Tweaking game...
In the mid seventies I had a readers letter published in HiFi News under the witty title of "SHURE FIX"!
Like many, I had rushed out and bought the lightest and best trackingest new cartridge in the World, The Shure V15 III, along with the recommended gubbins of a SME 3009II and Garard 401.
Frankly, I was disappointed. Not a patch on my old Decca FFSS moving coil in heavy 12" SME tonearm.
Upon close examination by my relentless engineering eye, I discovered this thing was of extremely flimsy construction with loose whatsits rattling and flexing uncontrollably. I discovered that a piece of Blu-Tac here and there could solidify things greatly, but was concerned about the added mass.
I therefore tried a light square of cardboard between the cartridge holder and the body. INSTANT IMPROVEMENT! I felt the need to share my discovery with the World. And did, regrettably making no money in the process.
Footnote: I subsequently discovered that the whole concept of high inductance moving-magnet cartridges resonating with a cable capacitance was broken and unfixable, despite my genius balanced input RIAA preamplifier efforts. But that is another story. However a teasing tempter below for those who share my acute analytic ability.
In the mid seventies I had a readers letter published in HiFi News under the witty title of "SHURE FIX"!
Like many, I had rushed out and bought the lightest and best trackingest new cartridge in the World, The Shure V15 III, along with the recommended gubbins of a SME 3009II and Garard 401.
Frankly, I was disappointed. Not a patch on my old Decca FFSS moving coil in heavy 12" SME tonearm.
Upon close examination by my relentless engineering eye, I discovered this thing was of extremely flimsy construction with loose whatsits rattling and flexing uncontrollably. I discovered that a piece of Blu-Tac here and there could solidify things greatly, but was concerned about the added mass.
I therefore tried a light square of cardboard between the cartridge holder and the body. INSTANT IMPROVEMENT! I felt the need to share my discovery with the World. And did, regrettably making no money in the process.
Footnote: I subsequently discovered that the whole concept of high inductance moving-magnet cartridges resonating with a cable capacitance was broken and unfixable, despite my genius balanced input RIAA preamplifier efforts. But that is another story. However a teasing tempter below for those who share my acute analytic ability.
Attachments
The wood on it's own is not snake oil, the metal is bad ((as it's a magnetic piece inside so it's surely affected. But the price certainly is. And durable plastic is still better as cartridge housing.
I had a DL110 (a variant of it) for a while and it's a very good cart, only pitty they wear out that fast. Now i'm back at MM cartridges from AT and the sound is not really worse, but my cartridge last way longer. MC cartridges wear out to fast for me and you can't change the needle like with MM cartridges when they do so each time you pay full price...
I had a DL110 (a variant of it) for a while and it's a very good cart, only pitty they wear out that fast. Now i'm back at MM cartridges from AT and the sound is not really worse, but my cartridge last way longer. MC cartridges wear out to fast for me and you can't change the needle like with MM cartridges when they do so each time you pay full price...
Luckily some clever people did fix it. Barney Oliver was the first back in about 1972.
You can change the 47 k loading to ameliorate the peaking issue @Steve. Doesnt fix it (the mechanical issues remain) but electrically it’s an improvement.
There was a whole long thread discussing this stuff in the Analog Source thread with some real electro-mechanical experts weighing in on vinyl in general.
There was a whole long thread discussing this stuff in the Analog Source thread with some real electro-mechanical experts weighing in on vinyl in general.
I have no intention of reading 168 pages of forum ramblings, thankyou. If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it, IMO.
All options were explored, including common-mode pickup, by yours truly. I played with resistive loadings down to 5k. Got rid of the capacitance, by building the amplifier into the turntable. Added series resistance up to 2k at the cartridge output with metal oxide resistors, which was a half-fix, but increased thermal noise.
Even let the cartridge add the top end RIAA equalisation. Ended up with something that loaded the cantilever motor with something resembling pure resistance. At which point I decided I had merely created a second-rate moving coil setup.
No, it's broken and unfixable. Wouldn't matter with a microphone, but a high inductance moving magnet cartridge will behave very strangely in the groove with a resonant loading. Simple mechanics. That's it.
All options were explored, including common-mode pickup, by yours truly. I played with resistive loadings down to 5k. Got rid of the capacitance, by building the amplifier into the turntable. Added series resistance up to 2k at the cartridge output with metal oxide resistors, which was a half-fix, but increased thermal noise.
Even let the cartridge add the top end RIAA equalisation. Ended up with something that loaded the cantilever motor with something resembling pure resistance. At which point I decided I had merely created a second-rate moving coil setup.
No, it's broken and unfixable. Wouldn't matter with a microphone, but a high inductance moving magnet cartridge will behave very strangely in the groove with a resonant loading. Simple mechanics. That's it.
Ops, I just entered and there is already too much homework for today ......
I will go in parts without mentioning who I respond to, I'm sorry, everyone will know.
I started this thread with the question of whether it is "snake oil" or not, to put a new body in Denon Dl 103, which is MC, this is a current concern of mine, because I have already acquired the cartridge a while ago but not yet. I used, because I don't have a pre for MC.
In a few days a dear niece from Germany will bring me the Project Tube Box S2.
It will be my first MC of my own (I have marketed and listened to some when I was in the audio business, many years ago).
Those who claim that in vinyl reproduction the clicks and pops are less audible with tubes than with a pre RIAA with various SS components have my credibility, I have experienced it with my first PP 6BQ5 and M44C amplifier in my youth.
For my budget, I have chosen the PJ S2 which only uses tubes on the outlet and allows tube rolling, I think that will work.
Another proven problem is that the D103 works yes or yes with medium to high mass arms, never with low mass arms which are ideal for a high compliance MM like the V-15 type 3/4 from Shure, for example. .
I have a TT Micro Seiki DQ43 with MA-707 arm, which is prepared to use both with MM or MC low compliance and low output, adding extra weights provided by the manufacturer (rare avis) and I have obtained information from a German page of those years with the optimal setting of mass for Denon DL 103.
It will also be easier to align the null points as it is a spherical needle.
There is also the issue of the firmness required to fit the cartridge to the cartridge holder.
This seems to be an important point, hence some manufacturers have launched to manufacture these accessories.
They are made of metal (aluminum) or wood, the original case is made of somewhat flimsy plastic.
Here are one video about the work to be done by those who have 1200 U $ S to spare to play.
Denon DL-103 DIY Modification - Removing plastic body - Audio MusiKraft <<Tunable>> cartridge - YouTube
I will go in parts without mentioning who I respond to, I'm sorry, everyone will know.
I started this thread with the question of whether it is "snake oil" or not, to put a new body in Denon Dl 103, which is MC, this is a current concern of mine, because I have already acquired the cartridge a while ago but not yet. I used, because I don't have a pre for MC.
In a few days a dear niece from Germany will bring me the Project Tube Box S2.
It will be my first MC of my own (I have marketed and listened to some when I was in the audio business, many years ago).
Those who claim that in vinyl reproduction the clicks and pops are less audible with tubes than with a pre RIAA with various SS components have my credibility, I have experienced it with my first PP 6BQ5 and M44C amplifier in my youth.
For my budget, I have chosen the PJ S2 which only uses tubes on the outlet and allows tube rolling, I think that will work.
Another proven problem is that the D103 works yes or yes with medium to high mass arms, never with low mass arms which are ideal for a high compliance MM like the V-15 type 3/4 from Shure, for example. .
I have a TT Micro Seiki DQ43 with MA-707 arm, which is prepared to use both with MM or MC low compliance and low output, adding extra weights provided by the manufacturer (rare avis) and I have obtained information from a German page of those years with the optimal setting of mass for Denon DL 103.
It will also be easier to align the null points as it is a spherical needle.
There is also the issue of the firmness required to fit the cartridge to the cartridge holder.
This seems to be an important point, hence some manufacturers have launched to manufacture these accessories.
They are made of metal (aluminum) or wood, the original case is made of somewhat flimsy plastic.
Here are one video about the work to be done by those who have 1200 U $ S to spare to play.
Denon DL-103 DIY Modification - Removing plastic body - Audio MusiKraft <<Tunable>> cartridge - YouTube
Last edited: