Denon 103r ????

Adjust your VTA to a lower setting (drop the back of the tone arm down) removes the bright edgy sound from the DL103R sound.

With the tome arm too high, you get a bright and thin strident sound with no bass definition at all. Imaging is poor, too. Adjust the cartridge right, and it is one smooth operator. I love mine.

Well, I never could get the 103R to get to really good on my Quatros. Over time, and several records, it always tended to sound slightly closed-in on the midrange and blurry. I switched out to the Accuphase AC-2 I had, and it was WAY better on definition and clarity.

I think that the conical stylus and low low compliance just won't let it happen on my set-up (SME III arm) and is generally better at the low-end based on the shape of the grooves in the record. Yes, the 103R can be better on a heavier arm, but the balance of the cartridge will always bias the low-end...by design.

What I need to do, is find a comparable compliance MC that has the timber of my AC-2. But, where to start?

"This is nonsense. There's no reason one cannot get linear sound and an extended top end from a properly set-up 103R, installed in a tonearm well-matched to its dynamic requirements."

No, even a well set-up 103R is soft on top. A conical stylus can only do so much. It simply doesn't fit the groove too well. Not to mention the higher stylus pressure conical stylus generate on the groove wall where they do hit. The small contact area has a high PSI so that and 2 grams tracking force is much harder on a record than at first glance against a more modern long contact area stylus. Sure, I can set it to a too high stylus tracking angle like 94 degrees and the distortion will peel the paint off the walls! Is that open high frequency "sound" though? Been there heard it. It gets to be OK with a good, and that's it. The AC-2 works very well (not extremely well) in my SME series III.

Why on earth the silly defense of an admittedly inferior product to the older 103D in overall performance? This product confuses me. OK, they made the thing a nail as everyone went high mass. Does that make it better? Give it a rest, the 103r is mediocer at best in sound quality. It has "value" but I'm more interested in getting to at least "class B" quality sound. I would not put the 103r I heard in that spot. Changing the stylus and complinace on a 103R IS NOT the same product anymore, so I won't go there.

When a stylus can't track the groove due to the shape, it is creating distortion. No way around it. A ROUND stylus won't FIT a high frequency record groove. It creates it's own sound at that point. It's a round peg in a square hole thing. A SMALL contact are ALWAYS creates MORE dange to a recoed than a line contact stulus that had both more area on the record wall (dustributed pressure) and a shape that more properly emulates the cutting head that made the record. Add to that, thye track lighter simple puts the conical stulus where it is, in the bottom of the performance heap.

No, the physics of PSI relating to the geometry has not changed. A line contact stylus as much more area contacting the groove than a conical. No way around that. Show me your math. I'm not talking about mistracking, either. The contact patch is in theory, infinitely small if a round object is placed against a flat plate. A line contact stylus EXPANDS this by geometry, not force. A conical stylus literally shoves the groove into submission, it has to.

A record is cut at a cutter angle of about 92 degrees, no less than 90 to remove the cuttings in the original master. A stylus sounds the best when it is matching this angle give or take a degree or so. The so called VTA is meaningless, and can only be measure AFTER you set the stylus rack angle. People are clearly misunderstanding what VTA even is, and how it achieves the proper stulus rake angle. I have to question your set-ups if you don't realize this.

No, the 103D was much higher compliance than the 103R, by about double. A 103R is 5 cm/Dyne, the 103D was around 12 cm/Dyne. The 103R is less compliant than the 103D. I used a 103D and it works much better in my arm, at least it was listenable.

I've heard the 103r set-up on a heavier arm. The sound quality I refer to is indeed the 103r, not some other product (thank God for that). So no, I did NOT hear it in an inappropriate arm.

Class "B" with a SME III is easy to do with a 15cm/Dyne compliant stulus of similar mass. I have that in the AC-2 right now and it sounds terrific compared to ANY other MC in high-end arms and well away from a 103r.

I find it real funny that people defend this cartride in a race it clearly losses. Just about anything that you do to it improves the sound. Remove the body, change the stylus, change the compliance, ETC. I really have to ask, if it's so darn good, why does anything done mechanically make it "SO" much better?

Roght now, I'm going to match a high compliance, 15cm/Dyne, Benz Micro Ruby III to my arm AFTER I listen to my Quatro woods using my AC-2 as a reference. The two are a dead match on weight, compliance and stylus shape and, the AC-2 has no issue with tracking at 2.0 grams. 1812 cannon shots and all it gets the job done. I expect that the Ruby III will be well into the QUALITY I'm after as it is. I can get a new factory warranty on a re-tip for under two grand. Thank goodness for "new" models clearing out the old. My AC-2 is over thirty years old and being "outdated" never changed it's sound quality.

The Soundsmith The Voice Ebony is a good choice, but I can not audition that product.

The 103r has serious limitations and people need to be aware of them, even with a high mass arm. It is what it is. paid for physical changes NOT being what it is. They are not free.

"Stylus Rake Angle (SRA) is commonly referenced relative to the true vertical position of the stylus, with straight up and down being *zero* degrees, not 90 degrees."

No, it isn't. Geometry class is still in session. A vertical line is 90 degrees (Right angle). A horizontal line is zero degrees. 90-92 degrees is the window, I agree but not 0 to 2 degrees.

"For a conical stylus, SRA isn't critical."

True, it's a ball. Not to mention, tracking angle error is also, on paper, better, too. I just wish the concept "sounded" good. I'm not hearing that. It sound consistently veiled and harsh to less so but still cloudy.

"…which is the angle of the cantilever relative to the record's surface"

No, it isn't. It is the CONTACT point of the stylus to the record surface drawn to the PIVOT point of the tone arm. A line is extended straight down to the record surface and then outward to the stylus again. This forms a 90-degree right triangle to the record surface. The VTA is the angle at the stylus tip end, and is somewhere between 15-20 degrees.

"Every line contact stylus.."
Oh, who said "every". I'll take a ninety percent improved field of choice over a very FEW conical styli that track light enough to offset the minimal contact surface. Show me your math on this one. Again, this is simple static’s and geometry at work. Sure, If I mistrack we are talking apples to oranges. I'm talking how the car behaves on the road, not in the ditch.

"rather than disparage other cartridges you don't understand?..."

So far I am not so sure who understands what. A cheap moving coil cartridge is not going to have the design effort that a better product has. Materials not withstanding, it's got so much effort built in. I understand this product plenty. The low compliance is but just ONE of the negatives thrown onto this product that in my listening, leave it inferior to the old 103D on ANY tonearm. It is what it is, nothing disparaging about that except the illusion that this thing is beyond "your" reproach. Glad you like to stop your listening there. You're saving a lot of money.

"103's holistic tone..."

You're kidding, right" I never knew Linda Rhonstadt was supposed to have been singing inside a felt box..my bad on that. But, the world is a "better" place through rose colored glasses. Reality bites, doesn't it? At least the 103D was a good kind of haze, the 103r runs you into things trying to hear through the fog. It REMOVES the music. That's bad. So, no, the 103r is doing the deconstructing. Any arm and against better products "clearly" show this. Are you really saying more focused and stable sound over a 103R is now "wrong"? A conical stylus is far removed from the cutter heads geometry. It is a simplistic approach to a cheap product.

I don't know how many cartridges are out there over $380.00 bucks, but we better save the world from them right away, or is it that you can't seem to accept the colored glasses on your head that seem to wrap around your ears? It's OK to like the sound, but to say it is the be all to end all is absurd, and say we who want better are "disparaging" a product you seem to take way too personal.

I'll listen to the Ruby 3 no different than the 103r. It has to equal or eclipse my AC-2. If it doesn't I'll work till I get there. Remember, you all take thses products to be your children. No, it's all impersonel manufactured product. To think otherwise is to limit your options going forward.

...mismatched and improper conditions...

No, I auditioned the Denon 103r is a heavier arm designed for MC cart, and the results were basically the same on Quatro's…poor midrange and higher end openness.

...Cutting head is not the playing head....
No kidding!! And the groove it leaves behind is NOT well received by conical styli. No amount of holistic garbage can replace what it leaves behind when it tries to extract information it can't respond to. Want to try a 103R with a long contact area stylus? Sure you do! It sounds MUCH better! Send your "superior " 103r off to sound smith and get back a $1,500 cartridge instead! Hey, but its a 103R right? WRONG! Why it might be more like a Benz Micro Ruby III for $1750.00!

Compliance isn't an issue? Yes, it is indeed an issue. It's crappy when the mechanics are crappy, all to meet some other objective that tries to overcome it for the price (and doesn't).

..."The damping and suspension have been dramatically re-engineered for greater compliance (now it is 8) and superior damping, resulting in much faster impulse response and recovery...." http://www.sound-smith.com/denon/index.html

The conical stylus is a throwback to cheap manufacture, and is designed to a price point and like you said...back in 1962 or so.

So far, the stock 103R is the WORST MC cartridge I've listened to and owned, even in the "right" tonearm. Oh it was better in a heavier arm, but I don't care about "better". I need it to sound "right". My old Denon 103D, and my AC-2 are much better sounding. Now, I have Benz Micro Ruby III that absolutely is superb even over my Accuphase AC-2, this, in my SME series III arm.

I'm sorry you guys, but you seem to have married this product and are now unaware of it's significant faults. About everyone else is, and they change, change, change, it till it MAYBE competes with something that was sold with a better design out of the box. I've moved on, and am happy I did. My current set-up sounds better than a $4,700.00 Wilson Benesch table, cartridge and tone arm. Would the Ruby III be better in THAT tone arm? Why yes, it would. A man's got to know the equipment's limitation. But the Ruby III simply walks away form my AC-2 and the 103r isn't even in the hunt... on even the "right" arm. There was no set-up problems, either. Oh it went from awful to better, but the AC-2 and Ruby III simply, and easily, moved out and away.

1.0 The 103D works VERY well in my SME III arm.
2.0 The AC-2 works VERY well in my SME III arm.
3.0 The 103R is TERRIBLE in a SME III arm (never said it wasn't terrible).
4.0 The 103R sound veiled and poor in the Wilson Benesch turntable - Full Circle Turntable/ACT 0.5 Tonearm.
5.0 The Benz Micro Ruby III work VERY well in my SME III arm.

So I'm sorry to hurt your feeling, but I'm more than well aware of what the 103r sound like, and the limitations in my set-up, and the limitations of the 103r in the closer to right set-up. All this clap-trap is just that.

Also, you can "pretend" that a zero slope is a vertical verses horizontal line if you want to. Count me out on that. As a matter of fact, Michael Fremer, who writes for ANALOG CORNER for STEREOPHILE would like to be counted out, too.

You can count me out on your Static’s lessons, too. A conical abject next to a flat surface produces a theoretical infinite PSI pressures unless, the plastic record violently warps out of the way. Same as a line contact, but a line contact has MUCH more contact area to start with. The trade-off on a conical styli are steep. So, they toss that little bugger the minute you PAY them to. Now your good deal product is creeping up tp where the really good stuff already is. Look at the magnified images of styli in record grooves sometime. The shape is the pressure All things being the same. You seem intent on pushing your strange agenda that the 103R is better only in that some other aspect of the alternatives set-up is wrong (stylii pressure, VTA ETC) to keep it looking better. Why? No one here is comparing WRONG set ups with superior product to the right set-up using inferior ones. At least I hope not. So stop throwing out Chaff to confuse everyone.

I don't think any one here counts dollars as "sound" advice, either. I agree with you there. Expensive stuff can be terrible, too. I count the sound period. The 103r sounds bad, I looked at arms and tables (Full Circle Turntable/ACT 0.5 Tonearm.). It still sounded bad in that set-up. A Benz ruby III for WAY less money in my current Ariston and SME III sounds wonderful. Case closed.