Denon DL-103 -- Was it a mistake?

Load at 400 to 500 ohms unless you are stuck with a SUT.

These cartridges are incredible but will not even begin to tell you what they can do until 50 hours in and sound best at 100 plus hours. Many modifications available which vaults their performance even further.

Sorry for not replying Jwglista but it seems you've figured it out anyway.

Well I remounted the Denon to try some loading plugs that I made. I actually learned that doing this will actually *lower* the load resistance on the Cambridge. For example, since the loading of the Cambridge is 100 ohms, if I add 100 ohm resistors in parallel, I am actually lowering the total resistance to 50 ohms. I noticed that by doing this, the sound gets more "deep" into the soundstage, dynamics are smoother, but at the same time less exciting. I didn't notice much difference in the treble. However, when I mounted the cartridge this time, I made the tail end of the tone arm a tad up instead of way down as it was before, and this seems to have surprisingly helped the sound a lot. Ultimately I'm leaving the loading at the default 100 ohms. To *increase* that number, I'd have to physically open the unit, remove the 100 ohm resistor, and put something else in. If I were to do this, I would put in a 10,000 ohm resistor, then use plugs to tone it down. But I will say that I am growing to like the DL-103 a bit more. I am getting used to its sound, although it does still sound just a tad bright in my system. This may change as I put even more hours on it.

The Compliance-weight relationship is closer to ideal for the 2M and the Clearaudio arm than it is for the 103 - so even though the 2M Red is a more modest cartridge - it should sound a lot better without having to tweak it. And the 2M Red probably still has a little breaking in to do. With that said, it is never going to sound quite like your Virtuoso.

Rccc:
I think that if I were to spend time and money getting my 103 to sound "right" just as you did, I would end up coming to the same conclusion. The 103 and Virtuoso just seem like they are based on totally different philosophies of sound. But just having owned the cartridge now, I'm very curious as to how it would sound in an ideal setup.

Johnnyb53:
I appreciate the suggestion nonetheless. I've heard great things about that cart, so it no doubt sounds good. $300 is probably more than I would have spent on a replacement cart (although combining the price of my 103 with the 2M Red puts me pretty close to $300).

I'm enjoying the sound of the 2M Red quite a bit. If there was one thing I could do without, it would be its exaggerated midrange sound. Instruments like trumpets can sound a bit harsh at times.

Jwglista... I think you would have been better off with the dl 160, or 110, or a decent mm cart, the 103 really wants a step up..... I think there is a synergy inherent with step up transformers and LOMC's.... and this is what folks seem to 'rave' about. Regardless,' one man's cup of tea ', etc. etc.
I had a wealth of problems similar to the ones you are describing with my first dl 103, and it took a bunch of fuss, trial and error,and help from others to finally make it sing! If you want to sell on the 103, let me know, it's always nice to have a back-up. I have a dl 110 sitting around doing nothing that I can 'extended loan' to you if you want to give that a try while you wait for your Virtuoso. Harv.

03-27-09: Jwglista
I assume by "sut" you mean step up transformer. That really isn't an option at the moment, as I only purchased the 103 as a temporary replacement for the Virtuoso.

With the painful acknowledgement that I'm too late, I think the AT150MLX would have been a much better substitute than the DL103--it's another high performing MM cartridge (with replaceable stylus, no less).

4mV output, great speed, dynamic range, detail, and body; compliance in the customary range so tonearm mass matching is easy; high output, so no fuss, no muss.

You may not need a step up with the cambridge but you will have to mess with the loading most likely. Ive had my 103 for many years and have found it really needs the right tonearm and step up and loading to work properly. After spending the time and money to sort it out I found it wasnt my cup of tea as I gravitate more towards the clearaudio sound. I think the speakers you use have a lot to do with it also which explains why many listeners have a completely different experience with this cart.

I assume by "sut" you mean step up transformer. That really isn't an option at the moment, as I only purchased the 103 as a temporary replacement for the Virtuoso. I think that even with the 103 put in an ideal setup, I would still prefer the Virtuoso. Therefore it really isn't worth investing more money at the moment to get the 103 to sound good. I would like to try Gordguide's loading method with the Cambridge, but I'm not entirely clear on how that is done yet.

I agree they are very different sounding carts. I think the 103 definitely has potential, but I could not tolerate the brightness in my system. The Ortofon 2M Red is starting to sound pretty decent in my system now. It isn't fully run in yet, but it sounds more "musical" than the 103. Of course it lacks a great bit of detail by comparison.

I have had both the 103 and the virtuoso at the same time. They are very different cartridges. I always preferred the virtuoso but that is a matter of taste. It will take you a while to get used to the 103 sound if you were fond of your virtuoso. To get the 103 to sound really good you will have to spend some money on a good sut and then see if you like it with the cambridge. Personally although the 103 is a pretty good unit I think you can do way better for not much money.

Also, I assume the "loading plugs" would be male-male, so that you could easily solder both ends of the resistor to the + and - ends of the male plug.

Gordguide:

This seems like a great idea, but I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are saying. Are you saying that essentially you get an RCA "splitter" for each channel, and in one plug you plug in your cable coming from the TT, and in the other you plug in the loading RCAs?

Vinyl Addict, i had a 2M Black with a Rega RB700 and I currently have a Zu 103R/Wood body 103R on a Thomas Schick tonearm. i'll take the latter. the 2m cartridge is great but did not present the music with the realistic palpability and sonic density as the latter combos. PRaT was the same. Additionally, I tend to think the Dynavector cartridges were better in PRaT than these two Denons but that could be a fallacy encouraged by the Dynas lighter presentation. The sound density of the Dynas is lacking compared to the Ortofons and Denons.

What tonearm did you use? As stated by many others, I think this is a crucial issue.

If you are handy with a soldering iron, it's not difficult to add some resistance to a non-adjustable phono input when dealing with MC cartridges. The easiest way is to get a 2 RCA female -> 1 RCA male adapter, and plug that in at your phono input.

Then add resistance with an RCA male plug and resistors in parallel with your load (across + and - on the RCA plug). It's a fairly simple soldering operation. Ideally you would create a few "loading RCA's" so you can swap out resistance to define your needs and determine if, indeed, there is a problem that points to improper loading.

Plug the loading RCAs into one Female input, plug your arm leads into the other. db Systems used to sell a kit of a dozen or so RCAs set up like this with resistance (for MC) and capacitance (for MM).

It might be helpful to check out this url, although it's geared to the specific transformer, which affects the choice of resistor for a given desired loading when using a transformer.

http://www.kandkaudio.com/mccartsetup.html

03-10-09: Viridian
Second, the 640P was a bad match with the 103 in my system. The brightness at the top of the Denon's midrange not matching well with the upper midrange brightness of the 640P.

Boy, I'll second that. I had a persistent low level midrange glare in my rig that I'd learned to live with, figuring it was the combination of a Technics DD turntable, the AT150MLX, or both.

Then I decided to plug the turntable's interconnects directly into the phono stage in my Onkyo integrated amp and the glare disappeared. In its place was a new wealth of low level detail translating into lushness, warmth, the bloom and decay of notes, both within the instruments and in the venues in which they were recorded.

I don't think the 640P is up to the task. It may take a better phono stage plus a step-up device optimized for the DL-103 to bring out the Denon's best.

This Denon AU-300 LC MC may not be the last word in stepup devices, but it's a match for the DL-103, and it has Denon's economy of scale going for it. You still need a phono stage, but only an MM one.

I agree... to a point... Dopogue

I tried several loadings with the DL-103 in my system - I still couldn't get it to sound "right" though, especially in the midrange. I did, however, find the best match at 500 ohms, as well.

My current Dynavector 20XL (microline edition) is so much more musical than the DL-103 was. I'd take the 10X5 or, as Jwglista did, the Ortofon 2m carts, over the DL-103 any day.

One thing that did impress the hell out of me was the Denon's ability to track inner grooves with it's conical stylus. It's the only conical I've ever heard that can do it convincingly and inner-groove-distortion is a pet-peave of mine. It tracked the inner groove almost as well as my 20XL, which is impressive.

Regarding loading the DL-103, my experience tells me it needs to be higher
than 100 ohms. The matching Denon SUTs load it at 470 ohms (at least my
AU-320 does). I now have an Aesthetix Rhea that permits on-the-fly loading
changes via the remote (yeah, the ultimate couch potato phonostage) and it
sounds best to me at 500 ohms. Too "scrawny" at 100 ohms, IME.

Goatwuss:

Sorry for being a bit vague. I was just curious what the rest of your system was like (phono pre, etc.).

I haven't really decided if I want to sell the Denon or not, just because I'd like to install it on another TT some day to hear how it sounds in a proper setup. I'm curious as to what specifically makes the Cambridge 640p a bad match to the DL-103, since loading is usually set at 100 ohms for this cart, and that's what the 640p provides.

Good to know you are enjoying yours. I know my Paradigm speakers with the aluminum dome tweeters can be very unforgiving on bright recordings and bright sounding equipment, so that did not help the DL-103 out at all in my incorrectly-matched setup.

I too hope to get better results with the Ortofon. I will definitely report back here once I've got things settled in.

Hi,

"What was your setup like other than the Rega when using the 103?"

I'm not sure exactly what you mean... I was using a Rega P25 with the RB600 arm, and used both a Phonomena phono, and then switched to the built in phono in my Supratek Syrah preamp. Loaded at 100ohms.

All in all, it sounded quite good, with none of the harshness that you are encountering. Granted, this doesn't apply to you that much, because your table/arm/phono are completely different, not to mention, I highly doubt that all 103s are manufactured perfectly alike.

Hopefully you'll get better results with the Ortofon

Audiofeil:
"I'm not trying to hide my "promotion" of the Mint LP. I am a very strong advocate of the device.

I also have no financial interest in it if that's your implication."

That was never my implication.

"And I have no grudge; based on your posts it appears you lack the skills and/or understanding to properly align a phono cartridge."

If you are as experienced as you make yourself out to be, I highly doubt you jump to such conclusions when considering analog setup. It is clear that there are several other factors here that have contributed to my problems with the DL-103: tonearm match, phono stage match, etc. So to say that "based on my posts" I lack the understanding on how to align a cartridge as if it's the sole cause of my issues here shows your own lack of understanding of how to arrive at an overall synergy in system setup. You may have more years of experience doing this, but "based on your posts" it appears you lack knowledge as well if that is your stand, or you simply failed to read all the posts in this thread.

Vinyladdict:

It's good to find someone who shares my same experiences with the DL-103. I tried very hard to find the magic in this cart, but either it's not there for me, or my system is just a horrible match for it like you said.

As for the discussion on alignment, I agree with you. I never had any doubts about my alignment with this cartridge. The reason Audiofeil brought it up is because I was experiencing alignment issues before with a cartridge that had a completely bent cantilever (hence sending it in for repair and needing this replacement cart). Now he seems to think I'm completely incapable of aligning a cartridge. As far as the DL-103 goes, my alignment has been great (when using the supplied Clearaudio alignment card). I hear no inner groove distortion whatsoever, which is really the only strength I noticed about the DL-103 in my system. There is no possible way that the Clearaudio alignment card is so incorrect that the alignment it provides causes the DL-103 to sound as bad as it did in my system, particularly given the fact that it does have a conical stylus.

Tvad: I hold nothing against the MintLP. That was just a joke that goes back to another thread. I'm sure it's a great product and works as advertised, albeit a bit expensive.

My advice - move on - I did! My DL-103 now sits quietly in its box after hours upon hours of trying to find the magic some seem to have found with it.

I think the Ortofon Red will be a much better match to your system and is a more well-rounded cartridge than the DL-103.

Don't get me wrong - I understand the infatuation here and over at AudioAsylum with the DL-103's midrange, but I could not live with it long-term in my system (KAB mod'd table, PS Audio GCPH phonostage, PS Audio GCC-250 control amp, Usher X-718 speakers). As you put it - it never sounded "right" to me and I found its midrange colored despite others opinions to the contrary.

The 640P is a very good stage for most carts, but I've read that it's a horrible match to the DL-103, so I'm guessing this only added to your problems. It should, however, be a stellar match to the Ortofon. I've heard the 2M series of and they are very very nice indeed.

I find it interesting that alignment became such a focus of discussion on this thread - the conical stylus of the DL-103 is probably the least sensitive to alignment issues of any cartridge I've heard in my resolving system.

I'm not trying to hide my "promotion" of the Mint LP. I am a very strong advocate of the device.

I also have no financial interest in it if that's your implication.

And I have no grudge; based on your posts it appears you lack the skills and/or understanding to properly align a phono cartridge.

It's that simple.

Haha Audiofeil, you are never going to lift your grudge, are you? I *knew* you were a promoter of the MintLP. And you've been trying to hide it this whole time...

Dopogue: glad you're enjoying the DL-103. I'm sure with the retip and in a proper environment, the 103 sounds great. I'm anxiously awaiting the return of my ruby cantilever rebuild of my Virtuoso. Is the Uwe Pod just another body for the DL-103?

Just put a Uwe pod (Panzerholz) on my Soundsmith retipped DL-103 last night. This may be the ultimate DL-103; it certainly sounds little like the stock 103. It's on a JMW arm that's something of a "mutt" -- 10.0 base, 10.5 armtube, 12.7 pivot point assembly -- and seems to match the now-heavy cart very well.

Probably should have ordered a Mint LP protractor after all of the money you've spent up to now.

It appears you have difficulty aligning cartridges and can't come to grips with it.

Ok well I've just put an end to all of this and ordered an Ortofon 2M Red. I don't expect it to have quite the same definition as the 103, but I am fairly confident that it will sound much more musical in my setup, being that it is a much better match for my tonearm.

Goatwuss:

I've been playing around with that idea as well, but that's a whole other thing to deal with. I actually used the DL-103 case to send the Virtuoso, so I wouldn't really be able to safely ship the DL-103 if I sold it.

What was your setup like other than the Rega when using the 103? I just tried another trick tonight: I put rubber washers in between the cart and the mounting plate, and made sure not to over-tighten the screws. This seems to have made a marginal improvement, but albums that are cut hot still sound way too harsh to listen to. Perhaps this cartridge is just way too unforgiving on poorly made albums.

Jwglista - Would it be possible to pick up another inexpensive cartridge on Audiogon, and sell the 103?

FWIW - I've owned the 103 and 103r in the past, and gotten good results with a Rega arm, which is also a bit light for the Denons.

Just because something is "widely admired" doesn't mean that 100% of the people that hear it will enjoy its sound, even if it is being heard on a "properly setup" system. I don't understand why you keep ignoring the fact that I explicitly pointed out that my tonearm may not be a good match for this cartridge. In fact, that was pointed out in the original post, and was one of the main reasons I initiated this thread. The simple fact that I indicated the conditions under which this cartridge is being used gives me the right to explain how it sounds under those exact conditions. If you don't like that, then stop reading my thread.

No I'm not. I think it's constructive to point out when someone is erroneously acting as if he or she has reasons to think there may be something amiss with a product -- especially one as widely admired as the DL103. Just what constructive point is there is stating that a cartridge badly set up doesn't please you? hey folks, I think prime porterhouse steak just as good as everyone says; I burnt one up well done, and it was dry and flavorless!

Rnm4:

I mean this in the least sarcastic way possible: are you a moderator of this forum? If not, then I really don't see where you get off trying to dictate what can and can't be posted in my thread. All of the comments made in it by others have been fairly constructive except for yours. If you have nothing better to do than spend time as a forum Nazi, then perhaps you need a second hobby. I'm not answering your question, simply because it's ridiculous. Anyone who reads this entire thread will clearly understand that my issues with the DL-103 *may* be related to an improperly matched tonearm. From my understanding (and I'd like to learn more about this, so please comment constructively if you have information), matching a tonearm properly against a cartridge's compliance helps improve bass performance. I'm curious as to how it would affect treble response. My guess is that upper frequency resonance is dampened poorly by the low mass of the tone arm itself.

I'd be curious to hear from some people who have heard a DL-103 on both a low and high mass tonearm to know what the difference in sound is like.

As a matter of psychology, at least some people will take away a negative impression of the DL103 from your reported dissatisfaction with it, despite the disclaimers that you didn't have it set up properly. That's why I think it's borderline irresponsible even to report on it. I's like spreading an unsupported and unflattering rumor.

That it doesn't sound good on a mismatched arm is absolutely no strike whatsoever against it; how it sounds on a mismatched arm is irrelevant to how it sounds properly set up. So why did you bother to report this, and reiterate it even after it was clear the arm was inappropriate?

Audiofeil:

Lol you keep going back to that Virtuoso incident. That was simply due to a bent cantilever, which caused me to send it in for repair, which has ultimately put me in this situation using the DL-103 as a temporary replacement.

Either way, good suggestion; I will continue to check it periodically as I normally do (in case it somehow is jarred out of alignment when moving the tonearm). I'll also keep playing with VTA and VTF, but I already have the tail end down to tame the high frequencies. I feel this may just be a bad tonearm/cart match, or perhaps this cart just isn't my taste.

Rnm4: Apparently you missed the second half of that post which explicitly notes the fact that my assessment may not be fair due to an improperly matched tone arm. I don't really need you to reiterate that in a forceful and negative way. Thank you.

I wouldn't recommend any cartridge to anyone unless they had a properly matched tonearm. In fact, it's borderline irresponsible to post what mounts to a negative review of a product based on improper use.

I'd check alignment more closely.

You've had problems with other cartridges in this regard.

Well I've given this cart 50+ hours of time to settle in, and yes, it has become less aggressive and harsh in the treble, but it still sounds too harsh to me at times. It sounds great on some albums, but is very unforgiving on others. I will have to live with it until I get the Virtuoso back, simply because I have no other choice. But I can't say that I would suggest this cart to anyone in the future unless they have a properly matched tonearm. My assessment on the sound of this cart may not be fair, simply because I'm using a low mass tonearm. I am, however, enjoying the sound of my DacMagic. On many classical recordings, it simply blows away the DL-103, hands down.

Jwglista,

When you say the alignment is "spot on" does that mean the VTA too? If the cartridge is tipped forward even a little, it can cause it to sound bright. You may be able to "tune" the sound more to your liking by adjusting the VTA a bit up at the front of the cartridge - which usually roles off the treble. If there is no VTA adjustment on the Satisfy tonearm, then you may have to shim the cartridge.

Sounds like you already tried putting some adhesive material on the tonearm head to increase the weight and dampen it a bit. Another thing to try is placing a small dot of blutack or other removable adhesive material symmetrically on each side of the counter weight and then re-balance the arm to see if it tames some of the liveliness. You could also try putting one or more dots of adhesive in different places along the length of the tone arm to see if that helps.

Don't know if you quelled the mushy bass problem, but that may have something to do with room vibrations as previously stated. Better isolation of your TT will likely help with that.

Good luck!

The specs on the Cambridge Audio Azur 640p state that the MC input is loaded at 100 ohm, 220 mF. From some of the other threads I've read, increasing the loading can actually make the cart sound brighter. Unfortunately, the 640p doesn't have a user selectable load setting. I'd have to physically take the unit apart and swap out resistors and/or caps.

I just wonder what could cause brightness. If it's a bad tonearm/cart match, then I'll never be able to fix that. From what I understand, a low compliance cart generates a lot of resonance, so perhaps the high frequency energy is just resonating all through the light arm tube of the Satisfy and becoming amplified. Or perhaps it's the all-acrylic body and acrylic platter. If it's burn in, then I can wait another 20-30 hours to find that out.

I'm also noticing that only certain albums sound bad. I believe it's the albums that are "cut hot", i.e. the ones where you can turn the volume down all the way and practically hear the song coming straight off the needle. To me this would indicate a problem with resonance. It's possible that the high frequency energy coming off the cartridge is resonating throughout the tonearm and causing treble feedback. If that is the case, I'm not sure how I could ever fix that without getting a different tonearm.

No way a properly set up, sound DL103 is either bright unmusical. Something is amiss. Your impressions are the exact opposite of what the DL103 is known for, and what I've experienced for sure.

or use step up transformer with the proper load for this gem! This is THE cartridge which was born this way!

One thing the 103 family isn't is bright; suspend judgment until 40-50 hours or so have passed and the cart settles in - personally, I've always found anything in excess of 2.55g (or so) to be detrimental as it stomps on the cart's suspension leading to a restriction of dynamics and hardening of the sound. If you still find it bright, I suggest playing around with your MC loading.

-Richard

Audiofeil:

That was never the conclusion. The cantilever on that cartridge was sold to me bent, which I believe was causing a lot of problems. And since I bought it used, the stylus may also be worn (I never looked at it under a microscope).

As for the Denon, the alignment is spot on. I hear no signs of mistracking whatsoever, and inner groove distortion is nonexistent. So to answer your question, no that is not the issue here. I believe this has more to do with improper cartridge/tonearm matching. Or perhaps the DL-103 is inherently a slightly bright cartridge. I have a strong distaste for even slightly bright audio components, so that may be playing a part here as well.

You expressed difficulty in other threads with an inability to properly align a cartridge.

Could that be the case here as well?