Why manufacture the DL-103 line at all?

[bauzace50]

Hi,
On occasion of exploring my new Denon DL-110, I have compared these directly:

DL-110
DL-103R
DL-160
Stanton 881S
Paratraced Stanton 500 E Mk II.

The question arises:
WHY do Denon still manufacture the DL-103 series, aside from their "domestic" series?
DL-103
DL-103R

AND:
DL-110
DL-301 Mk-II
DL-304
DL-S1

I have imagined a few reasons (for, or despite) but knowledgeable VE members may have the REAL ones, or additional ones.

-1- The DL-103 series have substantial market demand.
-2- Users prefer them.
-3- Conical diamond tip is unfussy and probably sturdier than exotic shapes.
-4- Sturdy design is out of place in domestic environment, more germane to its original "broadcast environment". This is a serious case of over-engineering, like setting a camping tent on top of an aircraft carrier.
-5- CANTILEVER- Is very special and unseen in other lines of domestic cartridges. The aluminum looks specially polished, and the cantilever itself is "machined" instead of crimped for holding the diamond tip. Looks like a serious case of excessive engineering, and a mighty fine piece of work. I suspect it is the real difference for its "signature unflappability".

The DL-103R kept full composure where the DL-110 became harsh on worn/dirty grooves. And the other mentioned cartridges kept a lesser composure than the DL-103R on the same grooves. That is, the DL-103R sounded the best of the group on records containing distorted grooves.

The Cantilever is my prime candidate for explaining that benefit ( Denon's "secret ingredient" which they do not even mention)!

It seems to have a wider envelope for resisiting breakup on difficult records, as would be the daily dose in a "broadcast environment". That is a theory of mine, sort of corroborated with anecdotal observation.

-6- The intended user of the DL-103 series was the broadcast industry, so Denon continue to support their special tonearm existence...explaining part of the design needs.

-7- Others? The comparisons among these five cartridges yielded the least distorted sound from the DL-103R with problematic records.

My interpretation is that the DL-103 line, with its over-engineered sturdiness shows clear benefits from its characteristics. Whether this resistance to distortion brings a magic foray into higher fidelity is not within the scope here. But these pointers certainly justify manufacturing the DL-103 line even to the face of their excellent "audiophile" brothers.

Any other thoughts on this?

Regards,
bauzace50

[Snead]

A quick aside -- the difference between the 103 & the 103R is...?

[Hanuman]

A quick aside -- the difference between the 103 & the 103R is...?

The coil windings are different. A better grade of copper is used but I'm not aware of any other manufacturing enhancements. Apart from, hopefully, better sound you get a lower internal DC resistance (14 ohms versus 40 in the DL-103) and a slightly lower output level.

[bauzace50]

Hi,
the thinner copper wire and fewer coil windings make for lower moving mass, also.
bauzace50

PS- as a separate consideration, applicable to all MC cartridges, Coil Characteristics can make noticeable difference in the sound of a cartridge. That includes:

The Material (copper, gold, silver, etc.)
The Topology (cross-like, overlapping, around the cantilever)
The Wire Thickness
The Coil Former characteristics (ie-what the wire is wound around)
As one example, the coils in AT MCs are not wound around anything, but are formed and placed inside a sort of "V-shaped capsule" which protects the form of the coils. Easier to look at than to describe it.

In other words, the coil characteristics in the DL-103R make part of the difference in its eventual performance and sound.

[Snead]

Very helpful,Hanuman, B50 ...thanks!

BTW, the 103R seems to be a frequent subject at the Asylum. An Inmate there did some measurements of his copy and it came up tops in most categories, just edging out an AT-OC9. An amazing feat for a 50 y.o. design! Note that his objective distortion figures seem to agree with your subjective reports B50. I love these too-rare occasions when that happens.

http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html? ... %3Dka-5002

and

http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html? ... %3Dka-5002

[bauzace50]

@ Snead,

Thanks for your comments and the links! The results shown for the DV top model come in as a surpise.

b50

[Trackside]

If people keep buying the 103 series then Denon will keep making them I guess.

[Ldg]

WHY do Denon still manufacture the DL-103 series,

Hi b_50. Perhaps it's the only part of their range which matches the heavier transcriptions arms well, and the spherical supports higher VTFs nicely ? Plus it's far far far from shabby, and for recordings mastered with contemporary sphericals in mind, it is arguably still the best around.

Its suspension differs from other Denon's, the stylus is very credible and advantages of alternate profiles are much overstated, and downsides played down, IMO. Perhaps fundamentally, other profiles can't be run heavy and so don't suit low compliance suspensions. But it stands on its own merit, as you know, b_50.

And as I see it, it's a very good thing that Denon still keep the DL-103 line. It has pedigree, and offers a choice not readily available elsewhere at similar quality. I like it too because it's obviously iconoclastic. It busts all manner of myths and misunderstandings.

[blakep]

As well as the six nines copper coils (and the resulting lower internal impedance and output) that Hanuman has mentioned, the 103R is different from the stock 103 in one other way: it has a small piece of rubber like damping material adhered to the inside front of the plastic body which is not there in the 103.

As to LD's statement that "other profiles can't be run heavy and so don't suit low compliance suspensions", that is certainly not my (or many other users) experience with 103 or 103R's that have been retipped with line contact styli, having used a line contact stylus on a 103R now for well over 3 years tracking at 2.4-2.6 grams with absolutely no problem at all.

[Ldg]

What I mean is it's not something which Denon decide to do, as illustrated by b_50 in range set out in the OP. Re-tipped DL103s don't count as Denons in my book; with potentially alternate stylus,cantilever, supsension, armatures. Modders might also have their own rules, and the matter of whether running line contact stylii heavy is a generally good idea is a seperate debate, off topic here except for bona fide Denons. AFAIK it's something Denon appear to have decided against with their own contemporary suspensions. And perhaps one reason why the DL103 continues to run.

[Hanuman]

The home market must be surprisingly strong. I was in Japan recently and every Yodobashi store carried a variety of '103 variants including the DL-103PRO. I thought that one had disappeared eons ago. I was sorely tempted to pick one up.

(Actually, there was a surprising amount of products still available that have dropped or are dropping off the radar elsewhere: Shelter 501MkII, Ortofon AS-212S; AS-309S, AT33PTG come immediately to mind.)

[krenzler]

DL-103(R) measures better than many newer and costlier designs:

[krenzler]

The Pro is still available from EIFL.

http://www.eifl.co.jp/index/export/export2.htm

I've never dealt with them.

[bauzace50]

But, Mommy, why can't I hear the tones from 10 KHz up to 20 KHz? That's not fair!

b50