Why manufacture the DL-103 line at all?

[bauzace50]

@ Zeppelinn,

He he heeeee . That's good!

b50

[bauzace50]

Hi,
and another reason to continue building them is: they sound so GOOD.

b50

[Hepokatti]

Offtopic question: I have a weird fascination; I want to build an ideal system around DL-103, but am clueless where to start. Budget doesn't matter so much at this point, but should be within "reasonable". When I mean system, I mean the signal path from stylus to the amplifier.

I have an idea, but would appreciate any input as I feel my idea isn't that solid;

Table: SL-1200 mk2 + maybe KAB damper and added weight to the headshell (how? what? when?) plus other needed mods.I'd rather not swap the tonearm.
Step-up: Silvercore 1:10
RIAA: ???

I'm not a big fan of the idea needing to add weight to the headshell, so another table could be needed. Then again, I like how Technics decks keep their speed (this has become pretty much a requirement for me for some reason. Nevermind dead acoustics, I want stability!).

[bauzace50]

@ Hepokatti,

You don't have to begin with a furious dedication with all sorts of mods and whistles. That can come one step at a time, if and when you feel like it.

At present, I went back to strictly "stock", removing the extra weights and playing it with my SME 309 in strictly "stock" condition. The Step-Up is the "budget" Denon AU-300-LC with very decent results, and the Parasound preamp is in strictly "stock" condition, also.

I do not doubt that the DL-103 can be modified to glorious conditions! But right now, my strictly "stock" unit makes me happy as all get out, and I am not even considering any modification at all. My ears would possibly not hear the difference at my ripe age, and I have developed great respect for its cantilever and special conical tip. No, make that "am amazed with its conical tip". And I have developed a fear for my financial budget, also!

So, go easy on yourself, and take it at your own pace. The SL-1200 is no longer built, I believe. And if you get one, the fluid damper IS a great idea! And don't add any weight to the headshell. You might like it!

Good luck,
bauzace50

[Trackside]

Offtopic question: I have a weird fascination; I want to build an ideal system around DL-103, but am clueless where to start. Budget doesn't matter so much at this point, but should be within "reasonable". When I mean system, I mean the signal path from stylus to the amplifier.

I have an idea, but would appreciate any input as I feel my idea isn't that solid;

Table: SL-1200 mk2 + maybe KAB damper and added weight to the headshell (how? what? when?) plus other needed mods.I'd rather not swap the tonearm.
Step-up: Silvercore 1:10
RIAA: ???

I'm not a big fan of the idea needing to add weight to the headshell, so another table could be needed. Then again, I like how Technics decks keep their speed (this has become pretty much a requirement for me for some reason. Nevermind dead acoustics, I want stability!).

I have the SL-1200 MK2 +DL-103 and it needs a Sumiko headshell to get the alignment correct as the stock headshell is not long enough. The Sumiko also adds mass which it needs not just for the compliance but because the DL-103 throws a lot of energy back into the arm so mass helps. I also need a 3mm alu spacer and I run the thick rubber mat + achromat in order to get the right VTA as the Sumiko raises the cart higher. The CW needs extra mass ( glued on mass) and the KAB damper is easily the best mod I have done - with or without this the resonance frequency is around 7hz. Nice as the DL-103 sounds it's a lot of hassle to run on an SL-1200 and if I hadn't had the 103 before the SL-1200 I would buy another cart that will work with the stock arm and table without the need for all the mods bar the KAB damper which IMO lifts the deck up several notches with any cart. It sounds very nice through my V-LPS phono stage although everyone else says it needs an SUT to perform optimaly - again I would probably have gone with a top flight MM if I did it again as the MM stage of the V-LPS is very good.

[Hepokatti]

^ Thank you guys

I'd rather avoid heavy modifications, so maybe another table which has a suitable tonearm to boot? While those 12-13g arms may work just fine for DL-103, I still feel I want to have a heavier tonearm.

Any suggestions for a turntable?

BTW. Interesting read Trackside. I would also mate the stock sl-1200 with another cart, but for my next project I really want to start from the cart instead of the table.

Often people buy a turntable and then a matching cart, I wanna do the other way around. Reason? Just "because"

[bauzace50]

Hi,

Great thoughts, Hepokatti! Now, just so it is written in the proper thread. Another reason I perceive for manufacturing the DL-103 series is a carry-over from its original design.

At that time, broadcasting studios needed to protect the FM Stereo carrier wave (19KHz?) from disruption caused by cartridge spurious resonances.

Denon met that expectation with the DL-103, and it seems logical to continue that tradition along with demand from domestic users.
Regards,
b50

[Hanuman]

Any suggestions for a turntable?

Choose the arm first, I'd say. Keep it period - simple, gimbaled and static balance, which rules out any FR64. I did have a couple of '103s on my FR64 but now I think it colours everything mounted on it but it was a good match nevertheless. My new Ortofon AS-212s is excellent with the DL-103R and the basic design of it hasn't changed for decades so a vintage version of the 212 or one of the 309 versions would work very well. I would've thought that an SME 3009 or 3012 would do the job also. Plenty of choice, I think.

[Ldg]

At that time, broadcasting studios needed to protect the FM Stereo carrier wave (19KHz?) from disruption caused by cartridge spurious resonances.

Hi b_50, it's done by filtering the source with a hard 15kHz low pass filter, not dissimilar in its way to the 22kHz cutoff for CDs. Most people can't hear there at any reasonable threshold anyway, plus there's not much programme material content. Besides, the natural DL-103 response extends way beyond such frequencies, you only have to look at the numerous published measurements for the DL-103 to see that.

[bauzace50]

Thanks ld,
your comment is corroborated in the test report posted by krenzler, above.

b50

[satanfriendly]

Am I the only person who doesn't get excited with 103?

[bauzace50]

satanfriendly,
He he heeee For YEARS on end I ran in the opposite direction when confronting a Denon, quite especially any 103 type . But being the type to try it out and not let anyone tell me, I mounted so many models of different brands, that the field had no choices left!

I tried one Denon DL-300 on a loan, and have loved all other ones (a reflection on my preferences). But that's just me. The Bobolis you like are starting to look very attractive!

Regards,
b50

[satanfriendly]

I've listened to 103's in various incarnations and the last one being mounted in some graphite open body belonging to Vincula. I can't say it set my world alight and I found it quite ordinary. Nothing wrong, nothing out of step, just nothing of real note. Perhaps that is a good thing.

Mind you I would sell my body on street corners to have his Le Tallec TT with SAEC 407 arm.

Perhaps I am spoilt because I use a DL304 which took time to get used to, but really does make you sit up and take notice.

I would quite happily bicylce the Boboli B50, but I think our recent postage palaver kind of negates that one. The only thing against the Bob now is the price hike. Still Mr DW loved it even though he preferred his DLS1 at the end of the day.

[bauzace50]

Hi satanfriendly,
The mailing fee palaver left me with a case of the mumps So, it's better to let go. I hear the High Output Boboli is quite special and out of my financial range? So, best wishes,
b50