Why manufacture the DL-103 line at all?

[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

[ripblade]

Of all the Denon's I've looked at and listened to (110, 103, 103r /wood body, 301 and S1, I've found them all to be exceptional trackers. B50's comment regarding the higher distortion of the ellipticals might possibly be accounted for by previous wear using ellipticals. I currently have the S1 on deck and find it's 'special' elliptical to be superb at hiding record wear.

I think much of the measured precision of the Denons relates back to the tight manufacturing tolerances of the 103, something that has benefitted the entire line.

[bauzace50]

@ ripblade,

Thanks. Actually, I did not mean to include the 304 and S1 in the comments you describe. Both these cartridges were exceptional trackers during their short ownership here. I was quite sorry to see both of them go (one accident, and one sale).

Thanks,
b50

[EdAInWestOC]

B50,
I have owned a DL-103D for almost 40 years. Prior to that I experiemented with a lot of MM and MI cartridges from ADC, Pickering, Stanton, Shure, Signet, AKG and others (I can't remember them all). Most of those cartridges were decent enough but each left me wanting for something that they didn't do.

To give you an idea about my preferences, I like planar or electorstatic transducers as opposed to boxed dynamic speakers. The dynamic speakers always sounded too slow to my ears and the boxiness of the enclosure drew too much attention to the speaker. I value very fast transducers that are neutral and transparent sounding.

The DL-103D made all the aforementioned cartridges sound closed in and congested. The 103D has also tracked everything I have tried. I have also owned a DL-300, DL-103, DL-103R and DL-103M.

The 103 was originally designed for use in the Japanese broadcasting industry and caught on as an unassuming plain jane cartridge that did a lot of things really well. Changing its cantilever and stylus raises the 103 and 103R's performance to heights that other, much more expensive, manufacturers make a big deal about. The Denon cartridge just does it with a design that is decades old.

Not only does the 103 and 103R sound very good in their stock form they sound good and don't give any trouble about tracking difficult passages. And they do all of the above for a very reasonable amount of money.

There are a lot of vinylphiles who own significant playback rigs and a number of these people choose to use a DL-103 or DL-103R (in stock or hotrodded form). I have read posts from 103 users that have owned much more exspensive cartridges and have settled on the 103 because it sounds good and works without a lot of fussy nonsense. The best cartridge in the world isn't very useful if you spend all of your time trying to get it to work properly.

In short the 103/103R is one of those cartridges that does so many thing well that its a hard act to follow up. There is no doubt that there are many cartridges that can outperform the lowly 103 but the 103 is musical, tracks well, gets your foot tapping and is inexpensive.

We have all fought fussy gear and had the pride of making it work when it worked. Denon cartridges all work very well and they sound much better than they should given their price. Thats a very hard thing to argue with, draws buyers and thats a good reason to keep manufacturing them.

I have no evidence to support ths, but I get the feeling that Denon would rather not be making the 103 and would prefer if the audiophile community would focus on its newer designs like the very good DL-S1. Denon is a major electronics manufacturer that still makes cartridges for a very small market. Its a wonder that they make cartridges at all. Any of them.

I'm certain that they are not in the cartridge market for the amount of money they make from that product line. Denon concerns itself with much larger market products and, as of this writing, cartridges are listed as accessories on their websites. These are products that are sort of stuffed in a corner. They make cartridges because they are still in the analog market and currently analog is enjoying a resurgence.

I often read posts from people who are having trouble with their playback rig. Things like inner groove distortion, mistracking and all manner of cartridge performance issues are listed in this and other forums. I have had none of these issues with my 103D (for almost 40 years), my 103R (when it is used as a backup), the 103M or the 103. Many people post about their delight with Denon cartridges both from a sonic standpoint and from a standpoint of their tracking ability.

I like Denon cartridges because they are very good, work every day, on all LPs and don't cost an arms and a leg. I admire boutique manufacturers of fine cartridges but Denon manages to make competitive products without having a cartridge wizard sealed in a secret dome with 25 9s wiring, with silver plating, hand assembling a cartridge that costs 10 of thousands of dollars. Of course that boutique cartridge must perform better. Or does it?

Ed

[krenzler]

Very well written Ed and right on the money.

Let's just hope that Denon doesn't one day choose to stop the production of 103's like Technics did with the 1200/1210 line..

-Since you owned both 103R and 103D, could you live happily with the 103R if the 103D wasn't an option (since it's hard to find)?

[bauzace50]

Ed,
each one of your points can be a separate chapter in itself. These past few weeks I have been appreciating my DL-103R more and more, and quite pointedly ( ) amazed with the conical point!

I had never envisioned owning a 103, but am rewarded for that leap of faith. It has been a paradigm shifter: low output, moving coil, 2-gram tracking, ancient design, conical stylus...oooh, it has been a great parturition! I had bedsheets freshly boiled.

It's true that cartridges are classifed as "ACCESSORIES" in the Denon website, facing a huge catalog of other stuff. Doesn't that cause rumblings in analog territory?

Regards,
b50

PS- "Accessory": something subordinate, of secondary importance? "You talking to me?"

[Trackside]

Yes the tracking on the 103 is very good - maybe worth putting up with all the fuss needed to make it work on my SL-1200. I was recording some orchestral classical music the other day and was amazed how it maintained an open detail sound without any IGD even during climaxes and complex passages.

[KentT]

For those Japanese audiophiles with high mass transcription tonearms to play their vintage original Jazz and Classical pressings on to their best abilities.

[bubba45]

I had never envisioned owning a 103, but am rewarded for that leap of faith. It has been a paradigm shifter: low output, moving coil, 2-gram tracking, ancient design, conical stylus...oooh, it has been a great parturition! I had bedsheets freshly boiled.

Sorry to churn up an old(ish) thread but just thought this was the place to add my very recent experience with a DL103r.

The one I'm using came with the Gyro I recently bought and my initial thought was basically to sell it on as I was much like you B50 in the quote above.
Obviously before selling it on I needed to check it was working and thought I'd also listen what the sound was like. I was honestly prepared to be completely underwhelmed by this big ugly looking lump of a thing - it has an added weight glued to the top by the previous owner, like the ones Isokinetik and others sell. The DL103r now weighs about 13g.
A couple of days ago I set it up on my SL1210, with stock arm, stock Technics headshell, additional Technics counterweight and I've been running it through a Pro-ject Phono Box SE MKI. The Pro-ject is a very very good phono-stage for it's cost but not the best I own.
As you see it isn't a stellar high-end set up at all.

Well I have been extremely surprised by the DL103r. It is all the things that VE folk and others have been saying - tracks well, good detail and soundstage, cracking bass and just so foot tappingly musical. Great sense of beat, pace and life on the SL1210 and I must say just about the best cart I have heard on my Technics.
I really am enjoying listening to it, so much so that I am going to remove the eBay listing I have made and keep it.
It's excelled with some of the livelier / upbeat / funkier stuff I've been playing tonight so I'm not sure how it will play the slower acoustic / folk / jazz / slower soulful styles of music I listen to but what I've thrown at it tonight it's been a bit of revelation.
It's not my 'favourite' cart / arm combination, that's currently a straight fight between a Kuzma Stogi / AT OC9MLII and an Encounter MK2 / Denon DL304, but the 103r is a definite keeper.

Looking at it the DL103r it still does beg the question of why it continues to be in production but I'm sure glad it is and that I've been fortunate enough to accidentally come across this 'old workhorse'.

[AudioSoul]

I have owned the DL-103D and presently own the DL-103R in a Alum. body. The 103D is an exceptioal cart. for sure but I like the 103R better. This is just a matter of personal preference though.....

[steve195527]

most folk have of the term supply and demand,with the 103 it is the inverse:-demand and supply,Denon make it/them and will continue to do so because they make money out of it/them AND will continue to release "special versions" of it to ensure demand keeps up,been in production so long its probably costs peanuts for them to make on a fully automated line that has been tweaked to ensure very good quality and few below par examples

[Piga30]

Hello,

Anybody had good results with a stock DL-103 and a SME 3009 series II improved tonearm despite its low mass ?

[bauzace50]

Hi Piga30,

this is NOT directly responsive to your question, sorry . But it IS a related opinion.

My SME 309 has similar effective mass, as compared with the 3009. My DL-103R is currently in use with NO added mass whatsoever, and that is the way I like it in my 309.

I thoroughly explored my 103R with different amounts of added mass ( 3, 6, and 9 ADDED grams) solidly fastened through their 1/2" installation holes.

The 9-added-gram version became unstable in my setup, and even skipped some grooves! So, I went back to an entire exploration process beginning with 0-added mass all the way back to the 9-added-grams.

Results were the same. I prefer the performance with -0- added grams on my SME 309. And I realize this goes DIRECTLY AGAINST THE GRAIN with much of the lore about the DL-103 and its expensive mass-adding modifications.

The only pinch of salt regarding these comments: I am an iconoclast regarding much of audio lore. I often burst bubbles of hallowed audiophile beliefs in my own setup . So, my recommendation is to experiment for yourself, and determine which alternative you like best.

Regards,
bauzace50