• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

103 S Soundsmith

I would try adding mass to the headshell, I have a mid level retipped dl103R in cocobolo using the heavy orsonic headshell on a fidelity research fr-54 tonearm and it sounds great. I have also used a 18g audio technical headshell with great results.

maybe it just needs to be broken in, give it some time and then reevaluate the bass. also as Pio asked, what is the quality of the bass now? sometimes we get so used to bass being loud and boomy when its not we think something is wrong but in reality its right....if that makes any sense.



edit: OH! I just thought of something, my soundsmith retip is very sensitive to minor vtf changes. try changing the tracking force up or down and see what happens. if I remember correctly mine had to be dialed in to the exact right VTF or the bass was non existent or way too boomy and muddy. good luck!
 
On the compliance, I imagine the 8cu listing at 100Hz is actually something like 15cu at 10Hz given independent estimates of the 10Hz compliances of the 103R (8 = 1.6*5) and 160 (28 = 2*14).
 
now that I am thinking about it more I would really recommend messing with the VTF, try different settings and see what happens. good luck
 
Mister Pig said:
I once bought a 103R that was mounted in an Ebony body made by Uwe, and this cartridge had a bent cantilever. I sent it off to Soundsmith for a level 3 ruby retip. When I got it back I installed it on an arm with 14 grams of effective mass, and gave it a whirl.

I noticed it had great detail, nice layering and imaging, and a low noise floor. But what I noticed was what appeared to be a hole in the mid bass. Fundamental low bass was there, but there certainly was something missing. I never could get that cartridge to be evenly balanced, and I eventually sold it. The new owner loved the cartridge, so perhaps I was just too picky.

This experience has made me wonder if it is a good idea to upgrade a cantilever to a different material than what was stock. Certainly the cartridge must be voiced to have a certain mass and material for the cantilever, so changing it is going to alter the sound, and how does one know if it is for the better, or perhaps it will be worse. It appears your experience may be mirroring what I went through.

Regards
Mister Pig
Click to expand...

The arm in your case was too light for that cartridge.

fiddlefye said:
I wonder what difference it would have made if the arm it had been mounted in had been somewhat higher mass, say in the 18-21g range? That upper bass range is where I've seen some suck-out with an arm just too light for the cart. Not so much so as to exhibit obvious poor function, just enough to cause imbalances.
Click to expand...

Your reply was to Pig's post. You're correct. He was using an inappropriate arm for that cartridge.

jeremyjustic said:
I would try adding mass to the headshell, I have a mid level retipped dl103R in cocobolo using the heavy orsonic headshell on a fidelity research fr-54 tonearm and it sounds great. I have also used a 18g audio technical headshell with great results.

maybe it just needs to be broken in, give it some time and then reevaluate the bass. also as Pio asked, what is the quality of the bass now? sometimes we get so used to bass being loud and boomy when its not we think something is wrong but in reality its right....if that makes any sense.



edit: OH! I just thought of something, my soundsmith retip is very sensitive to minor vtf changes. try changing the tracking force up or down and see what happens. if I remember correctly mine had to be dialed in to the exact right VTF or the bass was non existent or way too boomy and muddy. good luck!
Click to expand...

My Soundsmith cartridge also changes character markedly with minor changes of tracking force. This needs to be optimised for the system. Or more precisely, the cartridge has an optimum range within which it should be used.
 
andyecon said:
On the compliance, I imagine the 8cu listing at 100Hz is actually something like 15cu at 10Hz given independent estimates of the 10Hz compliances of the 103R (8 = 1.6*5) and 160 (28 = 2*14).
Click to expand...
Those figures I gave were based on this. Not my maths, I should hastily add!
 
The bottom-line is that the 103S is not a high compliance cartridge and should not be used in a low mass arm. It is a lowish compliance cartridge and should be used in a high mass arm.
 
jeremyjustic said:
I would try adding mass to the headshell, I have a mid level retipped dl103R in cocobolo using the heavy orsonic headshell on a fidelity research fr-54 tonearm and it sounds great. I have also used a 18g audio technical headshell with great results.

maybe it just needs to be broken in, give it some time and then reevaluate the bass. also as Pio asked, what is the quality of the bass now? sometimes we get so used to bass being loud and boomy when its not we think something is wrong but in reality its right....if that makes any sense.



edit: OH! I just thought of something, my soundsmith retip is very sensitive to minor vtf changes. try changing the tracking force up or down and see what happens. if I remember correctly mine had to be dialed in to the exact right VTF or the bass was non existent or way too boomy and muddy. good luck!
Click to expand...

The only DL103 I've played with was the standard conical and easy to set up, but other MC carts I've used that had more sophisticated stylus profiles were pretty sensitive to VTA as well as VTF. The Benz Gold was horrendously bright when run level and tamed down, balanced and made lots more and better bass with the tail down, this on an ATP-12T.
 
theophile said:
The bottom-line is that the 103S is not a high compliance cartridge and should not be used in a low mass arm. It is a lowish compliance cartridge and should be used in a high mass arm.
Click to expand...
My question is what the compliance actually comes out at with the ruby cantilever vs. the original?
 
fiddlefye said:
My question is what the compliance actually comes out at with the ruby cantilever vs. the original?
Click to expand...

This is only surmising, but I'd give Peter credit for not interfering with the nature of the cartridge that he was retipping. I'd see it as a gross insult to turn a low compliance cartridge into something that it isn't, given that arm/cartridge matching is intimately tied-up with the compliance character. Of course if his prospective customers for this service have any concerns on this issue, they should question him about it before proceeding with the modification.
 
theophile said:
This is only surmising, but I'd give Peter credit for not interfering with the nature of the cartridge that he was retipping. I'd see it as a gross insult to turn a low compliance cartridge into something that it isn't, given that arm/cartridge matching is intimately tied-up with the compliance character. Of course if his prospective customers for this service have any concerns on this issue, they should question him about it before proceeding with the modification.
Click to expand...
I would never question Peter's judgement about these things, he has as much expertise in this area as anyone possibly could. I was simply recalling having read somewhere awhile back that the ruby cantilever was more compliant than the basic standard DL-103. I had a look and couldn't find where I read that (it was a year or two ago) so maybe my recollection is incorrect.
 
fiddlefye said:
I would never question Peter's judgement about these things, he has as much expertise in this area as anyone possibly could. I was simply recalling having read somewhere awhile back that the ruby cantilever was more compliant than the basic standard DL-103. I had a look and couldn't find where I read that (it was a year or two ago) so maybe my recollection is incorrect.
Click to expand...

It would be worthwhile for the prospective customer to ask him about this and any other concerns prior to the modification. Peter manufactures low, medium (mine) and high compliance cartridges. One would have to assume therefore that he has the correct materials at hand to be able to keep a cartridge within the manufacturer's specifications.
 
For Theophile:

"the tone of calm investigation, which had characterized all previous philosophy, is exchanged for that of unshakeable certainty, such as is peculiar to charlatanry of every kind and at all times. ..." Authur Schopenhauer's essey on Fichte, Schelling and Hegel"
 
Ok. My TT comes with (2) arms.

According to Denon.....both arms are designed to be as low mass as possible indicating that a heavy arm is not ideal for their cartridges. The manual also states that almost all carts are suitable for the low mass arm.

A few quotes from the manual.....

Regarding the low mass (Straight) arm.....

"Almost all cartridges on the market can be utilized with this arm"

Regarding the also apparently relatively low mass arm....

"Even the S shaped arm tube bas been designed for the lowest possible mass....."

Denon seems to think that low mass is important......

??
 
Last edited:
BillyB said:
Ok. My TT comes with (2) arms.

According to Denon.....both arms are designed to be as low mass as possible indicating that a heavy arm is not ideal for their cartridges. The manual also states that almost all carts are suitable for the low mass arm.

A few quotes from the manual.....

Regarding the low mass (Straight) arm.....

"Almost all cartridges on the market can be utilized with this arm"

Regarding the also apparently relatively low mass arm....

"Even the S shaped arm tube bas been designed for the lowest possible mass....."

Denon seems to think that low mass is important......

??
Click to expand...

The mass is just deciding where the resonance frequency is happening, together with the suspension´s compliance. If You can, take a look at what res. freq. You are getting. There is no particular advantage to have either a low mass arm or a heavy mass arm per se, it´s all about where the res. freq. is. But I would take a low mass because it´s more versatile.
gusten
 
Last edited:
If I may make a suggestion.

Use the S arm with the heaviest headshell you may have.

Use the headshell weight that comes with the cartridge as well.

Try it. :music:
 
BillyB said:
For Theophile:

"the tone of calm investigation, which had characterized all previous philosophy, is exchanged for that of unshakeable certainty, such as is peculiar to charlatanry of every kind and at all times. ..." Authur Schopenhauer's essey on Fichte, Schelling and Hegel"
Click to expand...

You mean like the unshakeable certainty that the Denon 103S is a high compliance cartridge......
 
I am not saying that a heavier arm wont benefit my situation, but......Mr. Pig, although an admittedly simple minded barnyard animal, put it more succinctly in that:

The low bass is there......but the mid bass is completely gone.....a quality which was there before the cart went away. The only thing that has changed is the install of the ruby Cantilever.

I am merely suggesting that adding the Ruby Cantilever may alter the mid bass response. That is all I am saying.......unless someone had the exact same hole in the soundstage and adding a heavier arm completely cured the issue......

I don't know how anyone can say so definitively that its the arm....
 
If Peter did not alter the suspension compliance ring or the tension of the pivot wire the compliance will be exactly the same as a stock '103 S, changing the tip or cant' won't change compliance unless the length is grossly altered (leverage shift).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom