• 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

Just a suggestion, why don't you mount the DL-103 on your SL-1600 (which has a medium mass arm) and see how she sounds? See if the elusive midbass returns? Wouldn't hurt to try. :dunno:


_______
Matthew
 
hoodie said:
Just a suggestion, why don't you mount the DL-103 on your SL-1600 (which has a medium mass arm) and see how she sounds? See if the elusive midbass returns? Wouldn't hurt to try. :dunno:


_______
Matthew
Click to expand...

A great idea......I intend to do this as well when I have time.
 
Actually person who designed my arm is a hube Denon 103 fan, and used it extensively on the arm during prototype design. Now my arm is the 12" version, but has the aluminium fittings, and when I go back to my build sheet, shows it at 17 grams with hardware (15.7 grams nude), not the 14 I quoted from memory. Sorry. Now the cartridge did have the Uwe ebony wood body, which is reported to have 4 grams increase in weight over a standard 103 plastic body, which adds to the effective mass calculation. The resonant frequency calculation I ran at the time was well in acceptable range. So while this arm was not a 30 gram beast, it does appear to be suited for running a 103R, at least the one I had.

Yes I did adjust VTF and VTA, and also worked with damping fluid in the cup that the pin of the Riggle arm has under the pivot point. I never did get as even a tonal balance out of the modified 103R as I felt it should be.

Just my experience. Now on the other hand, I am sure not going to sell an $1800 tone arm to buy something that can only run Denon 103 series of cartridges on either. So the cartridge had limited utility for me, never regretted selling it.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Last edited:
Mister Pig said:
Actually person who designed my arm is a hube Denon 103 fan, and used it extensively on the arm during prototype design. Now my arm is the 12" version, but has the aluminium fittings, and when I go back to my build sheet, shows it at 17 grams with hardware (15.7 grams nude), not the 14 I quoted from memory. Sorry. Now the cartridge did have the Uwe ebony wood body, which is reported to have 4 grams increase in weight over a standard 103 plastic body, which adds to the effective mass calculation. The resonant frequency calculation I ran at the time was well in acceptable range. So while this arm was not a 30 gram beast, it does appear to be suited for running a 103R, at least the one I had.

Yes I did adjust VTF and VTA, and also worked with damping fluid in the cup that the pin of the Riggle arm has under the pivot point. I never did get as even a tonal balance out of the modified 103R as I felt it should be.

Just my experience. Now on the other hand, I am sure not going to sell an $1800 tone arm to buy something that can only run Denon 103 series of cartridges on either. So the cartridge had limited utility for me, never regretted selling it.

Regards
Mister Pig
Click to expand...
That puts things in a different light for sure. It is curious that there seem to be a few people who noted this loss (lack?) of upper bass and then another group who did not. I wonder what the difference is? I am curious as this is something I am thinking of doing myself and with money being really tight I need to be pretty sure of the result pleasing me.
 
Here is what I am saying......if all 103s need a super heavy arm.....how come Denon TTs don't come with a super heavy arm?

It specifically says in my TT manual that both arms are designed to be as low mass as possible.

The logic is not there
 
Last edited:
Where can I order a heavy head shell from??

I am going to switch arms and install a heavy head-shell.....
 
G'day all, an interesting thread. I wonder what the recommended tracking weight of this DL103 S is?

As I understand the general subject the tracking weight is generally indicative of cartridge compliance with heavier tracking weights indicating lower cartridge compliance.

For example I would not regard any cartridge tracking at two grams as 'high compliance'. I would call it low to moderate compliance at best and would best be mated with a moderate mass tonearm assembly. Regards, Felix aka catman.
 
Last edited:
Good point Felix.

As for tonearm mass, I cannot really say I´ve experinced a better sound with a heavy arm, compared with a low mass arm. I guess it mostly depend on what we expect to hear, and also very much our total system.

In reality a lower mass arm should, with a given cartridge, give a little higher output higher up in frequency; a higher res. freq. will give a higher output at the recorded lowest frequencies.
gusten
 
Last edited:
BillyB said:
Where can I order a heavy head shell from??

I am going to switch arms and install a heavy head-shell.....
Click to expand...

http://www.needledoctor.com/Sumiko-HS12-Headshell This is the headshell that I use and like, very adjustable.

I would suggest that you check all your systems settings and make sure they're correct...then go here http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/ttadjust.html There is just about everything you need to know in that article.

My best sound came when I increased the anti-skate and had the arm set a bit tail up. HTH, Preston
 
catman said:
G'day all, an interesting thread. I wonder what the recommended tracking weight of this DL103 S is?

As I understand the general subject the tracking weight is generally indicative of cartridge compliance with heavier tracking weights indicating lower cartridge compliance.

For example I would not regard any cartridge tracking at two grams as 'high compliance'. I would call it low to moderate compliance at best and would best be mated with a moderate mass tonearm assembly. Regards, Felix aka catman.
Click to expand...

1.8 gm.
 
BillyB:

I hope the heavier arm and headshell will do the trick. Check LPGear or Needle Doctor for headshells. I use LPGear's 12g Zupreme and it is reasonably priced.

Soundsmith should have included in their package the recommended tracking force for your 103S. Catman's on point about the relationship between compliance and tracking force. FYI Soundsmith recommended 2.5g for my retipped 103R which has a slightly lower compliance than the 103S. I'd expect the 103S to be at least 2.0g indicating a mid to high mass arm is needed. You may get there with the heavier headshell.

Also, I went back to an earlier post and you noted your Denon TT was specifically designed for the 103S. Denon has made a lot of different carts over the years so I was curious what TT you have.
 
BillyB said:
Here is what I am saying......if all 103s need a super heavy arm.....how come Denon TTs don't come with a super heavy arm?

It specifically says in my TT manual that both arms are designed to be as low mass as possible.

The logic is not there
Click to expand...

To answer this particulra question, you need to understand the history of the 103 series, including the original 103.

Developed by Denon in collaboration with the Japan Broadcasting Corporation Technical Research Laboratories as a high-performance, high-reliability phono cartridge for broadcasting purposes, the Denon DL-103 has been in continuous production since 1963.

As I understand it, the 103R is the same basic cartridge as the 103, but with 6N copper usd in the coil winding. If you have a low mass arm, then some added mass may very well be beneficial.

There are other Denon cartridges that have higher compliance, and would be suitable for a lower mass arm. For instance the Denon 301 or 304. But these cartridges were never intended to be used in the studio, and are intended to be used by the general public for analog play back.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Pio1980 said:
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).
Click to expand...

For the two cartridges I sent to Soundsmith for a ruby retip Peter recommended a quarter gram TF reduction with respect to the OEM's recommended TF.
 
BillyB said:
Where can I order a heavy head shell from??

I am going to switch arms and install a heavy head-shell.....
Click to expand...

Have You tested by adding some weight to the existing headshell, like bluetack, so You know it will make a difference?
 
VTA? Breakin Time? Loading? Contact Soundsmith?

Hi, I had my Benz Glider SL retipped by Soundsmith and the tonal balance shifted slightly with less treble extension. I found that adjusting the VTA /tonearm height (raising it slightly in my case) helped bring more clarity and sparkle to the top w/o hurting the rest of the frequency range -- the angle of the stylus was different than the original. I also wonder if adjusting the loading might also have helped. But I switched setups before getting to adjusting it.

You have to imagine that the new stylus and cantilever might change the impact of what the coils are doing. So maybe adjust the VTA/tonearm height slightly down and/or fool with the loading to see if this helps.

I would also try a slight increase in the VTF and see if that helps.

Give this cartridge a little more time to break in.

You might gain some insight as to what to do if you talk directly with Soundsmith. I have found them to be most helpful and responsive. They might have an adjustment for your cartridge that would make it perform better in your tt/setup.

I use the Sumiko headshells and they are very good with nice cartridge leads -- the older ones are better with slightly higher build quality. You can't go wrong picking up one of these and trying it.

I hope you can get to a happy place with your Soundsmith retipped 103S.

Best, Stephanie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom