Denon 103r ????

>>Increasing the arm's effective mass would theoretically lower these resonant points further - not necessarily desirable IMO, as they are already on the lower side of ideal.<<

Correct. But the Uwe body makes the whole cartridge much heavier than stock, so you've effectively raised the effective mass of the tonearm oving system above its nominal 14g eff mass rating, so you're listening to the 103R suspension and motor in a "heavier" tonearm already.

Can't say without being there. But a stock 103R in a 20g tonearm has given me resonance points no lower than what you cite. There may be other factors. But I'd expect a Uwe body 103R to sound beautiful in a Phantom II. In any case, 14g is better than the Rega's 12, for this cartridge, and it can sound good enough in the Rega.

Phil

>>But a line contact rattling in the groove due to improper setup or too-low VTA will wreak havoc in the groove.<<

No edit function here after posting. I meant to type, "...or too-low VTF..."

Have to agree with 213cobra that the 103R is one fine cartridge. I have compared it with some much more expensive cartridges, like the VDH Colibri Platinum and the Ortofon A90, in my system. Is the 103R as good as the other cartridges? No, it is not! But in a proper set-up, I really don’t feel deprived, or have any intense urge to switch back to the other cartridges, when I listen to the Denon. It is that good!

06-17-10: Thekong
Have to agree with 213cobra that the 103R is one fine cartridge. I have compared it with some much more expensive cartridges, like the VDH Colibri Platinum and the Ortofon A90, in my system. Is the 103R as good as the other cartridges? No, it is not! But in a proper set-up, I really don’t feel deprived, or have any intense urge to switch back to the other cartridges, when I listen to the Denon. It is that good!

Agreed, the Denon's faults are revolve more around deficiencies at the extremes and some shortcomings in imaging/soundstaging. It still sounds very good in these latter regards but very convincing in tone and texture - it sounds surprising good at midband detail too.

...mismatched and improper conditions...

No, I auditioned the Denon 103r is a heavier arm designed for MC cart, and the results were basically the same on Quatro's…poor midrange and higher end openness.

...Cutting head is not the playing head....
No kidding!! And the groove it leaves behind is NOT well received by conical styli. No amount of holistic garbage can replace what it leaves behind when it tries to extract information it can't respond to. Want to try a 103R with a long contact area stylus? Sure you do! It sounds MUCH better! Send your "superior " 103r off to sound smith and get back a $1,500 cartridge instead! Hey, but its a 103R right? WRONG! Why it might be more like a Benz Micro Ruby III for $1750.00!

Compliance isn't an issue? Yes, it is indeed an issue. It's crappy when the mechanics are crappy, all to meet some other objective that tries to overcome it for the price (and doesn't).

..."The damping and suspension have been dramatically re-engineered for greater compliance (now it is 8) and superior damping, resulting in much faster impulse response and recovery...." http://www.sound-smith.com/denon/index.html

The conical stylus is a throwback to cheap manufacture, and is designed to a price point and like you said...back in 1962 or so.

So far, the stock 103R is the WORST MC cartridge I've listened to and owned, even in the "right" tonearm. Oh it was better in a heavier arm, but I don't care about "better". I need it to sound "right". My old Denon 103D, and my AC-2 are much better sounding. Now, I have Benz Micro Ruby III that absolutely is superb even over my Accuphase AC-2, this, in my SME series III arm.

I'm sorry you guys, but you seem to have married this product and are now unaware of it's significant faults. About everyone else is, and they change, change, change, it till it MAYBE competes with something that was sold with a better design out of the box. I've moved on, and am happy I did. My current set-up sounds better than a $4,700.00 Wilson Benesch table, cartridge and tone arm. Would the Ruby III be better in THAT tone arm? Why yes, it would. A man's got to know the equipment's limitation. But the Ruby III simply walks away form my AC-2 and the 103r isn't even in the hunt... on even the "right" arm. There was no set-up problems, either. Oh it went from awful to better, but the AC-2 and Ruby III simply, and easily, moved out and away.

1.0 The 103D works VERY well in my SME III arm.
2.0 The AC-2 works VERY well in my SME III arm.
3.0 The 103R is TERRIBLE in a SME III arm (never said it wasn't terrible).
4.0 The 103R sound veiled and poor in the Wilson Benesch turntable - Full Circle Turntable/ACT 0.5 Tonearm.
5.0 The Benz Micro Ruby III work VERY well in my SME III arm.

So I'm sorry to hurt your feeling, but I'm more than well aware of what the 103r sound like, and the limitations in my set-up, and the limitations of the 103r in the closer to right set-up. All this clap-trap is just that.

Also, you can "pretend" that a zero slope is a vertical verses horizontal line if you want to. Count me out on that. As a matter of fact, Michael Fremer, who writes for ANALOG CORNER for STEREOPHILE would like to be counted out, too.

You can count me out on your Static’s lessons, too. A conical abject next to a flat surface produces a theoretical infinite PSI pressures unless, the plastic record violently warps out of the way. Same as a line contact, but a line contact has MUCH more contact area to start with. The trade-off on a conical styli are steep. So, they toss that little bugger the minute you PAY them to. Now your good deal product is creeping up tp where the really good stuff already is. Look at the magnified images of styli in record grooves sometime. The shape is the pressure All things being the same. You seem intent on pushing your strange agenda that the 103R is better only in that some other aspect of the alternatives set-up is wrong (stylii pressure, VTA ETC) to keep it looking better. Why? No one here is comparing WRONG set ups with superior product to the right set-up using inferior ones. At least I hope not. So stop throwing out Chaff to confuse everyone.

I don't think any one here counts dollars as "sound" advice, either. I agree with you there. Expensive stuff can be terrible, too. I count the sound period. The 103r sounds bad, I looked at arms and tables (Full Circle Turntable/ACT 0.5 Tonearm.). It still sounded bad in that set-up. A Benz ruby III for WAY less money in my current Ariston and SME III sounds wonderful. Case closed.