Devon DL-160 with Phono1

[tomblackford]

Ah - precision!

I was going on a basic metric that average weekly wage was about £20, so it was 2x that...

[Daniel Quinn]

I used the bank of England inflation calculator , precision and laziness

[alfafan123]

Hi,

Can't speak for the Denon DL-160 but I have owned a Denon DL-110 which is a close "relative" HOMC and IMHO is a great cartridge for the price with a detailed soundstage and only lacks a little LF weight and image solidity.

If you get a good DL-160 you should get all the DL-110 strengths and a little more resolution and HF sparkle.

[tomblackford]

Now that's what I like to hear!

Thanks Alfafan!

[_D_S_J_R_]

if you'd compared the two side by side, I doubt you'd hear much of any difference. Back when they were both cheaper than a Linn K9 - yes really - you chose on the colour of the body, red marble for the 110 and blue marble for the 160. The diamonds were the same as I recall and only the cantilevers and possibly a slight difference in compliance from memory...

[Daniel Quinn]

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index. ... 60.217956/

http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread.ph ... 0-or-DL160

forum comparisons for your consideration , they do not appear to share the same dimond profile .

[_D_S_J_R_]

Thanks again to you all for all the tips. I just spotted my typo in the thread title - rest assured it's a Denon DL-160, not the lesser spotted Devon DL-160 (targeted at the then-lucrative West Country market, with extra creamy sound).

Yes - it is an SME s2 'improved' as far as I can see, with a fixed headshell, which I believe might reduced the weight further (relative to the detachable headshells).

I think the deck looks like a MK1 (I think) and is a single-owner deck which cost the owner £40 new back in late 60s (which I reckon equates to around £800-1000 in todays money). SME / fluid damper was professionally fitted a few years later (costing more than the original deck) and he still has some of the original boxes. I have a feeling it has been pretty well cared-for.

I'd heard mention about the Linn plinth upgrade... it's really nice to know there are upgrades like that available should I want to tinker. Is there also a common upgrade by replacing the base of the standard plinth?

Also thanks for all the tips with the fluid damper. Getting all this goodness set up correctly feels like it might be a little bit of a challenge but hopefully things won't go to awry in transit (I'm collecting by car)... I collect at the weekend, so I may yet be back on here asking questions (will start a new topic outside of the NVA room)...

Thanks again!

I'm a lifelong turntable bodger, hence the seemingly encyclopaedic nonsense I remember as I've done a lot of it before when I was working with these things on a daily basis. An old pal has done the Linn plinth thing to his own TD150 and I remember we had fun swapping LP12 bits for TD150 bits and finding very little difference in platter and hub dimensions and so on - and the spring positions are the same and so on and so on. It wouldn't surprise me if a Linn sub chassis (with bearing and inner hub) wouldn't be a drop-in replacement for the T-piece Thorens article...

[_D_S_J_R_]

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index. ... 60.217956/

http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread.ph ... 0-or-DL160

forum comparisons for your consideration , they do not appear to share the same dimond profile .

I like the way you ignore an expert who has used and compared both, to a load of amateurs on other forums who haven't a fecking clue!!!

I repeat, the cantilevers are different and possibly the compliance as well, although in practise I'd suggest little between them. They *sounded* pretty similar to me, any output difference as much to sample variation from memory - and also to the panel on Hifi Choice at the time. If I can be bothered, I'll post the review and you can make your own sodding minds up...

Why the fuck don't I take my own advice and leave these effin' forums alone?

[Daniel Quinn]

If you read the net as I did before posting , the diamonds are differentiated - both elliptical but the 160 is described as 1x2mm . it also as 50 kHz F/R not 45.

I repeat the diamonds do not appear to be the same

[_D_S_J_R_]

Sigh...

In practise, it mattered not a jot.