Denon DL103 v DL103R

[Progmeister]

Denon DL103 users put your hands up. Quick question, is the R worth the extra dosh? discuss! Tell me your findings on the 103 and/or R.

[Fretless]

Prog - see if Google Translate can get this Dutch review into English.
Someone has replaced his 103 with a 103R and compares the two.

http://forum.audiofreaks.nl/index.php?topic=19129.0

The gist is - yes the 103R is worth the extra dosh for musicality and transparency. But it is suited to heavier tonearms.

[Daniel Quinn]

It should do , and the it was a big thumbs up for that person .

[_D_S_J_R_]

An online pal on the TeeDee forums is a bit of a 103 expert and also once confirmed that the R was better. Why you'd pay that much for even more inner-groove treble losses of a conical over an elliptical stylus is beyond me though. You also need the likes of a period Grey tonearm too, as modern lower mass arms aren't as compatible as the compliance suggests.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

An online pal on the TeeDee forums is a bit of a 103 expert and also once confirmed that the R was better. Why you'd pay that much for even more inner-groove treble losses of a conical over an elliptical stylus is beyond me though. You also need the likes of a period Grey tonearm too, as modern lower mass arms aren't as compatible as the compliance suggests.

Not so. I use a 103 as a back up to my Ortofon SPU in an old Jap arm on my Pioneer PL71. The arm is no where near the mass of Grey and the 103 tracks perfectly even on end of side, which I think is a bollocks fantasy based on a few experiences, and using too low mass arm.

This is useful information but I still think the ears are best as the judge http://ortofon.com/hifi/support/cartrid ... -frequency

[Progmeister]

No good in my OL Encounter then.

[_D_S_J_R_]

An online pal on the TeeDee forums is a bit of a 103 expert and also once confirmed that the R was better. Why you'd pay that much for even more inner-groove treble losses of a conical over an elliptical stylus is beyond me though. You also need the likes of a period Grey tonearm too, as modern lower mass arms aren't as compatible as the compliance suggests.

Not so. I use a 103 as a back up to my Ortofon SPU in an old Jap arm on my Pioneer PL71. The arm is no where near the mass of Grey and the 103 tracks perfectly even on end of side, which I think is a bollocks fantasy based on a few experiences, and using too low mass arm.

This is useful information but I still think the ears are best as the judge http://ortofon.com/hifi/support/cartrid ... -frequency

It's bad enough with an elliptical tip rolling off treble at side end (I've done enough vinyl vs. CD comparisons in my time, synching the two and listening through a side when I was sadder than I am now) and it's interesting how close the two can be at beginning of side and how the vinyl dulls-out towards the end. Some cuts tried to correct for this I understand, but I must admit to being a fine-line fan, especially on band/dynamics-limited muddy-mess records like Yes' Topographic Oceans.' The Denon's conical tip is well documented as to what it actually does and it is audible in comparison with its peers.

As to arm matching, I did over-exaggerate the 103's requirements - apologies - but I HAVE used them in years past, but honestly cannot see much if any advantage in bass and midrange reproduction using normal tonearms over say, a boringly reliable and everlasting Denon DL110!

[Daniel Quinn]

speaking of which -http://petergabriel.com/news/double-vin ... r-gabriel/

pg albums 1 to 4 , 1/2 speed remastered double albums playing at 45rpm . limited addition 10,000 copies .

best thing about it - £70 for all 4.

[Progmeister]

I was a little surprized when i found out that the Doc wouldn't need to reconfigure my Phono 2 to accommodate an R version with them having different specs.

[Daniel Quinn]

Why