Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Analog Playback
In the Thread: Denon 103: myths and the reality
Post Subject: More about the 103’s reality.Posted by Romy the Cat on: 12/7/2004

effexor

effexor inovina.com

prednisolon bivirkninger halsbrand

prednisolon bivirkninger open

 Thorsten wrote:
I did use the term "crappy" in the connection with the tonearm in an ironic sense. Have you lived so long among US Americans you lost your sense of irony? Also, i do not suggest crappy Phonostages, merely ones with low input capacitance....

T, hoped you know me well enough that you able to understand my sense irony as well without me spreading those smiley faces…
 Thorsten wrote:
What I actually tried to point out was that the 103 was designed to perform well in a certain context and taken out of that context into one that suits very different cartridges is not conductive to getting the best from it. If you then pass judgement from the wrong context you are simply not being fair.

Fair enough. I did bring my vision on the 103 – the extreme stiffness of the needle resulting a very aggressive, pushy and amusuc sound combined with color deficiency. To me the 103 sounds like a TV with extra contrast but with low color saturation - nice to watch the superball commercials but try to watch in this TV the final scene of the “Casablanca”… the fog in there will look like a sand storm in Iraqi desert… BTW I ran the 103 in the arms of effective mass form 10Gg to 40g with no positive result… Do not get me wring. It sound OK but it did not sound like a needle that worth as much publicity at it has…. I call this 103: the ‘Audiogon cartridge” – referring the level of demands that are popular at the Audiogon forums…, particularly in the music forum… :-)
 Thorsten wrote:
In some ways my position requires the faith that SME, EMT, Ortofon, Denon, Neumann et al actually GOT IT RIGHT all those ages ago and what we have done since was less to offer real overall improvements in replay then to provide marketing features which in turn forced other changes elsewhere. In many ways the situation is similar to that in Speakers & Speaker Drivers.

Well, I have no “position” and defiantly no “devotion of faith” to anything beside a particular result I am getting. You, see, when we give up the things that we sense to the conviction that “someone got it right” than all conversation should stop as it become a cult instead of an experience. The human awareness is very easily corruptible thing The Filenes are way more superior then we are… The do not subscribe BS….
 Thorsten wrote:
It seems that in the last 40 years we have added much "high tech" and frippery as well as fancy modern materials, yet the results achieved for any number of reasons do not match those achieved 40 or more years ago in areas that to me at least are crucial.

T, no one would argue with your but let do not apply the “pleasant to subscribe believes” to the specific topic of the 103 performance. In fact, generality the needles, as much as the entire analog become better over last 40 years. Not because the technologies become better but because the demands become higher. There are a lot of very capable cartridges around nowdays…
 Thorsten wrote:
  Maybe what I value most in music reproduction is different from what you after as well, so some of the 103's shortcommings are of modest relevance to me while it's strength (in the right context) agree with my own sonic prejudices?

Eventually!!!! Here is THE subject that actually worth to talk about: how the 103 enrich your sonic prejudices. Be advised that I use the phrase “sonic prejudices” in highly positive light. May I ask you what you like in the 103 so much and what the 103 does to you (sonically) that you can’t find it on other cartridges.
 Thorsten wrote:
   Lastly, it is my understanding that the plain old 103 and the 103C are actually the same, the C added at some point in time spurretitiously. Oh also, if the 5*10^-6 compliance is right either the effective mass of my SME is well off spec and even decades of dust cannot account sufficiently for that big a difference or the datsheet info is simply wrong.

Not really, this is well know fact and well blindly tested by me. The 103 has 5*10^-6 compliance (although they do calculate thier 5*10^-6 compliance in a slightly differently) and the optimum result with SME 3012 (the default effective mass 14g) I was able to get when I load the SME/103 with 30-32g.

Rgs,
The Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site