s_k

A NEW DL103? The regular one or the R?
That's cheap mate. These go around 350 here.
I prefer the Goldring I have over the Denon, but it is a nice cartridge and in the end it's all about matching.
I thought you bought SUT's a while ago?

__________________
Click here to see my collection

debaserr

I really want this:

__________________
Last.FM

Batty

Just the regular 103, the R was going for $248 + postage, still cheap. I bought a pair of transformers, a while ago, I have now built them into a box with connectors and a ground added, I didn't like the 'el cheapo' thin ally front panel so I made a new one out of 12mm thick pine.

Now I will be able to compare the DL103 with my Goldring 1042.

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/Batt1958/charts
Earworms Rool.

s_k

Having a Goldring 1022 I think it's safe to say I'd prefer the goldring.
To be honest, I preferred the 1022 over the DL103R. So...
Still any Denon MC cartridge (ranging from the 110 to the 103R) is value for money.
But it just isn't my sound. Bit nasal mids.

You might like this.
I just gained

Unfortunately it looked like this:


I took it apart


It is going to need a LOT of love though:

Moldy...

Still, 40 bucks... Hmmm... Worth the try.
It IS in the end a SP15.
If I get it to work I will mount a nice expensive arm to it with my Goldring 1022GX.
I think I'll stick to the Cambridge 640P. I love it.
I may mount two or three arms on it. At least two, one for 78rpm's

__________________
Click here to see my collection

s_k

Come to think of it, more gains

These

And

But without the metal dome

And


And:


And:


And so much more...
Yeah... Had a meeting of my own forum.
This is what happens .

__________________
Click here to see my collection

s_k

Check it

JPW ML-510. ****ing awesome speakers. They are no less than my IMF Super Compact II or Vifa Vivaces. I cannot believe how brilliant their bass is, taking their size in account. There's really a lot of it and it's good too. Not pushy, not boomy, just clean bass with an awesome amount of depth. Brilliant stereo imaging, voices are very subtle but very present. The tweeter has an awful lot of detail without being annoying at all.

They are next to my computer monitor now, replacing my beloved old Wharfedale 504's.

Another gain:

A Rotel RA-960BX. It's just better than my audiolab, period.
Compared to the Rotel, the audiolab sounds dull, lacks control in bass, lacks detail, lacks energy.
Yes the Audiolab is really a very good amplifier, but the Rotel kicks is ass. And it's way cheaper.

For sale: Audiolab 8000SE

2 years old, about a year warranty left, works like new, has some minor scratches (it collided with my belt when I took it out of the cabinet to plug in new interlinks some time back ). Anyone?

__________________
Click here to see my collection

Batty

Never liked Audiolab stuff, seemed too boring. I prefer the 103 through the SUTs over my 1042. But my amp is a bit more than yours plus it's a hybrid and the valve input likes SUTs.

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/Batt1958/charts
Earworms Rool.

s_k

Oh I love my audiolab. But it is indeed a bit dull at times.
That's where the rotel shines. Energyyyyy.
Have to be careful though, I hate all too bright sound. Especially at lower levels it quickly becomes hissy and I really hate that. Sound has to stay effortless and not tiresome to listen to at any volume.

What's the main difference between the 103 and the 1042?
Let's see if I understand what you mean and if it has anything to do with the (pre)amp.

__________________
Click here to see my collection

Batty

OK, I find that with the 103 and SUT plugged into the same phono stage the 1042 was that the bass slam is more pronounced ie I get more sense of reality with drums and bass guitar it seems as if the initial strike (leading edge / attack?) is reproduced better (sorry, not easy to explain). Also there is more bottom end bass notes, goes deeper. Treble is at the moment about the same as the 1042 but seems to be smoothing out the more I play.
My system is not a bright system, and so called PRAT (Pace, Rhythm And Timing) are supposed to be very good. (it means most music makes you tap your foot without even noticing) and with the amp being capable of transients exceding 60 Amps there is plenty of headroom meaning the music sounds effortless. I think you would like it.

Don't get me wrong I love the 1042, but at the moment I am prefering the 103 / SUT combination. I am in the middle of building a solid state pre pre amp to swap the SUT with to see what differences an active step up sounds like, I have a good circuit from DIY audio forum.

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/Batt1958/charts
Earworms Rool.

s_k

Clear. I am with you on the bass.
I usually think the mids are a bit nasal with every Denon MC.
I have to agree with you, the 1022 (I'm not sure about the 42, but I guess it's mainly the same) lacks a bit in bass. It's enough, but it's not in the face. I never missed it, but I get your point.

Where you say PRAT, I just say 'the system makes music'.
Some systems are perfect, but they don't really make music.
In the end, that's what makes it into an enjoyable listening experience.

Right now I've replaced my IMF Super Compact II with Vifa Vivace '87.
Altough they are bass reflex speakers (I usually think these are a bit boomy), they sound really good. They lack a bit of transparency, but the mid range is absolutely brilliant. Can't wait to move to my new place where I hope to have a better listening room.

Is it possible for you to record from your record player to your PC? Preferrably in a higher resolution? I'd love to hear the diff between the 1042 and the 103. I'm not sure if we share any records, but I wouldn't mind making a little recording for you if you like to hear what my player/cartridge/pre combo sounds like.

__________________
Click here to see my collection