[raysracing]

This has got to be one of those most elusive topics, when to buy a new table. Some people say #1 is the table and the cartridge is actually down the list. 

I am using a Denon DP-62L with the only arm I have which is the straight plastic/composite one. I do my own alignment and i feel it is good. But I dont get the bass response or even rich mid range I believe my Denon DL-103 MC cart should have. I am using a Cambridge 651P pre.

if the table is more important than anything else, what do the $1200 range TT's get you the old school $600 ones do not?

A few weeks ago I filled my plinth with plastic;ay and I felt it helped being out more of the sound stage (widening and deepening) and a bit more bass, but overal I find my set up sounding a bit bright and a bit thin.

Thanks,
Ray

[Nick77]

I would seriously consider auditioning a better preamp before considering a new table. I own the similar 640p and it wasn't so impressive till highly modded.

[usp1]

I have the same table with a AT 440mla cartridge. The phono pre will make an enormous difference. I went from the phon on an old marantz receiver, to a rogue 66 magnum and now to a lehmann black cube and each change has improved the sound. If I had seen the Vista ACLE special from Audiovista (currently being advertised) before I bought the black cube, I would efinitely have purchased that. I may still buy that given the value the vista apparently represents (only $299)

YOu may also want to look for a different cartridge if a different pre does not help.

I know the desire to upgrade to a better turntable... I am constantly looking for either a vpi, sota, clearaudio, well tempered or some such table just because they get so talked about.

[neobop]

I am using a Denon DP-62L with the only arm I have which is the straight plastic/composite one. I do my own alignment and i feel it is good. But I dont get the bass response or even rich mid range I believe my Denon DL-103 MC cart should have. I am using a Cambridge 651P pre.
Ray

I think you're looking in the wrong place.  This seems like a simple mismatch, cart to arm.  The 103 likes heavy arms, 20 to 25g eff mass.  Your arm is designed for higher compliance carts, which you won't have a problem finding. Just about every modern cart has higher cu than the 103. 
neo

[raysracing]

Neo I did not do they've search as I should have. I know the data exists to match these things up but assumed a Denon table with near same vintage cartridge would be a match.

[jarcher]

Despite owning a traveler, I'd second the recommendation on the phono preamp upgrade first.  In my case the preamp upgrade made as much of a difference as the table.  And a better pre-amp will also serve you for any future table / cartridge / arm upgrades as well. 

If you want thicker / lusher, you might want to seek out a phono preamp that is all tube or tube / SS hybrid such as the Jolida JD9, which is very reasonably priced. I use a second hand Sonic Frontiers SFP-1 Signature, which is probably available for $800 or less second hand. 

[roscoeiii]

I think you're looking in the wrong place.  This seems like a simple mismatch, cart to arm.  The 103 likes heavy arms, 20 to 25g eff mass.  Your arm is designed for higher compliance carts, which you won't have a problem finding. Just about every modern cart has higher cu than the 103. 
neo

Yes, a light weight arm with a 103 is not a great match. This would be the first thing I would change. Or in the meantime, find a way to add some weight at the headshell of the arm. The heavy headshell screws from Soundsmith. There are some plates that you can buy to add weight. Or Blu-Tak on a coin at the headshell. See what that does..

[Elizabeth]

I also say jump for a better phono box first as the best 'bang for the buck' upgrade.

[roscoeiii]

I also say jump for a better phono box first as the best 'bang for the buck' upgrade.

...once you get that arm-cart mismatch worked out somehow.

[neobop]

Neo I did not do they've search as I should have. I know the data exists to match these things up but assumed a Denon table with near same vintage cartridge would be a match.

Actually, they're not the same vintage, the 103 is an old broadcast cart and precedes the 62L by I'd guess, more than 20 years.  But that's neither here nor there. Now you know, all you have to do is ask and we'll give you what we think are your best alternatives. 

If I had a 62L in good shape, I wouldn't trade it straight up for a Traveller, no way. It's not just that I prefer nice DD tables, you'd be trading down.  Translate the price of your near top Denon from '80s dollars and it's more expensive than the entry level VPI, which will probably lose more of it's value, much more than your vintage beauty.  Like the song says, you don't know what you've got till it's gone.

Long term value is one thing and preference might be another. If you want to stay with the 103, the arm on the Traveller might be slightly better for that but it's still too light.  You'd be better off with an old Empire 208 or similar with a big old heavy arm. A Jelco arm works great with the 103.  You might even be able to fit the 12" Jelco 750L on your 62L, at least the 9" version would fit. 

Roscoeiii's suggestion of adding mass at the headshell will help.  Wasn't there an S arm tube and heavier counterweight with the table?  Or, if you want to be sensible, get another cart, then upgrade your phono stage and put the 103 away till you're set up for that.
neo     

[roscoeiii]

Neobop is a man who knows what he is talking about (far more than me). Here are some other thoughts and tidbits:

You could also pot your 103 in a metal body. Helps with your light tonearm issue by adding weight, and said to also improve the sound (the stock body is a weak point according to many). Zu and Soundsmith sell potted 103s, but you can also get a metal body online and pot it yourself.

As for the 103 with a heavier arm, my neighbor (quietglow on AC) has a 103 LC (similar to the 103R) on a heavy-ass stock arm on his Rek-O--Kut Rondine. Wow, that is a killer combo.

[neobop]

Thanks Roscoeiii, nice of you to say.  Have you ever seen a 62L ?  It's one of the older big tank Denons with a dark reddish brown wood base.  Check out the specs:
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/denon/dp-62l.shtml

244mm eff arm length, S/N 80dB, servo speed control, eggs in your beer.

I reread Ray's orig post, he only has the straight arm tube.  It just screams, high cu carts, line up for audition.  The problem with adding too much mass is the arm tube wasn't designed to handle it.  It could  flex under the weight. It's a removable tube (little knob in front of the bearings), which shouldn't be a problem except no heavier S tube.  This doesn't address the problem of the counterweight probably needing more mass and almost hanging off the end of the stub. 

Ray,
I know the 103 has a cult like following and you have yet to experience that magic on your rig.  Nevertheless, for now, you're better off with a higher cu cart and a phono stage upgrade IMO.  Maybe you can find the S tube and rig up more counterweight mass in the future.  You'd still probably need a little more mass.
Higher cu carts track lighter and usually better.  There are all kinds of carts that would be great on your table including MM/MI/MCs.  In all honesty, you might be able to get away with it, the 103 that is. You never know till you stack pennies on your headshell, get a lead spacer and get a big washer or hose clamp and add to the counterweight.  It just seems like a shame.
neo

[raysracing]

I am a sell to buy kind of guy so I would need to go back to my Ortofon Red and sell my Denon. Love how quiet it us in the grooves versus the Red.

[JackD]

I agree with Neobop about adding too much weight to the headshell.  Also not a big 2M fan.  If you are a sell and buy kind of guy, you might want to look at the Ortofon OM series 20 and up or the AT-150.  Another candidate might be the Denon DL-110, but it might be borderline also.  Neo might have an opinion on whether the Grado's would work and they won't have the hum issue with the Denon motor.  I really like the sound of a Grado body with an 8MZ stylus.

Jack

[raysracing]

Jack and all I put a small lead weight of unknown grams on the head shell and a penny close to the counterweight and I am relistening to albums I listened to last night and some old favorites. I hear much fuller highs like cymbals and that lovely crispness in the saxophone and snare drums. It will drive me nuts looking at the weight and penny though.

[JackD]

Ray

If you want to stick to that combo, then find one of the Shure or Technics weights that go between the headshell and cartridge that you won't see and see if that works.  They are usually about 2.5 grams.  Otherwise if you like that Denon sound and are already setup for LOMC the look at the Denon 301 MK II.

Jack

[neobop]

I didn't think it would be that easy to get it in the ballpark.  Learn something every day. Soundsmith has some heavyweight cart screws, but I'm not sure if they're long enough for your 103.  10mm
http://www.sound-smith.com/screwset/index.html

They would do the trick.  If you're not sure, give them a call they're Denon dealers. 

http://www.lpgear.com/product/STDHDSHWT.html

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-7669-vpi-stainless-steel-headshell-weight-for-jmw-tonearms-3-grams.aspx

A penny weighs 3g.  I don't have an easy solution for the counterweight, at least one that might look acceptable.  Maybe you could get a big washer with a hole big enough to fit behind your counterweight. You'd probably have to machine it or grind it down, it would be too heavy, but that would make it small enough so you wouldn't see it. You could probably find something else like a lamp part or something in a hardware store.  Whatever, fix it to the counterweight or back of the arm so it doesn't move around.  You could even use some of that modeling clay, but the look might drive you crazy.

Eff mass is actually increased by having the counterweight further back and a lighter weight.  The problem with this is less responsive pivot and back of arm performance. It seems like convoluted physics, but every time I've messed like this with arms, it seems like it works out better if the weight is added to the headshell where it directly adds to eff mass, and the counterweight is kept reasonably close to the pivot/bearing.  Unfortunately, according to the 103 crowd, 20 to 25g eff mass is optimal for a stock cart. You'll have to experiment. 
neo

[raysracing]

Results as pictured above have been very favorable. More detail for sure and loads more bass. This all in recordings I know very well. Let me see if I am starting to unravel this. The reason for weighting the tonearm is because the cantilever on a dl103 is stiffer and therefore a lighter eff mass arm the whole arm moves laterally instead of the cantilever?

I don't know the mass of my lead weight so I may order the screws and possibly machine some counterweights. I have access to a mill and materials.

Thanks again and I am enjoying learning about tonearm a.

[raysracing]

I am considering a Sound Smith Otello entry level, but was hoping for some thoughts. It would 100% require selling if my Denon and possibly other things to make happen. What little I have dug up makes it sound like (pun not intended) an Otello is MC like, even Denon MC like. But it is a high to medium compliance cartridge.  TIA,
Ray

[Elizabeth]

One good way to add mass to a sliding counterweight is the drill a small hole in it (underside, tap the hole for a machine screw then you can add weight to the screw.
Hidden, good, can easily change weights, (Keep a variety of screw lengths, and then you can have the screw tiighten up well for different weights added.
I did that with my Denon DP-59L which was missing some of the extra counterweights. worked great.

My Kuzma has set screw openings, (to set for tilt as it is unipivot)  and i used actual bolts into the set screw holes to add mass since the cart combo was 'between' the one/two counterweight pair. Also works great.