VAS Ebony Mono Denon DL-102 103 Shure SC35C Thomas Schick

NY Diary (19-22): 4 Low Compliance Cartridges
VAS Ebony 103 Mono
Shure SC35C, Part III
Denon DL-102, Part IV
Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12", Part II
Talk Vinyl - Mono Replay V
Talk Vinyl - 12" Arm vs 9" Arm, Low vs High Impedance

Shure SC35C, Part II
Denon DL-102, Part III
Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12", Part I

Evaluations in this article are largely based on a simple system (with one important detour): Thorens TD-124/Thomas Schick 12" arm into Parasound JC3 Phonoamp (mono button engaged) into Linear Tube Audio MicroZOTL 2.0 driving my YL horns. This article features 4 low compliance cartridges  that supposedly work best on heavier arms.

When I got back my Thorens TD-124 with Thomas Schick 12" arm I started to revisit the Denon DL-103 and derivatives (the VAS being one). This has been something I have been looking forward to, because the low compliance Denon DL-103 is regarded by some as only suitable for heavier arms (I happen to disagree, as I have always gotten great results on lower mass arms, Rega or even the ultra-light SME 3009i). But I suppose using a heavier arm in evaluation confers more legitimacy.

THE MONO SESSIONS

VAS Ebony 103 Mono Cartridge

I have previously written here and there about the excellent VAS cartridge rebuilds (here), including my own Koetsu Black and Denon DL-301 Mk II. I have also reviewed the excellent stereo  VAS Ebony 103 (here), which actually plays mono LPs extremely well. This time around, it is the stablemate mono version of it. It is the same exact cartridge as mentioned in the Official Info.

After briefly testing it out on my Pioneer PL-10 (light arm), to very good effect (better than my one-of-a-kind Rao's mono MC), I got sidelined by other projects and articles. But installation on the heavier 12" Thomas Schick arm was an eye opener. It simply played everything I threw at it superbly.

Jazz on a good mono cartridge is a given, and so it was with the VAS. I dug out my tattered copy of Garner Encores (Columbia 6 Eye, which I previously wrote about here) and it sounded simply fabulous, better than ever. It literally rolled on, and I played both sides. I have always not understood why Erroll Garner is not better regarded. In Johnny Hodge's Joe's Blues (Verve), the varied styles and colors of the brilliant personnel were superbly captured (more below).

The shorter cantilever means a sharper attack and fast transient time and good PRaT, but that doesn't always benefit classical's. No need to worry, the VAS played my mono classical albums magnificently. I have always regarded late period mono records as excellent sounding. Bruno Walter's mono NYPO recordings (Columbia) belong to this camp. Brahms Symphony No. 2 was alternately lyrical (those singing strings!) and majestic, not at all inferior to his stereo Columbia Symphony remake. Similarly, Julius Katchen's Prokofiev 3rd (Decca) was crisply detailed and the piano sound was a delight (Ansermet's partnership goes without saying). If a cartridge can get the best out of both strings and piano, it is in already in the top echelon. Even Furtwangler's earlier low-fidelity Berlin recordings had more air about them than usual.

Denon DL-103 Plays Mono Given that the VAS mono cartridge is a tricked out Denon DL-103, I decided to listen to the same records using the progenitor. Well, there really was no comparison. Immediately noticeable was how much quieter the mono cartridge is. With the DL-103, instruments were not as full bodied and strings and brass had less sheen, and sometimes just a little coarseness creeps in (this is after all a solid state phonostage). I didn't listen that long.

Denon DL-102 Mono cartridge
Swapping in the Denon mono cartridge proved quite illuminating. For a moment, it seemed I was listening to the VAS again. Blacker background and much steadier and full-bodied replay. But! The VAS was definitely a little faster in transient and this made for telling differences on Joe's Blues. The organist Wild Bill Davis had a distinctive style; he often made his phrases undulate wildly in dynamics; sometimes the effect strangely was almost like a portamento. VAS brought that out fully, whereas with the Denon it was less obvious. With the VAS, I think I could identify Davis in a blind test, but with the Denon I'd not be so sure (Jimmy Smith?), you see what I mean. The VAS also definitely made the colors of the horns and guitar more individualistic. This kind of superb microdynamic performance is uncommon, and it is what I really value as a listener, to feel the touch (or breathing) of the performer.

With the classical tracks, the differences were there, but minimized. In the Brahms, with the VAS the strings sounded more ethereal (important in this symphony), but the tutti were no less stirring with the Denon; as a matter of fact, I felt compelled to finish the record! On the Decca LP, it was apparent the voltage of the Denon was a notch down, but still very satisfying.

Detour: Onto the Technics SL-1200
I then wanted to get some insight into the contribution of the turntable. So I switched to System II, (see sidebar): The Technics SL-1200 Mk II is connected to the Aurorasound Vida phonoamp, then to the Shindo Monbrisson preamp, which then drives the same LTA MicroZOTL 2.0 amp and YL horns. I could have connected the phonoamp directly to the LTA but I could not be bothered as I know very well the system's sound and hi-end credentials, using the LTA or not (with LTA here).

Denon DL-102 As expected, the Direct Drive turntable upped the jump factor, but is slightly granier. The Decca disc gained traction and excitement and the piano tone was more chiseled, though here and there the scrawniness of the strings were somewhat exacerbated (they were present on the Thorens too; don't forget this is an FFSS record with a different curve from RIAA). The same increase in urgency also informed the Brahms and Joe's Blues. VAS Ebony Mono Exactly as on the Thorens TD-124, VAS immediately proved more accomplished. Just as with the Denon, there was more jump factor, but this different front-end revealed the VAS' virtues just as well as the other. Wild Bill Davis played in exactly the same inimitable way, wild indeed! In Brahms, the lyricism of the string playing was just as evident. Although the Technics was not as nuanced as the Thorens TD-124, it still managed to show to a considerable extent everything the VAS was capable of (the corollary is, the VAS played nearly as well on the Technics as the Thorens, no small achievement). I was so delighted I plowed on with other classical LPs. Edwin Fischer's Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 20 with the LPO (Pathe) is not quite as well recorded as the other two, but it was just as musically rewarding. The legendary Fischer's piano playing goes without saying, but the setup clearly revealed also his beautiful pointing of the orchestral lines as conductor - a little tug here, a little emphasis here that lifted the accompaniment out of the ordinary, even more potent than that provided by Philharmonia/Krips on the reverse side. The VAS made the musician's intent very clear, and there cannot be higher accolade. Even with much dimmer older material, the music was still engaging, as shown by Kreisler's Brahms Violin Concerto with Berlin Staatsoper/Leo Blech (from 78's; Dacapo), where Kreisler was just magnificent. This cartridge plays everything with insight.

Mono Appraisal

• The Subject of (MC) Impedance Before I begin my appraisal, I'd like to digress a little on the subject of impedance, as it'd have some bearing on how I judge things (down below). Currently, low impedance MC cartridges, in mono even more than in stereo, are all the rage. This is because the high end has been making stereo low impedance MC cartridges for a long time, whereas their mono counterparts did not emerge until the more recent Mono Revival. This makes the offerings in this article anomalies. Indeed, the two ancient Denon's qualify as cultural relics, which makes the VAS an updated relic. :-) The lower the impedance, the lighter the coil, the fewer windings, and a more powerful magnet, but also a lower output. But lest you think this formula automatically leads to good sound, I can assure you this is not the case. Most of the high end companies produce low impedance stereo MC cartridges, but many to me are just bland (ZYX, many Lyra, Clearaudio, even many of today's Ortofon's, to name a few). I do think in general modern low impedance mono MC cartridges do better, partly due to the simpler requirements and the richer and more focused sound of mono. Impedance is not everything, as cartridge design is the art of manipulation of a limited few parts; the choice of material influences the sound just as much. Going back to high impedance MC designs, don't mistake me for favoring this approach. It just happens that some of my favorites belong to this group. The Denon DL-103 certainly (but also the DL-301 Mk II and DL-304; and the lovely Benz Micro Gold also has highish impedance). Of course, the high-output MC's by nature have high impedance and some can be good (Denon DL-102; I am also fond of the Denon DL-110; and several high output Dynavector's have serious repute); let us also not forget the inimitable Decca cartridges (not MC, in its own category), which I love. But high impedance MC can also be a disappointment too: witness my recent experience with the Hana SL (here), so you can bet I shall never consider their mono versions. As they say, the devil is in the details, and good sound is all in the implementation.

• Mono Replay There is no question that, should you have a fair number of mono LPs, you should consider getting a mono cartridge - it makes a great difference. The much quieter experience is priceless. Contrary to the erroneous perception of most audiophiles, though mono the soundstage is wide and images are well defined and fleshy. With these modern mono cartridges you also get the additional benefit  of being able to play bad stereo records with aplomb! In these I echo the feelings of Philip Holmes cited in my Denon DL-102 link.

• VAS vs Denon The difference between the VAS Ebony Mono and Denon DL-103 is instructive, but not unexpected. The heavier coil of the Denon (around 10x the output of the VAS) and its conical stylus (VAS is hyperelliptical and shorter) could go some way towards explaining the difference in sound. The most gratifying thing is the similar way they serve the music. The most interesting thing is that the VAS has character traits (fast transient, microdynamics) that are usually associated with low impedance MC's! I shall greatly miss the VAS when it's gone, but I could live with the Denon, as it is like a VAS with a somewhat broader stroke, but with its heart in the right place.

• VAS in Perspective How does VAS stand in the crowded modern MC Mono field? Other than my venerable Denon DL-102, I have no modern offerings to directly compare. Although I can't tell you directly, I do have a bit of experience listening to some highly regarded ones in others' systems (Miyajima Kotetu and Zero here; Ortofon Quintet Mono here; both systems I know well and are good sounding). Let us first do some spec comparisons. Magnet I am not sure what magnets the Miyajima's or the Ortofon use, but the VAS (Denon) uses high quality Alnico, something usually found in more expensive cartridges. Impedance Miyajima's and Ortofon are all low impedance designs; in contrast Denon is high impedance. See my first bullet for more. Stylus Like Denon DL-102, both Miyajima's employ conical stylus, though interestingly more recent Kotetu's are now Elliptical (likely market demand outweighing designer's intentions, as even Ortofon SPU's now entertain all kinds of stylus profiles!). The Ortofon Quintet Mono is Elliptical and the VAS is Hyperelliptical. Sound? Well, if I have to extrapolate, I'd think the VAS Ebony Mono shall likely easily stand up to the Kotetu and Ortofon; in fact I suspect it as having more finesse and articulation. I cannot be sure about the Zero, but I'd relish a chance to find out! Some of you may object to this as an ungrounded wild guess, but I'd like to say it is an educated guess, so let me tell you my reasoning. The Miyajima's and Ortofon in question, being low impedance, of course did well in force and touch and certainly I heard that! The VAS does brilliance too, but it also does subtlety, and these two are not commonly found together even in expensive cartridges! I did not hear that aspect of excellence in the other two, but then they were not played in my system so I cannot be entirely sure. Even if based solely on what I heard in my own system, the VAS strongly merits consideration by anyone interested in a reasonably priced mono MC cartridge with truly hi-end sound. I (and a legion of others, including industry people, like the late Verdier, of Platine Verdier fame) have always thought of the unique, iconoclastic and idiosyncratic Denon DL-103 as an excellent cartridge with a sound of its own that is competitive with many more expensive cartridges, including the now-popular low impedance types. VAS, being a rebuild service, surely knows the sound of an unbelievably wide spectrum of cartridges, and, judging by its rebadged Denon offerings, certainly knows the evergreen classic Denon DL-103 inside-out. Some of its tweaks, like the shorter cantilever and hyperelliptical stylus to counter-balance the higher coil weight and impedance of the original, are, in my opinion, brilliantly applied, surely the result of many trials and errors!

STEREO SESSIONS

Shure SC35C Cartridge, Part III
Previously, I wrote about this wonderful and rather unsung cartridge (link above). What irks me, and Shure fans, is that Shure had regrettably ended their cartridge operation since then, sign of a company that does not respect its own tradition. Now, we can only pray for a resurrection, but don't get your hopes up. Meanwhile, prices for old stock and used items have risen quite a bit!

This low compliance cartridge also should (with caveats) benefit from a heavier arm, which I didn't previously have. And so, with great pleasure, I plugged it (with the stock stylus) into the Thomas Schick. The result? Very good indeed.

On the Schick, it showed its mettle as a studio transcriber. Absolutely neutral and even-handed, with a full but tactile bass. So, what was the difference from my references? On Ansermet's Chabrier album (London) everything was in place, but missing just a little the swagger the humble Denon DL-103 MC can bring on. Similarly, on Persuasive Percussion's Misirlou track (Command Classics), the sinuous quality was not quite there. For us classical listeners, this has always been the case in MM vs MC, no exception, no matter what a reviewer says. But, one of the best MM cartridges, for sure. I kinda doubt my various V-15's would sound better. This round, I didn't play with the various styli I have, but perhaps I should!

Denon DL-103 Initially, on the Thomas Schick, I was using a Midas (aluminum shell) DL-103 (see link above), but for this article I shifted back to the stock version. While the heavier shell and the heavier headshell it was installed in theoretically profer an advantage, somehow I still narrowly prefer the stock one installed in a generic light shell. And for microdynamic expression, particularly at the leading edge, it proved better than the MM Shure.

12" Arm vs 9" Arm
Previously, writing about the Thomas Schick 12" Arm (here) I made several remarks: 1) it is not "slow" as I have heard many 12" arm setups to be; 2) a good 9" arm is still faster. This round, even if I am not using a 9" arm, I still concur fully with what I wrote.

The Thomas Schick is a pretty neutral arm, and I don't hear colorations. Whether it was the Denon DL-103, Shure SC35C or the Denon DL-102, the tonal balance on the Thorens TD-124 is much the same as on my other turntables (Thorens TD-309, Technics SL-1200, Audio-Technica AT-PL120). The difference is in the background, a little cleaner and darker, not as dramatic as going from a stereo cartridge to a mono cartridge on mono replay, but is there nonetheless. Going from a 9" arm to a 12", no matter what cartridge, the music becomes a little less lively. I had a long talk with Andy, and he feels the same. Interesting, though we are in the same ballpark, he is a person who likes things a little smoother than I, but he does think there is not much advantage to the 12". Most of his arms are 9" (though heavier and of more repute than the humble ones that I have).

The biggest difference I think is found with the MM Shure SC35C. Previously I absolutely marveled at the sheer grunt of this cartridge, particularly with rock material (see link above), but on the 12" arm it kind of "grew up" into a respectable transcriber. For sure, whatever little grit it had in the treble when mounted on the direct-drive AT was now completely smoothed out, but the killer bass had also been trimmed a little, and I kinda miss a little the former excitable nature (Andy would definitely differ from me here). Part of it has to do with the turntable too, I am sure. Also, for my taste, from the previous proceedings, despite the heavy weight and high output of the MC Denon DL-102 (usually on my Technics direct-drive), it didn't gain from being on the 12" Schick.

On the other hand, the MC Denon DL-103 just may have benefited a little from the 12" arm. In stock form, or even with an aluminum shell, with lesser records it can sometimes still have a bit of coarseness in the treble. This is minimized, but not eradicated, by the 12" Schick.

All of this may lead me to install some of my other cartridges on the Schick. I suspect the 12" arm benefits MC's more than higher-output MM's. It is about time I listen to my various Ortofon's (MC-3000 Mk II, 5000; Kontrapunkt C) In due time, perhaps during the holidays?

The calming nature of the 12" arm should not be exaggerated. We are talking about quite subtle aspects of reproduction here! What I am talking here is unlike what I previously found in HK, where many 12" setups just plainly sounded slow (sometimes excruciatingly so), even staid, but I think that was because of the ancillary gear that they use. Many are vintage aficionados who use vintage equipment, which could slow down the sound if partnered improperly with a wrong front-end or loudspeaker. More, damaging is that, down to the last one, an Ortofon SPU is used. This (12" + SPU) is like a ritual in HK, probably in Asia! Certainly, in Japan, most phono setups use either the Denon DL-103 or SPU and most of the phonoamps are configured for them. I concede the SPU is rich sounding and pleasing on vocals in particular, but it is seriously colored and lacking at the leading edge, with subpar microdynamics. Used well, it could still be quite good. Setup skills is important in all cases.

In this hobby, balance is not what everyone seeks; some are addicted to having more and more of the same colorations. If we use Zero as the ideal, +/- 5-10, say, would be acceptable to me (Andy then will be +/- 2-5), but certainly not +/- 20 or more! But the holiday is coming up, and we all surely should relax our standards and enjoy more music, and the friednship of our fellow audiophiles (even if they deviated greatly from the norm)!