Shure M97xe/Jico SAS vs. Denon DL-110 findings

My Shure M97xe with Jico SAS was piling on the miles and I wanted to try/compare a new cartridge before it was past its best.


Reading around the Denon DL-110 sounded promising and good value, and also a little different with its MC-ness and supposed ‘broadcast’ nature.

The only concern I had was its compatibility with my MM phono stage (Graham Slee Gram Amp 2). More reviews/experiences indicated default compatibility with MM stages than not so I took the plunge.


For clarity the set-up is:


- Rega RP3
- Graham Slee Gram Amp 2 phono stage
- 0.5m QED Performance interconnect
- Cambridge Audio 840A v2 amp
- Castle Howard S1 speakers


After a few months with the 110, and then switching back to the M97/SAS for some days, then again back to the 110, then back to the M97 these are the findings:


1. The 110 seemed initially very bright! I tweaked the VTA to the least bright variation (2.0g), as well as finding the best alignment, and gave it settling time. Given a week or so it did settle a little, and/or I just more used to it

2. Had to turn the amp way up with the 110 to get equivalent volume as the M97 – I was expecting this anyway. Thankfully it still ran dead quiet, even at unprecedented volume settings! I did wonder what would be possible with a much less powerful amp though.

3. Overall the 110 lacked the bottom/mid fullness of the M97/SAS. It doesn’t seem scooped-out there as such, but has a softer belly to its sound – not the solid, rhythmic undercurrent. When going back the 97/SAS you realise again how it’s just not there in the 110.

4. The 110’s treble really seemed to shine though. Borderline too much, but just under. Not that the 97/SAS seems in any way treble-deficient (certainly not in the way that the 97 with standard stylus did – really quite rolled-off at the top), but the higher end in the 110 just sings. It’s especially apparent in acoustic guitars, where the strings have never sounded so alive, real, and present. Loved it at times.

5. The 110’s soundstage does indeed sound more ‘broadcast’. The 97/SAS casts a very strong, cohesive soundstage, but the 110 has a way of producing instruments and notes from places you almost don’t expect them. This could go from seeming rather magical to almost surreal, depending on the material. Probably less natural overall, but very likeable in its own way.

6. All that said, I’m pretty convinced that the 110’s abilities are hampered/skewed by my phono stage. I’ve since read again that a standard 47k loading will render the 110 bright, and that’s essentially what was found. I don’t really know how the 220 pf capacitance would affect it also.

7. The 110 still sounded fantastic and some might prefer that brighter sound (even if it’s perhaps not running optimally), but listening to it I miss the fullness I know isn’t there, or at least prefer.

8. So I’ll probably stick listening to the 97/SAS for now but will definitely hang on to the 110, especially as I intend to get an adjustable phono stage next (whenever) and can experiment with this and other carts.

Further: no tracking or IGD issues at all with either cart/stylus.

Rob

 

Nice write up Rob, thanks! I have my 110 going through the MM input on my VLPS-II, the only cart I can compare it to was my old AT120e which was substantially brighter, but again it may be due to my phono pre, not sure as I cannot change/adjust loading, I will be a repeat buyer of the Denon 110, as i'm happy with all my needledrops from this cart and I don't want to re-do them all,lol

 

I have the stock 97xe, the SAS I have'nt tried (yet). I'd think that the shure SAS should be able to outdo the 110 though- it sounds like that's what you found.
Its the Denon 103 that was designed for Broadcast I think, not the 110. The 103 has a flatter response. I have the 103 the 110 and the 301. The 110 is the brightest of the lot, as you found. I'd call its sound tonally slightly dry, detailed and bright- the treble lift is common among High output coils. I think The 103 is the better of the bargain Denon's but you need MC transformer or MC stage.

 

Your description matches my own experiences with the similar DL-160 and M97xE. I personally prefer the M97xE's fullness over the Denon's wide stereo imaging and treble extension, although both carts do have their own unique trade-offs.

I messed around with the resistive loading on the Denon and never could quite get it to sound 'right' to me, and eventually sold it.

 

Yes, a very good description, Rob, I can follow everything you say. My experience is with a DL-160 like action pact. The brightness isn't really a problem for me/my setup (I love the MC HF extension), but I was missing a taut bottom end with proper slam like I'm used to with MM cartridges.

The original Gram Amp 2 (not the current SE) has 38 dB gain I believe, which is a bit low for the Denon as you've found. The SE's 41 dB would be an improvement, around 44 dB even better. You can also load it down from 47k to 1-2k to give it some more body (going lower will require even more gain - some people prefer to run it into an MC input with 100 Ohms and 55-60 dB gain). Capacitance would be of secondary importance.

 

You need about 7db extra gain to get the level of that Denon cart to match the Shure. That's just the beginning to allow a side by side audition.

 

Considering that he had these mounted to the same arm, its not like A/B comparisons were remotely possible though. So how would this have helped?

 

That drastic of a level change at the input of a phono pre, without compensating with gain, messes with the tonal balance and imaging. I don't know why. Wish I did. But I have listened to my preamp and a tube unit with cart changes and been astonished how bad a MM preamp does when a MC is fed into it and makep gain was applied in the chain after the preamp unit.

 

Thanks c-eling. I'm glad the 110 is clearly working for you, and can imagine how nicely it must sound when properly dialed-in, based on my assumptions here. Do have a link to any of your needledrops from it at all?

 

Oh ok. I kept seeing the broadcast reference made to the 110 also, but perhaps it's not the case. Thanks for the info!

 

Here's one I did a couple weeks ago, If you want a raw 24/96 sample I'll post one from Eurythmics Greatest Hits I just re-did today, or not your taste let me know

 

Yeah sounds like a ditto kind of situation, and interesting if you had the same findings despite twiddling around with the resistive loading. It really did make me realise how much I love the M97/SAS sound...

Thanks Antares. As you say, and as per action pact, it's almost a shame you never quite found that bottom end in your 160s as I was thinking it might be there in the 110 when I eventually get an adjustable phono stage. If you could just keeep that magic HF world and match it with more lower oomph. And indeed the Gram Amp SE does actually say suitable for HOMC carts... I really do need to learn more about loadings, gain, etc, to be able to get the most out of this business!

 

Nice one, thanks. That did sound good, and certainly not too bright, but that said a) I'm not familar with that song!; b) only listening to it through the laptop speakers at the moment... if you could link to the Eurythmics one it would be great thanks - especially as I have their Greatest Hits on vinyl anyway. Cheers

 

The top end sounds good. Need more mids and bottom.

 

I agree, I think this album was all digital, it may be in the master, or not

 

Here's Angel
https://www.dropbox.com/s/al1paw71i4k51kq/Angel samp.wav

 

Really, the top end sounds very good. I was just bouncing yours off of this

 

I've compared the DL-110 to the Shure M97xE with Jico on a Technics SL1200 KAB upgrades. They are both very nice for the $. One thing to note the Denon handles surface noise better than the M97xE. The Denon is a different flavor and I think it really excels well with jazz recordings. The M97xE is better in "fullness" in mid fullness as noted, maybe better for Rock/Hard Rock. A lot depends on the mastering obviously and the Denon can also thump really well in the bass regions too like the M97 if given the right source material.

I am not hearing the bright sound as others have mentioned. My phono pre is internal (Luxman Integrated L505u) with 7Es3 Harbeths. Good match IMO.

After using primarily the Shure for several years, the Denon has been a welcome change.

 

Interesting topic. Just this week, I benched my Denon DL-110 (which I've owned for over a year) in favor of a Shure M91ED. I think the Denon's needle was wearing down; I'm easily long past the "500 hours" lifespan for these things. In addition, I recently bought a used Pro-Ject Tube Box SE II, and lemmie tell ya, Denon and Pro-Ject do not get along. At all. MM (47k) setting was too thin and bright; MC (100) was too cramped and noisy. And so I turned to my old Shure, which benefits greatly from the Tube Box's capacitance loading. I am really quite impressed with how this humble cartridge has performed these past few days.

ProTip: if your phono stage allows for increased capacitance, grab a Shure M91ED for $20. You may be surprised. I may purchase a $133 Jico SAS stylus and make this cart my new "starting QB."

Anyway, the DL-110/160 carts have their strengths, like the deep soundstage, but loading is critical, and greatly depends upon your phono stage. They seem to perform best with vintage stereo receivers, whose phono stages are rolled off at the top (my Marantz 2235b phono stage only goes to 15kH).

As always, everything comes down to personal taste. Whatever makes you love the music is right for you. Ignore everything else.

 

Nice, lots of air on top. I am not familiar with this album, but really the best I have heard Plant, as far as vocal quality. I am curious how this would sound with the M97 SAS. I have a stock M97 on hand, and honestly like my stock M95 far better with the stock hyper-elliptical stylus.
I am listening through Sennheiser HD420 SL headphones on my HP 2000 laptop.

 

A brief PS on this...
It dawned on me, recently, that the amp has tone controls (essentially had it on ‘Direct’ from the outset) so stuck the Denon back on and upped the bass. Subtly but notably: all the sparkly HFs remain, but now with more lower-mid-range presence and that additional, necessary, LF oomph. It doesn’t feel quite the pure way to do things (in the way that finding optimal loading would), but all the same it sounds quite wonderful...

 

I'm running an M91ED with an SAS, and it's very nice. I also purchased an EVG N91ED replacement stylus on eBay for $14 shipped, which sounds way, way better than it should for the price, but's not as nice as the SAS! The EVG is the standard elliptical replacement manufactured by Jico making it one of the best audio deals out there.

 

In some ways I prefer the EVG to the SAS on the M91ED (and V-15 III, for that matter). The EVG has richer mids and more "energy," and the SAS is able to extract tons of detail, but it's slightly forward on the top end.

 

I agree, they sound fuller, but are a little more etched on the high frequencies. Plus the soundstage is much larger on my system with the SAS, and the highs are smoother.

I must add that I'm using an SAS Stylus-1 from my Jico MM1 cartridge, which has a little different form factor than the exact replacement for the N91ED. The alignment is almost identical, maybe a .5 mm difference.

 

I wonder why the price of the DL-110 has almost doubled recently? I bought one from Amazon for $120 just a few months ago, and now it is almost $300...is the diamond market affecting production?