Tranfiguration Orpheus description

I have finally been able to fully digest your post Doug.My very last response to Audiofeil was, in essence, of a defensive nature.Sorry!
I can only imagine how good a sound system you,and Paul,have put together.Based on the well articulated description of it,by Andrew,it has to be damn good,and revealing enough to be appropriate in this "coil shootout"!
Based on your analysis,and perspective by Paul and Andrew, this new Transfiguration design comes off as almost flawed,to me.Especially at the asking price which is in line with the clearly far superior "UNI".The "UNI" must really be special!Especially once voiced in a set-up that is designed to harbor it,on a permanent basis.I have NO doubt.My own "taste",last Thanksgiving was obviously an appetizer.I am most interested if this new Transfig will get good universal press,as based on what you had to say,it should not.We'll see.
I hope my friend does not read Audiogon,as we thought we were happy,last week.
As I am at a point of considering a new cartridge,this leaves me in a conundrum of sorts.Maybe Cello was right.Do I really have to go for a new arm AND cartridge?Let's see how things shake out!
Though you have pointed to some decent performance aspects of the "O"'s design,I "read" your thoughts as underwhelming,towards it!I would not want to own a design that performed to the level you heard with the "O",regardless of the design it was put against.I can only imagine how poor the Temper-V would have fared,knowing how it is a rung below the "O".If your post was in a major publication I see little reason for any of us to want to acquire the new Tranny over the "UNI".
Be happy,as you have what most of us only strive for.
Best!
Mark

Thanks Doug. Great notes.

Speedy, I was in no way questioning your intelligence. A close read of my post bears this out.

Nsgarch, you're a Tranny owner correct? You might want to check out Doug's notes. I hope you enjoy them.

Mark,

We're still striving but we are indeed blessed, not only with some good mainstream components (which anyone might choose) but mostly by a friend who makes rare and very special preamps and amps for remarkably affordable prices. We have not heard anything better them, at any price, except for Dan_Ed's four-chassis version of the same preamp. (Lucky guy!) Meeting Nick was a huge bit of good luck.

Back to the Orpheus. It is a good cartridge, it will get better with time and those with certain listening preferences could prefer it to an Airy 3 or even a UNIverse. The trick is conciously understanding our sonic preferences before choosing a component.

The Orpheus does nothing obviously wrong, it never steps out of line and it is always satisfying and musical, which is more than I'd say about most other cartridges. (You know how forgiving I am!) The shortcomings we heard were sins of omission, the kind of things you never notice until you hear something better. Rushton, Zaikesman and others told me the same thing about my old c-j PV11 preamp, but I never quite believed them until Nick visited us with an Alaap in tow. Then we understood.

Our guess is that "typical" classical/jazz/acoustic listeners would prefer the ghostly quiet noise floor of a ZYX. This unflappable, jet black background lets colors, textures and sudden dynamic contrasts leap out with an "eery" reality, as Andrew noted. OTOH, the Tranny's somewhat higher noise floor gives it an insistent sort of energy that some rock/amplified music listeners would prefer. Those aren't my preferences so it's harder for me to explain them, but I became an old fart when I discovered classical at age 16 and I'm not getting any younger!

Best,
Doug

Doug,sorry but I cannot interpret what you claim in the O's performance,as "sins of ommission"!Sounds like a bit of a "RIP",at 5500 clams,if you are accurate(95% of it,as stated)."Completely lost" the duality of Dolly and Linda.
Jumping out of the groove,which was handled with aplomb,by the Uni?
"Certain accompanying instruments being smoothed over,and a flawed bass",don't sound too desireable at 5500 clams.

Lets keep going.....Bass that on some stuff,interferes with the "rest of the spectrum".Ommission?What's to omit,but my hard earned cash?I may own a printing/graphic center,but I do NOT print my own money!
More?...."Dynamically flat presenation",on some material,where you heard much better!
Noise floor is not up to "what ZYX users are used to".In need of a Schroeder(possibly),to "tame excess energies".
If you are right about getting "MORE THAN 95% OF WHAT THAT CARTRIDGE WAS CAPABLE OF",it should be pulled from the market!Fast!
I cannot see,from your own comments why this design should get any credible "good press",in the future.Also,I need to get out more,and hear some new systems(or maybe a hearing check-up).
Thanks for saving me some money!Can't wait to see what the mainstream press,or other owners have to say!
Best!
Mark

I take with a large grain of salt most of the comments I read above for those several instances of an Orpheus not having even 100 hours on it If someone tried to convince me that a $5000 cartridge couldn't tell a timpani from a bass drum or Linda from Dolly I'd be skeptical too. (I just played an Emmylou/Dolly/Linda tune and even my poor aging Shelter 901 had no problem timbrally differentiating their voices.)

If your post was in a major publication I see little reason for any of us to want to acquire the new Tranny over the "UNI".

I can appreciate this comment. Major publication reviewers typically use components for several months. And rightly so. First impressions can be telling, but they can also be incomplete. And even when you know a component is still new and not broken-in, it can be difficult not to believe you have its measure. Requiring one live with a piece of gear for a few months helps assure break-in and reduce premature assessment.

One characteristic I find definitely requires time to gauge is the overall balance of a component - its 'Goldilocksness' if you will. Can't be done in a few hours. Indeed that characteristic seemed to be a main point of the review that starts this thread:

it takes some little time until the superior characteristics of the Orpheus make themselves apparent. It is fortunately neither hyperdynamic, nor super-spacious, nor even mega-technicolored. The Transfiguration achieves more in all the named criteria than at least 95 percent of all cartridges, but nowhere does it allow itself the least extravagance.

There is so much paid-for-tout on the forums nowadays and so much investment in expensive gear without audition that I find Judgement requires a certain critical mass to filter the outliers. And its hard to dance well when they're shootin' at your feet. None of this is to question what anyone hears, just to caution the presumption of a verdict based on small evidences and limited groove time - regardles of the karat-weight of the cochleae involved. I like to keep this in mind if for no other reason than respect for the folks who devout their all to creating the products we critique.

I hope my friend does not read Audiogon,as we thought we were happy,last week.

Speedy, your are *so* quotable. :-) The way I read your post about your session with your friend, you were happy and excited about the "O" and felt it was fraught with prospect. Don't let 'em take this away. I suspect the ending of the O-story remains to be writ.

On a different note, two questions for Doug: i) What gain options does your phonstage offer and what gain was in use for your U/O listening session? ii) I think I understand the notion of electronics having a noise floor. In the case of a cartridge, where does noise get introduced? From stylus or external vibrations not getting resolved by a tonearm - a sort of mechanical feedback into the cantilever causing ghost frequencies not originating from the vinyl? (Forgive me if its a dumb question - there's a lot I don't know about cartridges.) And thanks for your writeup!

Tim