Tranfiguration Orpheus description

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

Audiofel,firstly no need to question how I interpreted your post.No offense was taken,either.I got the point!Nsgarsh,thanks,for the compliment.Truthfully though,Audiofel,you should re-read my interpretation of how I pereived the Orpheus,in my friend's set-up.I specifically stated to take any of my comments with a grain of salt,AND they were ONLY specific to what I heard in my friend's set-up.I think if you go back to many of my statements,of late,I am making an attempt to criticise my own componentry,for what they are,too.I have consciously done this,because I think some place ego,and "favorite designer/friend's" ahead of general "shoptalk".I am not accusing anyone here of any of this,though,no doubt some will interpret it as so.BTW,when did I ever question the reputation of the Universe design,as you allude to?The only time I get "ancie" is if I am very familiar with something,and a contrary opinion is stated(fine by me,as I don't feel the need to "have" to be right,but do want to entertain some insight).My reply is to instigate a debate!Nothing has to be definitive.We are all,going to buy what we like anyway! BUT I certainly give creedence to other opinions.That is how I learn,myself,and I will always have alot to gain from other opinions.No need for fights to break out,but confrontation,in a quality heated debate is a good thing.I hope.Too bad we can't have one without "riling up the troops"!
I stand behind my interpretation of the "O",in my friend's system(compared to the "V",in a "quite resolving set-up" too btw),but am happy to hear that there are those who feel there is a clearly better design available in the form of the "UNI",and it makes so many NICE folks happy!Isn't that what matters most?Maybe my own,and my friend's syatems are not up to Doug's.It is all fun,and one reason I like this forum.I NEVER actually mean to be condescending,or all knowing like some,but admit to being "too much",often.The hobby is SO MUCH FUN!!!....That's it!!!!!!
My only disappointment was that,since I am actually interested in both designs,having heard,and liked both,I cannot have some important questions entertained,based on the ground rules set,for fear of giving the wrong signal.Makes me want to retire,from 'gon again.
Best!
Mark

Tim asked:

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?

The Alaap does not have selectable gain, other than choosing between the MM or MC inputs. The MM inputs have a very robust tube gain stage with three tubes per channel. The MC inputs add an FET gain stage before going into the MM stage. Each stage has an independent external power supply. I don't remember the gain figures, perhaps Nick will let us know.

I do know that the MM stage provides so much clean gain that one can play a .2mV Koetsu Onyx Platinum or a .24mV ZYX (.36mV if Nsgarch is correct) with low tube rush and fully ample dynamics. I've heard both of those cartridges through the MM inputs and they rocked the house with no distortion or dynamic headroom issues. Dan_Ed could probably confirm this with his XV-1S. I use the FET inputs to get optimal impedance loading, and it does reduce tube rush to inaudible levels.

On a related note, we're going to have Nick reduce our line stage gain to 9db. The present 15db is too much. I can't turn the gain control knob above 9:30-10:00 without breaking windows. It would be nice to have a less sensitive gain control and to run the line stage tubes nearer their mid-point.

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?

Exactly. That is precisely what we heard. If mechanical vibration is not damped or drained, it will necessarily vibrate the coils at frequencies and phases unrelated to the new signal coming from the groove. Vibrating coils generate signals...

We heard exactly this with the UNIverse a couple of weeks ago, during an abortive tweak-fest. I added a 4g weight atop the headshell, to get effective mass up to what Thom Mackris has found to be optimal. This certainly added weight and bass heft, but it also reflected energy back into the cartridge. Paul instantly heard phase shifted noise, made a face and left the room. It took me a couple of sides, but eventually I had to admit that the induced noise was a bigger penalty than any benefit. (Anyone want a nickel with two mounting holes drilled through it?)

At one of Cello's gatherings, Frank Schroeder was very surprised when a UNIverse/TriPlanar gave his Reference/Olympos a serious challenge. Since he knows from experience that the Reference is a quieter, better damped arm (and it is) he commented that the UNIverse must have exceptional internal damping. He expected to hear a muddied noise floor and/or resonance peaks at frequencies the TriPlanar doesn't control well. These are audible with Shelters and others on a TriPlanar, but not with a UNIverse, which prompted Frank's astute observation. It is an inherently quiet cartridge that doesn't rely on damping by the arm. It's had a similarly black background on every arm I've heard it on.

Sorry for the lengthy explanation and examples, but we made some strong statements about a $5K cartridge and people may reasonably question my constant championing of the ZYX. I felt you deserved as much verification as I could provide.

Doug

P.S. to Mark, I obviously can not and would not question your "O" vs. "V" findings. I have no doubt you and your group heard exactly what you reported. Don't go away! As you said, we're all here to learn together. Without this forum our system would be nowhere. We'd probably still be playing a CD once a month and wondering why music was so unsatisfying. (We'd also have much larger bank balances!)

So sorry(for the traffic involved),but I did go back to my friend,this morning.We listened and played around a bit,with his "O".We both feel that we must have had too much wine,last week!How could we have liked it,SO much?Of course it did not change it's characteristics,one bit,but "now" we don't like it anymore!My friend is going to sell it,and get something new).I think he is going to try to become more influenced by some of these posts,and take things from there.It did not mistrack,played virtually everything thrown at it,to a "fairthywell",had fabulous timbres,harmonics,detail,dynamics(top to bottom),incredible soundstage with depth as good as I have heard.To play it safe,we had a number of other hobbyists,from our little group,give it the "go round" by bringing some of their "torture track" lp's over.I feel sorry for them,as they loved this new Tranny,and did cartwheels.Their own set-ups range from Pipe Dream speakers,BIG Infinities,CJ Art II,the big Maggies,and some other standard and custom equipment,but there must have been something in our brew,as everyone was "flabbergasted" by the performance of the "O".
I am really perplexed,as a potential "serious" buyer,as these are the guys who taught me about the hobby,music,record collecting,equipment,mods,tweaks etc.More than a few actually have contributed "alot" to music journalism,yet I cannot allow myself to believe their "over the top" enthusiasm,for this new Transfiguration,knowing Doug has given it ALL that it can attain.Other than "it was not fully broken in".But no other parameters can be addressed because there was no control over them.So, just, maybe, those parameters could not level the playing field if one was say,going to commit to long term ownership.I'm confused.My pals must,surely,be in the dark,for liking the "O" so much.But none of them are moving to a new cartridge,like me.They are happy with their assortment of Koetsus,Olympos's,Coral Stones,Titan's,"V",s,Benz etc.What could they know,for virtually going "ape-shit" over the "O" in one guys set-up?Maybe the set-up was flawed!
Best!
Mark

Before entering THIS fray, I'll get out my Trio and Sonic Fireworks Albums and listen to them with my lowly Temper W for the qualities Doug describes. In the meantime, and apropos of Doug's stratospheric hearing specs, I ran across this site from the University of New South Wales. All you need is a decent pair of headphones and sound card to test your own amazing hearing ;--):

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/hearing.html

Anyway, I'll listen to both albums as I stare hypnotically at a printout of Doug's comments, and compare my findings with his. Gosh, what if my W turns out to be better than Andrew's O!

This all puts me in mind of the composer Max Reger's reaction to a negative review­­: "I am sitting in the smallest room in my house. I have your review in front of me. Soon it will be behind me."