Tranfiguration Orpheus description

I have the O in my system right now. I borrowed it from a friend. It does not yet have 100 hours on it, so I will withold judgment on its ultimate performance. So far, in my system, I rather like its sound. It has a good, well integrated and tight bottom end, a touch elevated in the midrange (relative to my Titan), and is a bit shut down at the very top (less "air" than the Titan). Then again, I really have not tried to optimize setup for this cartridge. To change loading in my phono stage, I have to take it apart and solder in different resistors. That is why I am sticking with 1k ohms right now. It is also set at very slightly low (tail down) for VTA. Actually, a friend lent me a custom phono stage that was built specifically for a Helikon and it sounds even better than my stage with the O.

I find it interesting how vigorous is the debate on the relative merits of the O vs. the Z, particularly when everyone's system is so different. When I switched to my friend's stage, the sound was completely different from that of my stage. I really can't see how any phono component can be evaluated other than as part of an evaluation of the complete system.

I've heard so many different, yet all enjoyable set ups to get into a "who's best" kind of argument.

Neil, I nominate Raul to be the host of a comparison meeting. That way we all get a vacation in Mexico and hear some really great reproduction! (Plus we can spend his money on cartridges. :) )

Perhaps I missed it somewhere in Andrew's posts, but was he also running VTA tail down when the 47K loading sounded good in his system? If that's true it seems to contradict the theory that this VTA setting is the culprit.

"I really can't see how any phono component can be evaluated other than as part of an evaluation of the complete system."

This is a very critical point often overlooked and I wholly-heartedly agree with Larry on this.

I too did listen to a host of top flight carts - Urushi, Allearts MC1B, Dynavector Te Kaitora and XX2, and at the end of the day, the conclusion was similar to Positive Feedback's Roger Gordon, who concluded saying "Each of the three cartridges gives a slightly different view of the music, but all three views are equally valid and equally beautiful. I could easily live with any of them."

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/cartridges.htm

Nsgarch wrote:

Oh really? I wonder what Nakatsuka-san would think of a customer who thought him such a sloppy craftsman as to make a cartridge that had to be raked BACKWARD to achieve proper SRA? (to say nothing of the hurt feelings of the tonearm designer!)

I guess a proper comparison remains in the future . . . .

Heh, more blind and incorrect assumptions, Neil. I haven't checked other TriPlanars, but on this one a slightly tail down arm results in a parallel cartridge and vertical SRA. That has been true with Denons, Shelters, Koetsus, ZYX's and now Trannys. We did not and do not play with negative VTA or SRA.

I guess a post from you based on first hand experience remains in the future...

I agree with the point made by Larryi and cmk that cartridge evaluation is part of the complete system.

However, that does not change the fact that some cartridges are quieter, track better, and retrieve more information than others.

Could most of live with a number of cartridges? Probably. If you could choose only one, what are your criteria? Mine are mentioned previously.