Tranfiguration Orpheus description

I wanted to provide some feedback in optimizing my Orpheus set up.

I have tried to further optimize the VTF so far. Recall, I have been running the Orpheus VTF at 1.92g. I suspected this could have been contributing to a slight leaness and brightness. I went up to 1.97 g based on the suggestions of Bc3. This improved things in all ways.

First, the leaness disappeared to a very large extent. The sound became much fuller and smoother without sacrificing detail or upper end extension. In fact, it is more detailed and extended. Most importantly, it has a lot deeper and tighter bass, it now has a very full, smooth and natural mid and treble and has more power and dynamics.

I think this is a lot more what a Tranny is supposed to sound like and I'm enjoying the system even more.

I'll try experimenting with the Boston Mat. I've been told that this tends to brightness. I suspect removing this will make the sound even more natural, romantic but yet detailed and neutral.

Lastly, I'll try some different settings with the VTA. I'm using ~1.3 degrees based on the method proposed by Nsgarch. Before optimizing the VTF, I thought reducing the SRA muddied the bass a bit although it did reduce, but not eliminate, the leaness and brightness. I think the VTF made a much larger difference.

I'm now enjoying a very transparent, detailed, open and clear sound but with very good natural timbre. I think this cartridge really bridges these objectives very well.

Andrew

One more thing I forgot to mention. Soundstaging emroved greatly with the higher VTF.

Andrew

Andrew,I posted this on Raul's Essential thread,but this is a more appropriate place.Could you report back at some time,as to where you finally wind up setting VTA?I am very close to getting my Orpheus,and have not visited my friend,who has one,in a while.
I have no other agenda,other than getting some good input.

Also,I want to take this time to appologize to Doug(and Paul),"for a second time,sadly."I definitley came across as disingenuous,in some of my posts,here.I,truly,did not mean to be mean spirited,but can understand why Doug got ticked off.
It is clear that many of you guys are very decent folks,and based upon Raul's comments,I am ashamed for some of my provocative remarks,made awhile ago.They were actually designed(stupidly) to get as much input about the Orpheus,as possible,and I "really" thought some of you guys kind of knew me already,and would not get so peeved.I was wrong!My real life audio pal's are worse,but we all know eachother for many years,and kind of like all the discourse and banter that follows our listening sessions.Sorry!
I absolutely do not expect any response here!!!!Also,any comments,made by me,after realizing I had ticked off a kindly poster,were made in reflexive mode,as I was a bit surprised(and a bit hurt)Sorry #2!!
This post is,in reality, a "selfish" one,as it is designed to make me feel better,as I don't hold grudges,for long,but am sensitive to other's felings.Like I have stated before...the web-world does not easily show us others' feelings,and it is so easy to be emboldened,to say dumb stuff.I do it ALOT!

Speedy, the 7 or so people I've assisted in following my procedure for establishing zero SRA, have then set their stylus rake angle to a nominal 1.5 degrees (+/_ .20 degree) and found it to yield the best sonics achievable simply using measuring tools and mechanical adjustments. It is possible to refine the SRA (and the sonics) further on a record-by-record basis, the way Doug likes to do, however that requires you have a tonearm that permits easy SRA/VTA adjustments on-the-fly.

I don't have a tonearm that allows me that luxury-cum-obsession, however, it is possible to achieve almost the same results (as adjusting VTA on-the-fly) by increasing/decreasing VTF slightly:

If one normally runs their MC cartridge at the high end of the recommended VTF range say 2gms, then adding or subtracting 0.2 gms won't substantially alter the alignment of the coils in the flux field, but it will change the SRA by a tenth of a degree or more, for high compliance cartridges like van den Huls, somewhat less for Transfiguration, Dynavector, ZYX and other low-to-med compliance designs.
.

Andrew,

Your increase in VTF (1.92 to 1.97) had sonic effects that would be similar on our cartridge, or maybe any cartridge. A slight increase in overall heft, sturdier bass, less edginess in highs. Those are fairly normal effects when you move from near the mistracking point to very slightly higher.

A spot some few hundredths of a gram above the mistracking point is the sweet spot for every LOMC we've used. On a UNIverse the spot is about .02-.04g above the mistracking point. Apparently on an Orpheus it's about .05g above the mistracking point. Different suspensions, different results, but not by very much.

We're obviously both splitting hairs to maximize the performance of extraordinarily sensitive and responsive cartridges. As Raul observed during his visit here, we play right on the edge. Our bass was a touch light at one point so I replaced a thick O-ring with a thin one, increasing VTF by about .02g. He was fairly amazed at the audible improvement from such a tiny adjustment. This degree of nuttiness is the only way to get the most from these cartridges, at least in our experience.

BTW, don't think that just because it sounds perfect at 1.97g today that it will do so forever. That kind of stability will probably never happen. Weather will change it. Amount of use or lack thereof will change it. We often find ourselves reducing VTF by .02-.03g after the cartridge warms up from playing several sides. The sweet spot is always a moving target.

You're right that VTF must be absolutely spot-on before you can truly optimize VTA/SRA. Doing that by ear requires listening for:

a) the integration or timing of fundamentals vs. harmonics (what Frank Schroeder and I hear) or,

b) the quickest rise/fall times and greatest amplitudes of individual notes, especially bass notes (what Paul hears).

Best,
Doug