Tranfiguration Orpheus description

The real reason for the increased output vs. impedance is a new core material (around which the coils are wound). This material was introduced by MySonic Labs' Matsudaira (formerly of Audiocraft) on his Eminent cartridges from a few years back.

One of Ortofon's newer SPU series (which I believe was also designed at least partly by Matsudaira) shares the same core material, and has similar output voltage vs. specs (something like 0.5mV with an internal impedance of 2ohms).

I believe that MySonic Labs shares a builder-craftsman with Immutable, hence the transfer of core materials.

Although the Eminent is highly regarded in Japan, production is very limited, so it may not be well-known in other countries yet.

Incidentally, both the Eminent and new SPU model use a traditional "Ortofon-style" magnetic circuit (with polepieces aka yokes and all), so it is doubtful if the choice of magnetic circuit has much to do with the increased output efficiency.

IOW, give ZYX or other cartridges the same core material and chances are that you'd get similar increases in output vs. impedance efficiency without much redesign effort required at all.

hth, jcarr

Jcarr -- with all due respect, I think you have it all backwards ;--( Here's some technical background for your edification. BTW, the new core material only helps improve the signal to noise ratio, it doesn't increase the output:

The moving coil cartridge has become to be accepted internationally as the ultimate transducer of these and other fine analog recordings. However, despite increasingly sophisticated cartridges being developed there remains a number of aspects that place a ceiling on the quality of the reproduction: the prime cause being the yokes and pole-pieces of the magnet, which focus the field around the coil. The yoke system is unable to focus the full power of the magnet into the coil affecting both the strength and the accuracy of the signal. The resulting distortion inherent in most moving coil designs shows as a high frequency rise, ringing and a high level of both distortion and tracking distortion. There is also a masking of the frequency response, especially in the high range. The inter-relationship of magnetic field and coils is simply too "loose". The magnet and coils are too far apart to be able to capture the very subtlest details. On the other hand, very dynamic passages tend to cause coil saturation, especially if the coils are wound on formers. Increasingly powerful magnets, or special coils, bodies and suspensions, are in themselves no solution.

"Accuracy" defines precisely the ability of a cartridge to recreate the original recorded sound. Greater accuracy provides more of the music - the direct sound, and the myriad of recording environment subtleties that are the intimate detail. Ultimately, a more musical sound. Indeed, it seemed the ultimate moving coil design was already with us. Only to be continuously re-refined.

Design Concept

Now, in these final days of the glories of analog, there is a whole new frontier to the music of recorded music. The great complexity and crudeness of magnetic fields, yokes and coils is replaced by a new concept. The vast and costly magnets, magnetic-field-dispersing yokes and coils suffering variable magnetic influences of all other moving coil designs are replaced by a single assembly.

No yokes
Coils inside the magnet
No magnetic irregularities
Coils at the crux of magnetic focus
Intimate coil/magnet coupling
Low internal impedance
High output
Elegantly simple body design

Technical Features:
• Unique ultra grade SS-µ-metal core for coil assembly. Newly developed ultra grade SS-µ-metal square core increases sensitivity by 35dB, improving the signal to noise ratio and eliminating a usual source of distortion.
• Special 7N copper coils. A newly developed 7N copper wire used in the coils eliminates a common source of distortion and increases transparency.
• Push-pull damping. A special quality compound has been meticulously designed and fabricated to provide total stylus/coil alignment and control. Its non-sensitivity to temperature change keeps the damping co-efficient stable and improves trackability.
• Anti-resonance cartridge body shape. A resonance controlled 'simple' design for lower tonal colouration and a new-generation image.
• Boron cantilever. Newly developed rod for a more natural sound.
• Low mass tip. Ogura PA (3 x 30µm) tip. Its function is to reproduce the character of the original recorded sound - not add or subtract its own deficiencies.
• Ultra tight magnet-coil coupling. The coils are not just close but literally right inside, with coil-magnet proximity of only a few thousandths of an inch. With the precision magnetic field focusing possible only with a ring magnet and superbly accurately wound coils, the ultra tight magnet-coil coupling enables far greater electromagnetic efficiency.
• Dynamic mass minimized and coil saturation eliminated. Much faster, more accurate stylus response to groove formation. Rising dynamics or sharp transients never mask detail.
• Twin coils on cantilever fulcrum. Ultra low dynamic mass and mechanical impedance for instant, accurate reaction to every groove detail, including the ability to handle massive transients without overshoot or break-up.

excerpted from Elusive Disc:

http://www.elusivedisc.com/prodinfo.asp?number=TRANORP

Nsgarsh,firstly,you know I love ya,so don't take me too seriously.
Anyway,alot of your comments,admittedly,are based on conjecture,and from my years in the hobby,I have seen LOADS of "advanced" products sink,like the Titanic.
I have NO doubts that the Orpheus will be a fine performer,but am not convinced it will "meaningfully" outperform the competition,until I hear it.Been down this road,alot!
Let's face it,I am the one who turned my friend on to it,and would not really expect him to spend his cash,if I did not think he would benefit from it.
Also,I AM absolutely ready to try to obtain a unit,and have already spoken with a fine dealer,about this.Should it "clearly" outperform the Temper-V!
I STILL stand by my scepticism,and will be happy to let it pass,if the "O" passes the test.In reality,not on paper.
Please don't take my comments as any sort of a "diss".You know this is all fun,anyway,and I have not had too much of a good time,in the last month,so I need to Pick on You a bit -:)...You can handle it anyway,as you are armed with knowledge.

Best!

That ain't technical background, that's marketing speak :-).

Again, both the Eminent and Ortofon SPU Synergy (you can find these on the cartridgedb.com site) have a 1.8-ohm coil impedance and produce 0.5mV (measured at 5cm/sec). If we apply the sqrt 2 conversion factor (3.54 vs. 5cm) to the coil impedance, we see that putting a 2.5 ohm coil into the SPU Synergy or Eminent would yield 0.5mV @ 5cm/sec. No need for a yokeless magnetic circuit, just a suitable core material (and appropriate coil design) :-).

And FWIW, since the diameter of the coil wire can be either thicker or thinner, you cannot simply look at the coil impedance and deduce that the coil weight is lighter. A higher-impedance coil could be the one that's actually lighter, depending on the coil wire diameter specified.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock yokeless designs (I like them, too). But trying to draw a connection between yokeless and greater efficiency (output vs. impedance) isn't warranted, IME.

regards, jcarr

Jcarr, you're quite right re: the wire diameter used to wind the coil -- after all, the number of windings is directly proportional to the current produced when a coil is moved through a magnetic field. I only was using the impedance spec as a rough indicator of how much wire was actually in the coil (it's weight.) My assumption being that a cartridge maker would employ the thinnest wire he could possibly work with, in order to get the maximum number of turns with the minimum weight.

As for your comment about marketing speak, well say what you like, but the ring magnet concept eliminates several sound-degrading electomagnetic irregularities (as detailed in the above descriptions) that do not attend the ring design which has obvious advantages, both mechanically and electromagnetically. I think the advantages are a reality one can't reasonably avoid.

My contention/speculation or whatever you wish to call it, is that unlike the Colibris, UNIs, Allaerts, etc, the ring concept has a lot of room for refinement, and yet it's already neck and neck performance-wise with the (maxxed out, IMO) conventional designs.

As I stated somewhere earlier in this thread (and as Speedy just commented) I'm not about to put my W up for sale. First I want to sift (for authenticity) through the rave reviews we'll no doubt be hearing from some of our beloved early adopters. Then I'll decide if the Orpheus represents enough of an improvement, or if I should wait for the further development that will undoubtedly take place.

One thing is certain, I won't have egg on my face, or yokes on my tonearm ;--)
.