Tranfiguration Orpheus description

Surprised me too, which is why I remembered it and mentioned it... I suspect it is a combination of ability to track and no saturation. System was fairly modest and at a local dealer: all Quad electronics, the new (Chinese) tall Quad speakers, Basis 2200/Vector. He also had the new Airtight cartridge (I believe this is built by My Sonic, but Mr. Miura of Airtight was very involved in the design), which was also wonderful and could do this too, however, that system was much more money (SME 30, Avalon Diamond Eidolon, Wavestream electronics mostly).

Partly related, in response to ngarsh's discussion of resistance/output, I think much is due to the new coil former material. Immutable claims that the coil former itself is responsible for some gain in output. Perhaps jcarr could verify whether this is possible, though it makes sense. I know one of the drawbacks of the theoretically great idea of the ruby coil former in the Benz Ruby/LP/Cardasheart was the fact that without any magnetics, they have to use a bunch of windings to achieve a usable output. Yes, he avoids eddy currents, the moving mass is exceedingly low, but internal resistance is fairly high. The earliest ruby's from Benz (1.8mV ?) were wonderful, but needed a lot of phonostage oompf and quiet. If my years of listening to tube amps taught me anything, it was that magnetics are THE most important thing...acrosound, peerless...to today, with the tango, tamura and viva transformers, using permalloy and amorphous core materials. This was the reason for the big initial jump in performance, I think, when the W arrived, as it got some of it extra output (according to Immutable) from the new coil former material (the V originally used permalloy). Later (post 2004) V's switched to this material too, bringing output up from .25 to .34, with no change in internal resistance. This also brought the V back to a position of expected sonic superiority (very slight) over the W (given the right phonostage), which the W had held before the change. Just like the apparent edge that alnico seems to hold over other magnets...hard to explain, but easy to hear (sweetness of the big Dynavector, the Olympus from Lyra (this only by hearsay...), the phy-hp drivers...)

Subtle/not subtle? I would say that the improvements in most of the categories of performance I mentioned are relatively subtle (except macrodynamics). Also, upon first listen, the difference is relatively subtle, because the Orpheus is a more subtle/refined/natural sounding cartridge, but, the sum of all those subtle improvements brings about a very un-subtle net effect in terms of musical and emotional connection. You will see/hear.

nope, not Eddie...

Bc3 -- everything I've read about the Tranfg. coil former material speaks of a 35dB increase in sensitivity:

"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."

So far I've not read anything that indicates it actually increases the (voltage) strength of the output signal. Though I suppose a better S/N ratio might increase the "perceived" output?
.

I am just not sure on this. To me, the output voltage increase on the V, when all that changed was the core seems some evidence of this. You are correct, though, on the Orpheus, that they have also increased magnet strength, as well as going to "ss-u-x" (whatever that is...) material for core, so that windings could be reduced from even the V. Listening outcome is, indeed, better S/N...sounds quieter in the groove and there is definitely more low-level resolution. Again, one could say objectively that the improvement is subtle, but there is a definite increase in "musical" as opposed to audiophile detail. Harmonic and spatial (venue space) clues that you often do not notice, but are part of live listening experience.

However, I must defer on technical aspects of whether core materials can increase electrical output. I only know from the ironless Benz cores that they can decrease it.

Either way, they have come a long way now from the AF-1 in terms of usable output. Also, the top end of the Orpheus now surpasses that of the AF-1, whereas one might still have argued that the V and W did not. The AF-1, at the time a major breakthrough, was also nowhere near the newer cartridges in correct timbral and dynamic areas. Still, it was the first time I heard a human voice on LP that sounded "real"...funny how those firsts stay with you. Like the first time I heard Quad 57's, or Klipschorns, or the big SoundLab's.

Doug,thanks SO much,for the kind words.Much appreciated!You are a great guy.Sorry I like the 2.2 better than the "Tri"-:)
However that won't excuse you(I'm still "me").I stated doing piccolos at "volume,consistently,from disc to disc!C,mon!!Sorry,but maybe I need to actually take a trip to Conn,because it's a toughy,for me to swallow.Just kidding!I really do believe you.
BTW,this "Nick Doshi" guy must be special.I could swear he was a chef,at "Benehana" when I was last there.-:)

Bc3,I think the Temper-v,of old,you refer to was the Temper Supreme.A very nice design,so I thought,until the "V" made it's presence felt.Your observations are interesting BUT,all this on a dealer's set-up???
HMM?-:)

Try Tchaikovski's 4th, 3rd movment. This is the solo that strikes fear in the heart of piccolodeum. Only 21 notes at forte, but they require delivery in a scant three seconds. Done at volume with proper tonal inflection and nary a whiff of smearing nets a check in the plus column for the system that can.