Tranfiguration Orpheus description

Anti-skate and azimuth are both very important with the Transfig styli. I have found the Orpheus likes to run a little bit heavier (1,95-2,0g.) than the Tempers, though I agree that 1.87 is exactly where I ended up with them. I would also try 100 ohms loading, as the cartridge is a bit better balanced there.

Bc3,glad you mentioned this.The distributor told my pal to run at 2.0 gms.I felt this should be a bit too high,without checking other weights,but was going to check all forces,starting at 1.8 gms,and moving up,from there.TIME CONSUMING,but mandatory!!The loading interests me,as I DID have my "V" at 60 and 100 for a time,but wound up liking dynamics and freq extremes better at 47!Maybe the "O" will want a different setting.OK by me.
Best!

All,

I've been playing around with an Orpheus lately. It only has about 80 hours on it. I thought it was a lot more but it isn't. Therefore, I believe my observations are on a cartridge that isn't fully broken in.

It certainly sounds extremely clear, transparent, clean and open. This is probably the best way to describe it. In this regard it sounds exceptionally neutral. As a result, it doesn't sound "musical" like maybe a Koetsu or Benz does nor does it have the highest level of natural timbre. I would also say that it has a slight edge and would say that this is likely break-in related. It is getting smoother as time goes on. Therefore, it might become more "musical" or natural to the degree that the Temper is known for with full break-in. I will let you know if that is true.

I did find the cartridge sounds it's best at 47K and with minimal antiskate force of ~0.8g. At 100 ohms it does become smoother but it loses in the high end detail and soundstaging. Although the bass was initially lighter at 47K, raising the VTF and minimizing AS solved that issue. This cartridge has plenty of bass at 47K. It certainly sounds a lot less edgy and smoother, yet still clear and neutral, on the higher end of VTF levels. I'm up to 1.88g and will experiment with the higher values that were suggested here in the near future. At this point, I would also discourage using the recommended value of 1.8g. I haven't experimented with VTA. I have only been playing it with the tonearm parallel to the record surface. However I will give it a try later. With a past cartridge I did notice that the highs can become edgy at higher VTA.

Overall, I would say that it sounds CD like in its detail, clarity, quietness and cleanness. However, some of the magic of Analog is coming through already. I can see how someone might think this cartridge sounds a little on the analytical side. But realize, there is no harshness, glare or dynamic compression here. Nsgarch has postulated that the Tranny's require at least 150 hours of break-in. He also felt the Orpheus could probably require as much as 300 hours due to its lower compliance. In my experience, cartridges loose their edginess with break-in and open up more. Hopefully this will lead to a little more "musicality" and natural timbre as well.

As I said in the beginning, these observations are on a cartridge that is probably only 1/4 to 1/2 broken in. I will have to go back and experiment with loading again and optimize VTF and VTA further.

Andrew

OK,finally got to my pal Friday afternoon.Kept thinking,to myself,this better be worth it,as I was greeted by New York traffic the moment I got off the Verazzano bridge!
I deserved more than "a little better than the Temper-v" performance,for having to put up with the barrage of lousy drivers,on the road,as well as 40 dollars(what a rip-off)in gas and tolls!..........Was it worth it?.........
Well,so as anyone knowing my propensity for bloviating can make an early exit,from this post,just read Bc3's comments,or Nsgarsh's assessments,and you will have a "dead on" answer.They nailed it,and with the help of Doug Deacon's antiskate postings,you all made my EIGHT HOURS of playing around with "voicing" alot easier!!THANKS!
I felt like an indentured slave,but did not complain.NOT ONE BIT!!!Here's my schtick.......

I felt the difference in price between my original Temper Supreme and my Temper-v was only about six hundred dollars list.I think!The difference in performance,there,was quite significant,as the "V" was a far more relaxed and detailed performer.A good deal,in terms of an upgrade.
Here,with the "O",the difference in price is about 1700 dollars.Almost 300 percent more,of an increase,over the "Supreme" vs "v" upgrade.Short story...Supreme listed at about 3200 dollars/"V" at 3800/"O" at 5500!!!!It better be good,not "a little better",was how I went into this!
So we set about painstakingly doing what all us obsessed 'philes do.
I'll mention some discs we played,for making certain judgements about the usual parameters,like dynamics/tracking/timbres/frequency extremes.etc!
EMI-asd2369..Eric Satie(Parade,Relache,Ballets) Paris Conservatoire Orch/Louis Auriocombe,cond WHEW---this is a GREAT disc(I don't have it)and is really hard to get,but has incredible dynamics(percussion alluding to actual gunshots,typewriter,flutes,vibraphones,etc)and is a BITCH to track cleanly.With the "V",I could always get it do do dynamics,but with a touch of "leaness of timbre,and textures".This killed the listening experience,if one was trying to get away from a Hi-Fi effect,and hear the beauty of the music.
WELL,the "FRIGGIN" Orpheus nails the crap out of this disc!!Everything the "V" did,but added tonal beauty to boot.I was starting to get depressed,but kept on with my vigil!
Next up,wasVerdi's Rigoletto...DECCA SET-542 with Sutherland Pavoratti and Milnes.Side six is the killer here,with great vocals,dynamics to burn and an incredible thing to hear,when Pavarotti moves back,and to the side of the stage,as he is singing full tilt.WHEW!..the "O" is getting EVEN BETTER,to me,and I'm getting more depressed as I'm now beginning to make mental plans for scrounging up some extra cash.ALOT of cash,sadly!
Disc after disc...from Britten's Prince of the Pagodas(huge scale)to Muddy watters and JuniorWells,and from Ella and Louis to Copland,the same results.The "O" kept getting better,and I kept getting more depressed.
The "O" has something the "V" does not.Here,if the system is really good,a "little better"(not really) becomes "ALOT BETTER"!REALLY!!!
The "O" does not have the subtle bleaching of timbre,that the "V" has.Mostly in crescendo,or tough to track stuff,with the "V".This is something almost all the better cartridges cannot get as "almost perfectly" as the "O" does!I think!!So far!!
The "O",to me,really clears up my question of whether my Graham 2.2's fluid/bearing resonant tinge,can ever be emeliorated.IT CAN,and DOES,with the "O"!!It is that good(the "O")!!
Inner details and subtlety are the best I have heard,in my limited experience of thirty five years in the hobby.
BUT the BIG deal,for me,was the FANTASTIC timbral/harmonic GLORY that this magnificent design has.BIG TIME!Talk about a roundness of texture.You really must hear this!
Spacial characteristics were by far the best I have experienced.Space between instruments,between players,the whole nine yards.AND I'M TRYING TO BE SUBTLE!
IT is THAT GOOD....My friend,and I went through multiple diaper changes yesterday.I MUST HAVE IT!!!!

Best(the cartridge too,btw),and sorry for my rant,but I could not help it.

Mark

Sirspeedy,

Great post! It appears you LIKE IT. Can you comment on your experience with setting up the cartridge and ultimatly finding an optimum combination of settings. I.e., what were the optimum VTF, VTA, and loading? How did the sound change by varying these?

You eluded to BC3, NSgarch and doug feedback. Did you load down the cartridge to 100ohms with a parallel tonearm and VTF of about 1.95-2.0?

Thanks for your post,