Tranfiguration Orpheus description

Mark,

We're still striving but we are indeed blessed, not only with some good mainstream components (which anyone might choose) but mostly by a friend who makes rare and very special preamps and amps for remarkably affordable prices. We have not heard anything better them, at any price, except for Dan_Ed's four-chassis version of the same preamp. (Lucky guy!) Meeting Nick was a huge bit of good luck.

Back to the Orpheus. It is a good cartridge, it will get better with time and those with certain listening preferences could prefer it to an Airy 3 or even a UNIverse. The trick is conciously understanding our sonic preferences before choosing a component.

The Orpheus does nothing obviously wrong, it never steps out of line and it is always satisfying and musical, which is more than I'd say about most other cartridges. (You know how forgiving I am!) The shortcomings we heard were sins of omission, the kind of things you never notice until you hear something better. Rushton, Zaikesman and others told me the same thing about my old c-j PV11 preamp, but I never quite believed them until Nick visited us with an Alaap in tow. Then we understood.

Our guess is that "typical" classical/jazz/acoustic listeners would prefer the ghostly quiet noise floor of a ZYX. This unflappable, jet black background lets colors, textures and sudden dynamic contrasts leap out with an "eery" reality, as Andrew noted. OTOH, the Tranny's somewhat higher noise floor gives it an insistent sort of energy that some rock/amplified music listeners would prefer. Those aren't my preferences so it's harder for me to explain them, but I became an old fart when I discovered classical at age 16 and I'm not getting any younger!

Best,
Doug

Doug,sorry but I cannot interpret what you claim in the O's performance,as "sins of ommission"!Sounds like a bit of a "RIP",at 5500 clams,if you are accurate(95% of it,as stated)."Completely lost" the duality of Dolly and Linda.
Jumping out of the groove,which was handled with aplomb,by the Uni?
"Certain accompanying instruments being smoothed over,and a flawed bass",don't sound too desireable at 5500 clams.

Lets keep going.....Bass that on some stuff,interferes with the "rest of the spectrum".Ommission?What's to omit,but my hard earned cash?I may own a printing/graphic center,but I do NOT print my own money!
More?...."Dynamically flat presenation",on some material,where you heard much better!
Noise floor is not up to "what ZYX users are used to".In need of a Schroeder(possibly),to "tame excess energies".
If you are right about getting "MORE THAN 95% OF WHAT THAT CARTRIDGE WAS CAPABLE OF",it should be pulled from the market!Fast!
I cannot see,from your own comments why this design should get any credible "good press",in the future.Also,I need to get out more,and hear some new systems(or maybe a hearing check-up).
Thanks for saving me some money!Can't wait to see what the mainstream press,or other owners have to say!
Best!
Mark

I take with a large grain of salt most of the comments I read above for those several instances of an Orpheus not having even 100 hours on it If someone tried to convince me that a $5000 cartridge couldn't tell a timpani from a bass drum or Linda from Dolly I'd be skeptical too. (I just played an Emmylou/Dolly/Linda tune and even my poor aging Shelter 901 had no problem timbrally differentiating their voices.)

If your post was in a major publication I see little reason for any of us to want to acquire the new Tranny over the "UNI".

I can appreciate this comment. Major publication reviewers typically use components for several months. And rightly so. First impressions can be telling, but they can also be incomplete. And even when you know a component is still new and not broken-in, it can be difficult not to believe you have its measure. Requiring one live with a piece of gear for a few months helps assure break-in and reduce premature assessment.

One characteristic I find definitely requires time to gauge is the overall balance of a component - its 'Goldilocksness' if you will. Can't be done in a few hours. Indeed that characteristic seemed to be a main point of the review that starts this thread:

it takes some little time until the superior characteristics of the Orpheus make themselves apparent. It is fortunately neither hyperdynamic, nor super-spacious, nor even mega-technicolored. The Transfiguration achieves more in all the named criteria than at least 95 percent of all cartridges, but nowhere does it allow itself the least extravagance.

There is so much paid-for-tout on the forums nowadays and so much investment in expensive gear without audition that I find Judgement requires a certain critical mass to filter the outliers. And its hard to dance well when they're shootin' at your feet. None of this is to question what anyone hears, just to caution the presumption of a verdict based on small evidences and limited groove time - regardles of the karat-weight of the cochleae involved. I like to keep this in mind if for no other reason than respect for the folks who devout their all to creating the products we critique.

I hope my friend does not read Audiogon,as we thought we were happy,last week.

Speedy, your are *so* quotable. :-) The way I read your post about your session with your friend, you were happy and excited about the "O" and felt it was fraught with prospect. Don't let 'em take this away. I suspect the ending of the O-story remains to be writ.

On a different note, two questions for Doug: i) What gain options does your phonstage offer and what gain was in use for your U/O listening session? ii) I think I understand the notion of electronics having a noise floor. In the case of a cartridge, where does noise get introduced? From stylus or external vibrations not getting resolved by a tonearm - a sort of mechanical feedback into the cantilever causing ghost frequencies not originating from the vinyl? (Forgive me if its a dumb question - there's a lot I don't know about cartridges.) And thanks for your writeup!

Tim

Audiofel,firstly no need to question how I interpreted your post.No offense was taken,either.I got the point!Nsgarsh,thanks,for the compliment.Truthfully though,Audiofel,you should re-read my interpretation of how I pereived the Orpheus,in my friend's set-up.I specifically stated to take any of my comments with a grain of salt,AND they were ONLY specific to what I heard in my friend's set-up.I think if you go back to many of my statements,of late,I am making an attempt to criticise my own componentry,for what they are,too.I have consciously done this,because I think some place ego,and "favorite designer/friend's" ahead of general "shoptalk".I am not accusing anyone here of any of this,though,no doubt some will interpret it as so.BTW,when did I ever question the reputation of the Universe design,as you allude to?The only time I get "ancie" is if I am very familiar with something,and a contrary opinion is stated(fine by me,as I don't feel the need to "have" to be right,but do want to entertain some insight).My reply is to instigate a debate!Nothing has to be definitive.We are all,going to buy what we like anyway! BUT I certainly give creedence to other opinions.That is how I learn,myself,and I will always have alot to gain from other opinions.No need for fights to break out,but confrontation,in a quality heated debate is a good thing.I hope.Too bad we can't have one without "riling up the troops"!
I stand behind my interpretation of the "O",in my friend's system(compared to the "V",in a "quite resolving set-up" too btw),but am happy to hear that there are those who feel there is a clearly better design available in the form of the "UNI",and it makes so many NICE folks happy!Isn't that what matters most?Maybe my own,and my friend's syatems are not up to Doug's.It is all fun,and one reason I like this forum.I NEVER actually mean to be condescending,or all knowing like some,but admit to being "too much",often.The hobby is SO MUCH FUN!!!....That's it!!!!!!
My only disappointment was that,since I am actually interested in both designs,having heard,and liked both,I cannot have some important questions entertained,based on the ground rules set,for fear of giving the wrong signal.Makes me want to retire,from 'gon again.
Best!
Mark

Tim asked:

On a different note, two questions for Doug: i) What gain options does your phonstage offer and what gain was in use for your U/O listening session?

The Alaap does not have selectable gain, other than choosing between the MM or MC inputs. The MM inputs have a very robust tube gain stage with three tubes per channel. The MC inputs add an FET gain stage before going into the MM stage. Each stage has an independent external power supply. I don't remember the gain figures, perhaps Nick will let us know.

I do know that the MM stage provides so much clean gain that one can play a .2mV Koetsu Onyx Platinum or a .24mV ZYX (.36mV if Nsgarch is correct) with low tube rush and fully ample dynamics. I've heard both of those cartridges through the MM inputs and they rocked the house with no distortion or dynamic headroom issues. Dan_Ed could probably confirm this with his XV-1S. I use the FET inputs to get optimal impedance loading, and it does reduce tube rush to inaudible levels.

On a related note, we're going to have Nick reduce our line stage gain to 9db. The present 15db is too much. I can't turn the gain control knob above 9:30-10:00 without breaking windows. It would be nice to have a less sensitive gain control and to run the line stage tubes nearer their mid-point.

ii) I think I understand the notion of electronics having a noise floor. In the case of a cartridge, where does noise get introduced? From stylus or external vibrations not getting resolved by a tonearm - a sort of mechanical feedback into the cantilever causing ghost frequencies not originating from the vinyl?

Exactly. That is precisely what we heard. If mechanical vibration is not damped or drained, it will necessarily vibrate the coils at frequencies and phases unrelated to the new signal coming from the groove. Vibrating coils generate signals...

We heard exactly this with the UNIverse a couple of weeks ago, during an abortive tweak-fest. I added a 4g weight atop the headshell, to get effective mass up to what Thom Mackris has found to be optimal. This certainly added weight and bass heft, but it also reflected energy back into the cartridge. Paul instantly heard phase shifted noise, made a face and left the room. It took me a couple of sides, but eventually I had to admit that the induced noise was a bigger penalty than any benefit. (Anyone want a nickel with two mounting holes drilled through it?)

At one of Cello's gatherings, Frank Schroeder was very surprised when a UNIverse/TriPlanar gave his Reference/Olympos a serious challenge. Since he knows from experience that the Reference is a quieter, better damped arm (and it is) he commented that the UNIverse must have exceptional internal damping. He expected to hear a muddied noise floor and/or resonance peaks at frequencies the TriPlanar doesn't control well. These are audible with Shelters and others on a TriPlanar, but not with a UNIverse, which prompted Frank's astute observation. It is an inherently quiet cartridge that doesn't rely on damping by the arm. It's had a similarly black background on every arm I've heard it on.

Sorry for the lengthy explanation and examples, but we made some strong statements about a $5K cartridge and people may reasonably question my constant championing of the ZYX. I felt you deserved as much verification as I could provide.

Doug

P.S. to Mark, I obviously can not and would not question your "O" vs. "V" findings. I have no doubt you and your group heard exactly what you reported. Don't go away! As you said, we're all here to learn together. Without this forum our system would be nowhere. We'd probably still be playing a CD once a month and wondering why music was so unsatisfying. (We'd also have much larger bank balances!)