Tranfiguration Orpheus description


This is the first detailed description I've seen of the new Transfiguration Orpheus:

http://hifi.com.sg/products/cartridge/transfiguration/orpheus.htm

Anyone run across other info?

.
128x128nsgarch
Doug:

Neil. I haven't checked other TriPlanars, but on this one a slightly tail down arm results in a parallel cartridge

Then I think you should send the whole TA back to Tri and have him check the headshell alignment. Something wrong with either the headshell or cartridge mounting hardware, perhaps the ZYX spacer plate.

slightly tail down arm results in // vertical SRA.

My SME is also tail-down with vertical SRA, but vertical SRA is not what we're after. So, once you found vertical SRA (as I explained elsewhere) then the TA post needs to go up about 6mm to achieve the nominal 1.5 degrees SRA. At that point the TA wand should be parallel, or even sligntly nose down.

Put another way, and assuming a proper undamaged 23 cm.TA: were I to mount a cartridge and set the TA for vertical SRA (using my scope and mirror) and then after raising the TA post 6mm (to get nominal 1.5 degree SRA) discover that the TA wand was still sloping backward, I would return the cartridge AS DEFECTIVE (stylus improperly mounted in the cantilever)!!

Intelligent mechanical design demands that tonearms (including unipivots and most straight line trackers) have their horizontal pivot axis ABOVE the stylus' point of contact with the record, and not below. This, along with the more recent move to underslung counterweights, insures mechanical stability of the entire system with respect to gravity (e.g. improving the ability to better track warped records ;--)

My point is, that after going through proper setup procedure, including the use of a scope and mirror to determine vertical SRA (THERE'S SIMPLY NO OTHER PRACTICAL WAY TO DO THIS AT HOME!) still, if by some ironic miracle, one wound up with the correct 1.5 degree SRA, yet the cartridge and/or arm were sloping backward, then the cartridge and/or arm would need checking and service because one or both of them are defective or damaged.

Frankly, I doubt there's anything wrong with either your arm or your cartridge, and I'd be more than happy to send you whatever tools you lack to carry out this VERY NECESSARY determination. Can you imagine trying to cut a record without watching the ENTIRE PROCESS through a microscope?

Personally, I've NEVER met a cartridge that needed to be raked backward to achieve proper SRA, or that sounded better that way . . . . . unless it was loaded at 47Kohms ;--)

.
Dan,

As I just posted, we did not run the Orpheus (or UNIverse) VTA tail down in our setup. The only *cartridges* we've ever run tail down were Shelters, which most people agree prefer that attitude. We're chasing a false lead on this one.

Doug
Neil,

Thanks for the offer. I have a mirror, a good lamp, 10x and 20x loupes, a 100x microscope and cards with reference lines at 0, 1 and 2 degrees. What other tools does one need to see and adjust SRA. (And yes, I understand that straight vertical is not optimal. Sorry for the shorthand.)

Are you EVER going to read or acknowledge that article I mentioned? You are not the only one who understands this, nor were you the first (and I certainly wasn't either). We should all give credit where credit is due.

You didn't by any chance read it in the smallest room of your house and put it behind you, I hope? :-)
Now now Doug, let's not get testy ;--) I never upstaged Mr. Risch, not that there's anything "pioneering" about his his method, or mine for that matter. Both are pretty much intuitively obvious to anyone with a mechanical bent. I simply offered a technique which proves more accurate and reliable when calibrating a cartridge setup, which BTW, I discovered years ago due to a separate interest in optics.

N
.
Doug, as a matter of fact, yes you do need some other (actually slightly different) tools. Loupes are out. Not strong enough and in any case too bulky to get their optics right in where you need them to be.

The 100x (pocket?) microscope is too strong (too small a field of view to see both the stylus AND its reflection easily) A 30x or (I prefer) a 50x scope is just about right as far as magnification goes. In addition, it has to be of a physical design that allows the objective to focus on the stylus without actually hitting the cartridge body. And it must be small enough in diameter to "find" the stylus in its optical axis without the barrel of the scope hitting the little mirror. This is a rather tall order, and I bought a half dozen scopes before I found one or two that I could use.

Also, bean bags are essential to get all the optics just right -- although a good strong Zip-lock filled with sand, salt or preferrably sugar (so you can suck any excess air out through a straw before sealing ;--) will work just fine as well. (see the pictures with my SRA post: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1140840022&read&keyw&zzsra)

I totally admit this procedure IS A HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS, TEDIOUS, AND FRAUGHT WITH DISASTEROUS CONSEQUENCES FOR DELICATE CANTILEVERS IF ONE DOES NOT KEEP THEIR WITS ABOUT THEM. But that's just the first time. (Unfortunately, by the SECOND time, you've probably forgotten all the little tricks you learned the first time!)

I've sent mirrors, scopes and even bean bags and Maglite to others who've had no touble using these techniques with great success (usually with a little telephone guidance from me.) So anyone who wants to borrow my stuff, just let me know.

N
.