Tranfiguration Orpheus description

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
.

Dan,

In my system I run the tonearm with a slight tail-up. I haven't verified what the SRA is exactly. As I recall, we ran the O and Univ in Doug's system with a slight tail down. According to Doug this provides a positive vta/SRA.

Anyway, I'll try adjusting the tonearm up and down from my exisiting setting and report back.

All,

Please allow me to take the blame for walking into a premature comparison and maybe not an extensive of enough evaluation of system parameters. I realize that this has only caused controversy and ill feelings between Zyx and Tranny owners. There are a lot of emotions going back and forth and it's too bad to see this. You guys are very proud of your knowledge and I'm sorry to see this thread get so testy.

I realize that it was wrong to compare an unbroken in, quickly optimized O to the Universe given the competitiveness and fallout likely to occur. In retrospect, we probably should have kept our feelings between us until a more thorough comparison could be made. Oh well. i'm new to this club and I guess I'm learning the hard way.

Doug, Paul, Nsgarch and Raul are great guys and have a lot of knowledge that has enabled me to prevent many mistakes and optimize my system. Obviously not all:).

At the end of the day, I really like the sound of the Orpheus in my system. i'll let you know how it improves in another 100 or 200 hours. Maybe then we can make a more thorough comparison.

Andrew

I will assume that the "O" has the same stylus and rake angle as the Temper. This requires the VTA to be set differently than most other MC. The tonearm should be a fraction lower at the headshell. Just the opposite of what the typical MC requires. No observation of the sound quality of the "O" is valid if the VTA is set incorrectly. And there is no way around this VTA requirement. It must be set like this, any other setting will degrade performace. Please read the Transfiguration instrution booklet and follow it precisely. Top Transfiguration cartridges do not sound as Doug desribed. The desription Larryi has written is quite spot on.

Well, I mis-spoke and lead you guys in the wrong direction. I meant to refer to the angle of the tonearm as being tail down and not the actual VTA. Sorry to be inaccurate in my postings.

Andrew, you have absolutely nothing to appologize for!

Ya' know, that is a funny thing about posting on the net. We don't have the benefit of vocal tone inflections as well as hand and facial expressions. I really think that makes this whole blogging phenom quite a difficult communications challenge.

Then again you have folks popping by who take great pleasure in drive by pot shot postings.

And then you have the smooth talking, smarmy bastards that want to piss down your back and tell you it's raining.

Best to all,

Dan

Dear friends: As the " actors " of this controversial cartridge test post/posted about the situation has more fail and misunderstanding, example: Doug post that the O set up was made with the usually " VTA madness " that he likes and in other post Andrew told us: +++++ " we did not make large enough changes( speaking of VTA ) to evaluate the cartridge with a parallele...." +++++

Between other things that Doug or Andrew mentioned is how they match the volume gain for every time that they change the volume gain with each cartridge this volume gain was exactly for both cartridges due to its different output.
This subject is extreme critical because any small difference in the SPL is detected for our ears/brain and that small SPL difference could give us not small changes in the frequency response that could alter in a very sensitive way the sound perception.
Other issue that is related with the changes in the volume gain setting is that normally almost all the preamps change its frequency response when change the volume pot position and this alter the quality sound reproduction for both cartridges but in different way. Here the designer could explain us about in the Doug's unit.

I think that Doug don't read yet what I aked him: the inverse RIAA eq. deviation from 20 to 20kHz in his unit, this is extremly critical especially with top cartridges like the O and U. Here again I ask to the designer for he can give us his unit info: important!! ( It's curious that Mr. Doshi don't comes yet to this thread when we need very important information about his unit and for understand better what happen with this controversial cartridge test. I'm saying this because I read posts of Mr. Doshi in other lesser threads. )

All these subjects ( including others that I posted here ) are important and are related with what Larryi posted: +++++ " I really can't see how any phono component can be evaluated other than as part of an evaluation of the complete system " +++++ and Larryi if you don't mind: not only a phono component but any audio device.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.