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
Andrew - were there particular epiphany points during break-in (30 hrs, 60 hrs, etc.) where things really gelled, or have improvements kinda trickled in across time? Thanks for taking the time to post your reports.

Wrt to arm position and 1.5 degree SRA - probably good to remember that different arms on different tables will yield different relative up/down positions. With my SME V + Teres, 6mm up from stylus vertical still has the back-end of the tonearm down relative to the cartridge end.

On a side note, I tried checking azimuth via the 50x scope and first-surface mirror method. Yes, I had to tape the mirror to the table to cantilever it out from platter so I could position the scope. And I bent my flexible Littl Lite to bounce off the mirror right between the front of the scope and the cartridge. Got a decent image. But eventually I gave up.

One problem was the thinness of the cartridge profile viewed head on. It was hard to gauge the "equality of the X" across the real and reflected stylus. Nowhere as obvious as the side view for setting vertical SRA. Plus I was never sure the scope lens was absolutely perpendicular to a line bisecting the stylus head-on - if the scope is off just a little on either side, it makes a difference in perception of the angles. I suspect it might be do-able by someone with better eyes. 8-) Maybe a scope with a reticle or cross hairs might be helpful in setting the stylus at 90 degrees to the mirror surface.

But isn't it really the coils or engine we're trying to get positioned? Using the physical stylus position should get close on a well made cartridge, but even there, the stylus is probably no more absolutely guaranteed in the proper position relative to the coils than anything else on a cartridge. It was cool to do, but I think I'll stick with the meter method then ears.

Cheers,
Tim
Tim,

Good question. The improvements were probably happening gradually but I heard a large change in the 160-180 hours point as if it had passed through some wall. The sound is now much more natural and pure.

Based on your experience, it looks like the magnification methods is not appropriate for azimuth. I'm wondering about the Wally device for that.

Andrew
Hi Andrew,

Glad to hear the Tranny is working well for you!

I have also had good results using Neal's method for SRA and agree that it usually ends up that the bearing end of the arm is abit higher than level. Nice to know we're getting similar results.

As for azimuth. I could see where this would be very difficult using the mirror approach. Mostly due to not being able to get the right magnification in right place, much like Tim posted about. I did experience the setting of azimuth by ear when Thom, Doug and Paul were up. It was such a tiny amount of adjustment that Thom was making so not really far from having the headshell level. It seems that a really good mono recording makes this method easier. Alas, that is something I don't have in my stash. Seems like several folks tried the Wally tool a year or so ago and came to the conclusion that the "ear" method was just as good. YMMV.

Best,

Dan
Andrew,

Cello and I each own a 25% share in a Wally Analog Shop. It works, and using it taught me two things (which Dan has already mentioned):

1. extremely small adjustments matter and,

2. I can set azimuth about as well by ear as by measuring (and with far less fuss).

4yanx also owned a share of our Wally at one time. He sold it after making the same discovery. Wanna buy my share? ;-)

As Tim said, cartridges are rarely if ever so flawless that stylus, cantilever, coils, suspension and magnets all align perfectly. It just doesn't happen in real manufacturing.

I set the stylus close to vertical to prevent vinyl damage or uneven wear. I don't find magnification helpful for this either. After that, fine adjustments to minimize crosstalk yield the best sound.

A good mono record works, but so does a good stereo one if there are well recorded instruments or vocalists in the center. Getting images tightly focused with maximum air is the goal.

Doug
Doug,

That's interesting. Let me think about buying your share:)

One thing I do that is helpful in identifying "close" to vertical alignment is putting a small level on the headshell while the arm is in it's resting position an varying azimuth till the side to side level is the same as the TT platter. Of course this could only be true level if the cartridge base to stylus alignment is true.

Maybe I should get a mono recording or one with clear certain center image to assist in varying from this point by ear. In your experience, what range of azimuth changes resulted in optimization. 1/8 turn? 1/4 turn? Or less? Also, did your setting through listening equal the setting you obtained using the Wally instrument? Finally, did you have to connect your speaker cables to the Wally device or can you just insert tonearm out puts or preamp outputs?

Thanks Doug as always.

Andrew