Tranfiguration Orpheus description

"Trying to listen,and let the cart tell me what it wants"....Dan a SUPERB point,and one all serious hobbyists should take into account.
Best

Thanks for the link, Neil. That was very enjoyable! Speedy, my problem is that my "cartridge-eese" is still underdeveloped. :)

Andrew, I owe you big time! Your recent post regarding vtf has prodded me to re-examine my settings. The results are very impressive and have opened up a whole new side of my tonearm/cartridge combination.

I've spent the last day and a half listening to the changes with vtf at .1 gram increments, from about 1.92 to 1.99. The veil really began to lift at 1.95. I believe I've settled around 1.96-.98. But wait! There's more!

I don't know any other way to say it, but AS is a necessary evil that must be kept to a minimum. What I have found is that by going into the same range with vtf that Andrew posted has greatly reduced the propensity for my setup to mis-track. Doug and I have discussed this effect in the past but I have to admit to being somewhat skeptical. Well, I'm a true believer now! I've replaced the 3.9 gram AS weight with what amounts to just under 1 gram with no mis-tracking on any of the LP's I own that used to cause me to bump up the AS. The increase in dynamics and resolution has my jaw on the floor!

Want a good laugh?I have been experimenting with Pre/phono/table connections to "balanced/symetrical/regenerated A/C",vs other alternatives.I have three dedicated lines,and a new,high quality circuit breaker box.Also,I live in the suberbs,and usually have very good power.The difference with the balanced/symetrical regenerative power is ASTOUNDING!!
If you thought you had a slightly hardened sound,or slight grain/haze,or whatever,you would be shocked at where A/C technology is,now.
What got me started,was buying a PS-Audio P-500,for front end stuff(digital takes a nice bump up,too).This was an eye opener.I previously tried a load of stuff,settling on Ultimate Outlets.Sadly I went through two different P-500's which just were NOT made as well as the Exact Power stuff.The P-500 failed in three weeks,with a secod unit lasting six days.There is absolutely nothing wrong with my lines,but I did find a small resistor loose,in the second unit's bag.Hence,I started to do some serious research and wound up with the new Exact Power "Ultra Pure" unit.It is superb,but I am now seriously considering the EP-15a to go along with it and run my entire set-up in regenerated symetrical power.Think "set" sound,but full range.Best to all,and your families during this new year!

You're right that VTF must be absolutely spot-on before you can truly optimize VTA/SRA. Doing that by ear requires listening for:

a) the integration or timing of fundamentals vs. harmonics (what Frank Schroeder and I hear) or,

b) the quickest rise/fall times and greatest amplitudes of individual notes, especially bass notes (what Paul hears).

One of my New Year's resolutions may be to wonder less if I'm a few angels shy of a pin full and wonder more at the music itself. Those might not be mutually exclusive activities, but its not New Years yet.

So maybe Doug and others can elaborate on what/how one listens when making small changes. Sometimes the vocabulary we use strikes me as chunkier than the product of the fine grained adjustments it attempts to describe. I'm fascinated as much by the assessment part of the process as the analytics and rationales.

From the above, I interpret 'a)' (integration of fundamental and harmonics) as the absence or lessening of what I call tonal 'smearing'. To me this is as much a temporal issue as it is anything, but I'd love for anyone to elaborate further. Several hundred messages ago in this thread we mentioned the piccolo solo in the third movement of Tchaikovski's 4th - many notes in a short span of time. When the leading edges bump into the trailing edges, such that notes are less tonally individuated, I call this 'smearing'. A smeared single note is slightly 'de-focused' tonally, it is less 'compact' as if its harmonics slather outside proper temporal boundaries. Correlating back to reality, better 'tonal focus' means homing in on the setup sweet spot. Is this at all close to what you're talking about??

Wrt to 'b)', I think I grasp listening for amplitude, but help me out with listening for 'quickest rise/fall time'. More words (heh) or an example? Without knowing better, I'd think this was ultimately the same thing as 'a)' put differently, but that could just mean I'm confused.

Apologies if my phenomenological bent goes against the grain of the thread - just more universal struggle for understanding what is sometimes tough to put into words. Betwixt the turn of the dial, the tenth of the degree, and the ear is where I'm working. How, or to what, do you listen for the effect of the changes you're making?

Ho, ho, ho,
Tim