Tranfiguration Orpheus description

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

Dan_Ed wrote:

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!

BIG SMILEY FACE!

Your post that SirSpeedy has already admired is worthy of a second admiration.
- listen to hear what the cartridge wants
- balance the nimbleness of being on the edge of mistracking with the authority of more downforce
- use just enough AS to prevent mistracking

Brilliantly and simply expressed. We have a Zen master. :-)

Sometimes the vocabulary we use strikes me as chunkier than the product of the fine grained adjustments it attempts to describe.

Very true. Trying to express these experiences in words is quite challenging.

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??

EXACTLY RIGHT! Paul actually uses the word "smearing". I use the phrase "temporal integration". We're talking about the same thing and so are you. The attack of resin on string, the vibration of the string, the reverb in the body: all must occur with timing that's realistic relative to each other. Otherwise it doesn't sound like a violin.

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.

Well, it is the same thing in different words, and since you hear (a) as I do perhaps that's what you should listen for. I mentioned (b) largely to help those who hear more like Paul than me.

This is Paul's thing more than mine, but one example is that, while visiting Cello, he was able to adjust arm height by the feel of the air coming from the woofers, without LISTENING at all. When each pulse had maximum intensity and fastest slope, on both ends, he knew VTA/SRA was right.

I "think" the easiest way to explain this is SRA theory. The playback stylus can only trace a waveform accurately if its SRA matches that of the cutting stylus. If SRA is way off, the stylus would "slide" onto and off of a modulation more gradually than it should. This would lengthen and smooth both leading and trailing edge transients, artificially raise the noise floor and thus reduce peak amplitudes relative to that floor. I'm not claiming that's what actually happens, SRA theory is controversial, but that's what it sounds like.

So, is this all too neurotic? Only if we let it be. It's really become just second nature. I don't fret about whether VTA/SRA is right, I adjust only if and when I notice that it's not. Of course, becoming more sensitized does mean you notice more often. ;-)

I'll jump up from the dinner table to adjust arm height on a record we haven't played before, just because my ears have learned which way to go and about how far. It's mostly a matter of practice, but the practicing isn't unpleasant and it doesn't stop my toes from tapping. We only do it because it's easier to enjoy the music with good timing than be annoyed by inaccurate timing and smearing.

And our infamous yellow stickies are a HUGE help. Trying to find the right spot from scratch on every play of every LP WOULD be insane. Raul or Dan will tell you I have arm height dialed in on familiar LP's before the platter gets up to speed. Record keeping makes the whole thing a virtual no-brainer on a daily basis.

I will humbly assert my title is Zen Grasshopper as I cannot yet pluck the pebble. :)

Really good questions, Tim. I've been fortunate to receive several lessons from Doug and Paul in the art of sound characterizations. I also listen for what Doug refers to. I'm getting little snap-shots of what Paul listens for but I'm still not quite in tune. And what makes it worse is that Paul comes in from another room pointing out what is wrong! BTW, I noticed you have the Orpheus as well as Andrew. Can you post the cartridge weight and compliance just for reference?

This morning I'm finding that VTA did need to go up about 1/2 a turn. I believe this is in keeping with the SRA theory after more VTF is applied. Anyway, that's what it took to get back that hollow shimmer of the cymbals.

I feel like we should move all of this to another thread, but since Andrew started it . . .