Trans Temp W, Magic Diamond cartridges - comments

Raul, I'm just curious. Would you mind posting a list of all the cartridges you currently own and which ones you listen to the most?

Thanks

Raul,

Thanks for the list. That's very impressive. I'd say about $120,000 alone just for the installed and stand-by cartridges. You must have many interchangeable head shells or arm wands? Do you ever have an interest to sell any of your cartridges?

FYI Magic Diamond cartridges are a product of MagicMicro, a division of the Swiss company Bluelectric. They are distributed in the US by AXISS Distribution Inc. Copy and paste this long link into your browser to go to their website:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.dietiker-humbel.ch/micromag.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dbluelectric%26num%3D50%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26newwindow%3D1%26safe%3Doff%26rls%3DGGLD,GGLD:2003-39,GGLD:en

Rushton,

Thanks for your comprehensive description of the MD. It's really the first one I've read. Apparently, you've been listening to it long enough to know what it really sound like; yet you didn't compare it with any "known" cartridges (like vdH, Koetsu, Allaerts, etc.) so I was wondering what you were listening to before you acquired the Magic Diamond?

Thanks Rushton. Before the Magic Diamond, I believe Lloyd Walker was using the Transfiguration Temper W -- which is of course my other candidate (and at about half the price!)
Again, thanks for your impressions.

Rushton, you're right, it was the Clearaudio -- I remember we talked about the Transfigurations and I think he said he liked the Temper V but wasn't familiar with the Temper W. I know he's pretty impressed with the Magic Diamond though.

Raul: No. No crossover. But that is a subject for a different thread. You could start one if you like.

RE: cartridge loading and stylus rake angle:

Maybe the reason some of you are getting seemingly better response with the cartridge/arm at a negative angle is because that would compensate for the kind of non-linear response created when the cartridge load is set way too high (like 47K ohms)

The recommended load for the W is >9 ohms (>3 ohms for a V)
so I think it behooves one to start at the lower end of the scale and work one's way up. I tried 30 ohms (the lowest preset on my preamp) and the response was great in terms of information retrieval, but not much focus, no "sparkle" and bass was a little "wooley." A friend who tried 50 ohms said that 50 ohms wasn't quite enough either, and that I should try a little bit higher setting. Well, my next two higher presets are 100 ohms and 825 ohms. I had already tried 825 ohms when I installed the Temper W because that's where the preamp had been set for my vdH Frog. But that had sounded very bright and lacked bass and body. So this time I only went up to the 100 ohm setting, and it was magic -- HOWEVER -- please bear in mind that all this was with the arm/cartridge parallel to the record, meaning the stylus was raked back (from the side it looks like it's leaning forward) the standard 1+ degree or so that the cutter heads are set for.

Groove undulations not only wiggle from side to side, they also angle forward, because a cutter head has to point backward (at 1 degree) like a chisel, so the wax cuttings will fly away as it's making the goove. If you have a spherical or elliptical stylus, it doesn't matter a lot if the stylus is vertical, or leaning a little forward or backward, because it fits in the groove more or less the same (inaccurate) way in all three cases. BUT, with the new generation of micro-ridge styli, vdH being one of the first in the early 1990's, (if not THE first) it's a whole 'nother matter. These styli are chisel or "spade" shaped, almost like the cutter head itself. If they sit vertically in the groove (or -yikes!- tilted backward) then their sharp side edges actually scrape over, or "clip" the tops of the forward-slanting groove undulations! Paradoxically, even "mis-set" that way, they still sound better than conventional (old-type) styli because their very tip (at the bottom of the groove) can still "see" information that elliptical styli miss.

To extract all the information in the groove, these new styli must "see" the groove from top to bottom, and the only way they can do that is if they can lock into the groove by leaning forward at exactly the same angle as the cutter head.

Now, one can go on and on expounding on the vagaries of different systems and components and tubes and rooms ad nauseum -- however, there are certain scientifically proven mechanical and electronic rules that must apply "across the board" regardless of the equipment or the room. I have just described a couple of them.

Happy listening.

Well, I went with a Transfiguration Temper W. Other candidates were: Allaerts, Colibri, Airy 3, Magic Diamond, and Shelter 90x. My decision was based on four points:

1.) It appeared to have the best build quality. And the fit and finish turned out to be absolutely stunning in the flesh.
2.) It employs the newest design thinking and technology -- a yokeless design using double ring magnets and a special mu metal coil former which increases sensitivity by 30dB.
3.) It had reasonable output voltage (0.5 mV), good compliance (not too high or too low) and nominal loading requirements. There is nothing about this cartridge that is non-standard or requires special accomodation in tonearm or electronics.
4.) I could obtain one new for a very attractive price.

In addition, it requires only a short (30 hour specified) break-in period, due no doubt to the new generation rubber suspension material, which is unaffected by temperature.

So far (one afternoon/evening-worth) , it's performance is
astounding compared to my Frog Gold, but I was expecting as much. I'll write a proper review after 50 or 60 hours. Thanks for all the input -- Raul, Rushton, and Speedy.

Neil

Reb -- congrats, another new Temper owner! Please stay in touch and give us your imprerssions. What kind of arm/tt/phono preamp? And current cart?

Higher vs. lower output was an issue I wrestled with a bit. My system (it's posted here) is up to either. My decision to go with the W was based on better volume matching to other sources (primarily CD) and also some technological changes.

I'm glad you quoted the ENTIRE output spec. It is important for folks to note that they are not all alike. Van den hul, for instance, specifies their outputs at 5.5 cm/s.

Reb -- that's interesting, I didn't know the newer materials were being used in the V, although it just makes sense when you think about it. I was interested in your associated equipment though, if you want to share that info.

Neil

Reb -- sounds like you have (and will have) good support components. Why don't you post your system here when you get a little further?

Just for your and Speedy's info, I checked my Transfig W stylus position (in the groove) under high power magnification, with the cartridge body (actually the top surface of the cartridge body) absolutely parallel to the record surface. The stylus is raked at approx. 1.25 degrees (with no down force applied) which is the average cutter rake angle. So it makes sense that the Transfig instructions say to start with the tonearm parallel to the record before fine-tuning VTA (really SRA as far as I'm concerned :~)

I'm not saying you should keep it that way, but it will give you a point of reference. vdH cartridges, by comparison, have zero stylus rake angle when the body is parallel to the record. So to get a 1 degree rake angle on a vdH stylus, you need to raise the back end of the tonearm between 4 and 8 mm from a parallel setting.

Further info on my initial settings for the TTW (please let me know what you come up with) are: downforce= 1.90g anti-skate= 1.4g. SME V arm parallel to record (for now). BTW, here's a tip for setting anti-skate force that is absolutely infallible, but which takes a little observational practice (and you do need an arm with a lifting lever like the SME) It is very effective with the Transfiguration V or W because the stylus is so easy to see from the front: With the arm up and positioned midway over the first track, with a strong light pointed at the front of the cartridge and (if your eyesight's like mine, a big reading magnifier as big a your face!) watch very carefully from the front, the position of the stylus/cantilever as you lower the arm. Just as the stylus goes into the groove, (and with no anti-skate applied) it will appear to move closer to the outside of the cartridge body (because the arm is trying to pull in toward the center of the record.) It's a lot more obvious than it sounds like it would be. Begin applying anti-skate until you can no longer perceive this movement and the stylus appears to stay in the same place in or out of the groove. No need for perfection here, your ears are for that. Better though to err a little on the side of too little rather than too much, and then you can increase it a little, if necessary, as your hearing dictates.

Hi speedy,

I know all about vdH's customizing service, and I think it's great (he reconfigured my Frog Gold for my arm and phono preamp.) But I think that the Transfig Temper is simply a better design (and build) than the vdH's. Just the diamond on a Transfig is a thing to behold (compared to a vdH stylus)

I'm having trouble understanding why you would want to get the stylus vertical in the groove (when viewed from the side as you say) when all cutter heads are raked. (An average of 1-2 degrees from vertical.) To get the stylus to "lock" into the groove undulations, and thus extract the most information, wouldn't you want it raked at the same angle as the cutter head was? It seems to me, especially with these new micro-ridge styli, that one would want the stylus rake angle to approximate the rake angle of the cutter head as closely as possible, no?

Raul, do you know the design of the transfiguration generator and how it is different from the typical yoke generator?

Raul, I will take your response as a "no." You can find descriptions of the Transfiguration generating system online. It is new and innovative. Based upon my understanding of electromechanical physics, it represents a more efficient way of producing a current in a moving coil cartridge. I suggest you do some research and then perhaps you will understand the reason for my comment.

I could have got a new Colibri XCP for the same price as the Temper W. In fact, the Temper W is my first non-vdH cartridge in some time. I could only afford to buy one cartridge of course, but I'm very happy with my decision to leave the conventional van den Hul design for something new that I consider more intelligent.

Speedy, luuuvved your post! You can go on as long as you like, on any subject you please! I'll give the vertical setting a try once my W (or is that DUBya?) is broken in and let you know what I think. You implied that the instructions that came with your V state the arm should be tilted back or that the stylus should be vertical? I wasn't clear on that. For comparison, the instructions that came with my W are as follows:

"As a final point, run a few records with which you are very familiar, and experiment with VTA - vertical tracking angle. (When viewed from the side, a stylus does not sit vertically in the groove but 'points backward' slightly.)"

"Check with your arm handbook for recommended arm angle; most are designed to provide correct VTA when the arm is parallel to the record (not turntable) surface."

From the foregoing, you can understand how I came to the conclusion that the cartridge (and arm) should be parallel to the record surface, and that I should expect to see the stylus "point backward slightly" when viewed from the side, which it did. I must say it sounds terrific, focused and alive, strong controlled bass, etc. FWIW, my instruction sheet also goes on to say:

"When VTA is 'spot-on', instrumental location, dimensionality, and other important detail will should move into optimum 3-dimensional focus and away from the immediate surfaces of the loudspeakers.

Despite the accuracy of setting up, still use your ear to fine-tune optimum tracking pressure, lateral angle, vertical angle, and vertical tracking angle. Such adjustments allow for subtle individual variations from cartridge, and for any setting-up instruction compromises made by the arm or alignment device manufacturer. Ultimate alignment is based on the cantilever -- NOT on the cartridge body."

I wondered if the instructions that came with your V contain the same language? BTW, in an earlier post, Reb mentioned that the V he was about to receive had a 0.38mV output. I thought V's were 0.25mV? The W is actually only 0.48mV, so have they made changes in the specifications they've not yet published?

I'm loving this thread, everybody is being so civil and informative! Thanks Raul, Reb, Speedy, et al. I'd like to know what everyone has found to be the best loading for the Transfiguration series. I'm using 100 ohms with my W right now. It's a convenient preset on my (ML 25s) phono preamp. Perhaps I should customize it up or down? What are the rest of you using?

Reb, I want to respond to your post first, (because it's easy :~) First of all congratulations! I agree with all the wonderful things you discovered as you began using this little gem -- especially the lack of noise and grain.(What is your preamp load setting and anti skate setting?)

Second, please, PLEASE, don't even think about demagnetizing it! I don't know what son of Satan started that idea, but just think about it for a moment:

1.) Only ferrous (iron-bearing) materials can become magnetized.

2.) They haven't used ferrous formers on which to wind the coils in MC cartridges for years -- so that just leaves the pole pieces (in conventional designs like vdH), and you wouldn't want to demagnetize them or you'd ruin the cartridge!

3.) The coil former (the little square or cross-shaped thing the coils are wound on) in the Transfiguration is made of this snazzy new SS mu metal which is totally impervious to magnetism, so it can't get magnetized in the first place.

4.) The other parts: boron, diamond, and copper also cannot become magnetized. So what the hell are we talking about here?!

5.) On the other hand, the innovative Transfiguration design employs double "ring magnets" -- literally magnetic rings fore and aft of the coils which sit right inside of them. If you apply an AC demagnetizing current to the coils, you will weaken the ring magnets and reduce the sensitivity of your cartridge.

DON'T DO IT! You have absolutely nothing to gain and a whole lot to lose!

If you want to "tune-up" or "break-in" the coil wires, get the Cardas sweep record and leave the cartridge over night tracking the "locked" white noise groove. It won't hurt the cartridge, and the record is, as stated, made with a particularly hard vinyl for just that purpose. I did it for a couple nights and my Transfig was ready to go in no time.

I'm going to leave another post later for Speedy in which I'll attempt to explain this whole "stylus rake" thing and how to do a "reference setup" from which you can experiment, but always return to if desired.

Neil

Reb -- thank God! The Cardas record is all you need for "cooking" those little coils! And I'm not sure you even have to do that more than once, but it can't hurt them and it also conditions the rest of the system if you have it turned on. Think about trying a lower load impedance at some point if it's not too much trouble. Somewhere between 80 and 120 ohms. I think you'll be amazed at the air and ambience you'll find lurking in those grooves.

Speedy, if you are looking at the cartridge from the side, the top of the stylus (where it attaches to the cantilever) should be closer to the front of the cartridge, and the bottom of the stylus (where it fits in the groove) should be closer to the rear of the cartridge. So too with the cutter head, and so that's the same position the stylus must take also.

The exact wording of the instructions I received with my cartridge is: "When viewed from the side, a stylus does not sit vertically in the groove but 'points backward' slightly." Now, I admit that's somewhat ambiguous -- however, if one reflects on how a record is cut, there can be no question that what they mean is that the TIP of the stylus (the business end -- the BOTTOM end!) points backward.

What has to happen, if one is going to be scientific about cartridge setup, is to establish the known Stylus Rake Angle at a specific tonearm/cartridge position. The easiest position for me to establish (over and over again if necessary) is setting the top of the cartridge body parallel to the record (or platter) surface. There are probably a lot of ways to do this, but here's how I do it:

1.) Tape the platter down in at least two places using masking tape, or something easily removable, but so it won't rotate.
2.) Make sure the platter is level. Place the level next to the spindle, first parallel to the tonearm, and then perpendicular to the tonearm. I use an 8"plastic torpedo level. It doesn't weigh much, but if you have a sprung TT, you might need to use a very short bubble level so its weight won't affect your measurements. They're about the size of a pencil with flat sides like a pencil so they won't roll and about 1.5 to 2 inches long. When using any kind of spirit level, always switch the ends around to make sure the bubble reads the same both ways -- nothing worse than a faulty level!
3.) With the platter levelled, and the tonarm in its rest, place the little spirit level across the top of the headshell parallel to the front face of the cartridge. (I'm assuming here that the top your tonearm's headshell is flat and even with the bottom surface where the cartridge joins it.) Adjust the headshell, or the tonearm base/pillar or the cartridge itself until it is level to match the platter.
4.) Now comes the fun part: Remove any anti-skating force. Make sure the stylus guard is on the cartridge -- better safe than sorry! With the tonearm still in its rest, place the little spirit level on top of the headshell pointing front to back along the centerline of the cartridge (in other words 90 degrees to how it was before) Make sure it lays flat and parallel to the top surface of the cartridge. You can use a little piece of double sided foam tape to stick it in place and dodge any irregularities on the top of the headshell if you have to -- otherwise just let it sit there.
5.) Lift the tonearm and set the cartridge (with the stylus guard in place) on the platter. Read the level. Start adjusting the tonearm pillar up or down until the level reads true. Your cartridge will now be (for all practical purposes) parallel (front to back and sideways) with the surface of a record.

The big question now is, with the cartridge body set up this way, what is the stylus doing relative to the groove? With vdH, no problem. It's vertical. That's the way they're made. You want the bottom of the stylus to point backward one degree? That's easy. With a typical 23 cm tonearm (from pivot point to stylus tip) the geometry works out that you raise the pillar 4mm (from the level setting) for each degree of stylus rake angle you want. With a vdH on an SME V, I started with 5mm and teased it up till the image snapped in, right around 7mm, equal to about 1.5 degrees of SRA.

So what about the Transfiguration? Well they designed it with a stylus that is already raked when the cartridge is level and parallel to the record surface. I wanted to know just how much they'd raked it however (although I had a pretty good idea!) So, I levelled mine as described above, and with my pocket microscope, I could see it was clearly raked (with the bottom of the stylus pointing backward.) So I started dropping the tonearm pillar (keeping careful track of how far) until the stylus was vertical (I do this by checking the stylus with a 50x scope while it's sitting on a front surface mirror on the platter, until it lines up with its mirror image -- you might not want to try this, but I've had a lot of experience!) Anyway, I had to drop the pillar about 6mm to get the stylus vertical, which means it had a preset rake of a bit under 1.5 degrees when level and parallel to the record, and at a tracking force of 1.8g.

Now that's really good information to know, don't you think? You now know, for instance, that if you do want to lower the back of the tonearm, you don't want to go further than 2 or 3 mm down from level, or you can be sure the edges of that micro-ridge stylus are going to clip the tops of those groove undulations -- and ditto in the other direction. So what I'm saying, is that somewhere in that 6mm range, 3mm up or down from level, you should be able to find that magic spot. Having done so, you can then fine tune it even further if you want, with minor adjustments in VTF, which will micro-adjust the SRA as well as VTA.

I'm leaving mine as is for now (meaning level, at the factory preset SRA) and 100 ohms loading. It's apparently breaking in quickly, as Reb observed. It seems to get better with every record (or am I just over-enthusiastic?) Anyway, I'll need time to really get used to it with many records I know well, before I would be able to judge if additional adjustments produce better results. When it stops blowing my mind the way it is, I'll consider it!

Hi Reb -- well what I know about cartridge loading, I know mostly from experimenting with my vdH's over the years. The required load impedance (or preamp input impedance) for any given MC cartridge is generally a function of its internal coil resistance. The 0.5mV Colibri, for instance, with a coil resistance of approx. 30 ohms has a required load impedance of "greater than 200 ohms" (which presumably means 200 ohms up to infinity!?) but then, they do specify an "optimum" load of 500 to 1000 ohms (which is why I always used the 825 ohm setting on my Levinson phono preamp.)

Now, the Transfiguration folks are even less specific than vdH, (greater than 9 ohms? duh!) but after looking at the specs for a lot of MC cartridges, I've come to realize that the specs for cartridge loading vs. coil resistance are pretty much proportional across the board, for example: The average optimum load for the Colibri described above would be 750 ohms (halfway between 500 and 1000) If you divide 750 by the coil resistance (30 ohms) you come out with a multiple of 25. OK the internal resistance of my W is 6 ohms (Isn't it amazing how the Temper W gets about the same output as a Colibri with what appears to be only 20% the number of coil windings!) OK, so if you multiply 6 ohms times our multiple of 25, you come out with 150 ohms as the optimum loading for the Transfig W. For a V, at an internal resistance of 3 ohms, the optimum load would be around 75 ohms.

Now none of these numbers are cast in concrete, however, they do represent a fairly solid point of reference, and will apply to any step-up device, whether ss, tube, or transformer. Assuming the cartridge is set up so the stylus is in reasonably correct relation to the groove modulations, and taking into account some other minor sonic variables (like your speakers) you shouldn't have to deviate more than, oh I'd say 50% up or down from the theoretical mid-point to find the best response. In the case of the Temper V, that works out to somewhere between 40 ohms and 120 ohms.

There's something else I've noticed sonically in loading MC cartridges. Let's use the Temper V as an example. There is never a huge difference, sonically, between the top end of optimum (120 ohms) and infinity (lets say 47K ohms) so it's sometimes easy to miss that high optimum point because everything above it sounds about the same. But not below the low optimum however! That sounds like crap! This is why it's best I think to start at the low end of optimum and slowly go up until things start to sparkle, bass tightens up, and then stop! That is the point where you will get the most output and flattest response across the frequency spectrum. Right now, I have my Temper W looking at a 100 ohm load which is one of the preset loads in my phono preamp. It's probably a little low, but I'll leave it that way for now. Maybe in a couple hundred hours, I'll get off my ass and try 150 - 200 ohms using some really good Vishay resistors. But no higher. I already tried 825 ohms when I first installed the cartridge because that's where my preamp had been set for my vdH Frog, and it sounded pretty screetchy, almost unlistenable.

A long time ago, I had a vdH TWO cartridge. It had an output of 2.25mV! I had an ARC SP-14 preamp. It had a really great tube (lo-gain moving magnet) phonostage with a built in standard MM load impedance of 47K ohms. The internal resistance of the TWO was 96 ohms, so the optimum load should have been about 2400 ohms. I put in some shunt resistors to drop the impedance down (I didn't solder them) Well, it did get just a tad louder, but it didn't sound that different (to my ear at that time.) I decided not to mess with it. But had I known then what I know now, I would have dialed it in!

I guess my main advice, based on what I've learned over time, is don't paint all MC cartridges with the same brush when setting them up. How your previous one worked best is not necessarily how your new one will work best, even though they may have similar outputs, VTF, etc. In my opinion, the most important things to set properly before attempting any fine tuning, are VTF, SRA, anti-skate, and load impedance in that order. Once those parameters are correctly set for a specific cartridge's electrical and physical properties, I believe very little additional fine tuning will be required to reach the very best performance.

In fact, I would suggest listening for a 100 hours at the initial settings, until the cartridge is broken in and you are really used to it's performance as is. Then, at least, you'll be able to better tell what effect any changes you make are having, better or worse.

Speedy, I'm glad I finally managed to express myself clearly. Please share your progress with us.

N

Reb, I was just curious: What was the 36mv cartridge you had previously? The one that sounded good at 22K? If you don't know what its coil resistance (or internal impedance) is, I thought I'd try and look it up to see what the "formula" predicts its loading should be.

N

Reb -- I could only find an internal impedance spec for the .3mV version of the Ruby 2. It is 45 ohms (the .34mV might be a little higher.) Its loading range is spec'd at >400 ohms, and our "formula" (25 x internal impedance) predicts an optimum load at 1125 ohms, with a high-optimum of 50% more, which would equal 1700 ohms.

So you can see that, unless you did an A-B and listened carefully, you might not hear that much difference between 1700 ohms and 22k ohms. But make no mistake, there is a difference! I'm not that familiar with Benz, but if they have a rolled-off high end like you say, running them into a higher load might compensate somewhat, but you'd also be "throwing away" some low end output. How much would depend on the cartridge/arm's low end response.

I wanted to mention something about the issue of MC cartridge output. Manufacturers use one of two different test records to measure cartridge output. The JVC (TRS-1007) at 3.54 cm/sec, and the CBS (STR-100) at 5 cm/sec.

Make sure, when you are assessing output figures, that you take the cm/sec figure into account.

For example, the Lyra Titan is rated at 0.5mV, and so is the Transfig W. But the Titan's output was measured using the CBS record (at 5 cm/sec) while the W's was measured using the JVC record (at 3.54 cm/sec). Had the Transfig W also been measured using the CBS record, its output would be well over 0.6mV

Lohanimal, if you want to keep your EF1 (which you should!) I suggest you trade your Temper V in on a Temper W. It has 0.2mV more output than the V, which is not enough to render it less refined IMO, but enough to do the trick with your EF1 (and make sure your cartridge loading is correct, around 150 ohms +/- 75 ohms.

Call Bob Clarke at Profundo, he might be able to arrange a trade with one of his dealers:

email: [email protected]
phone: 510.375.8651
fax: 510.525.8942

As for the Koetsu, IMO they represent old technology pushed to the limit. People say they have great midrange. Perhaps that's because that's ALL they have. The Transfigs and Titans, and yes, the Colibris too, have great midrange plus the stuff that goes above and below it.

It's interesting to me that the people who work in the "profession" (especially many musicians) have mediocre audio systems. It may just be that they don't expect a lot from reproduced sound because they're immersed in the real thing so much of the time :~)

Speedy, it sure sounds like you're getting a handle on this stuff. I'm glad this thread is turning out to be so helpful. I started it 'cause I was trying to figure out what kind of cartridge to buy, (which I did,) but then it sort of took on a life of its own. I hope everyone will continue to add experiences here so we can all learn from them.

Neil

.