Old Reviews

In the early eighties, I didn't offer any arms for review, and later, the RP1 was mainly sold in Asia and North America, so there were few European reviews. The two main english language reviews were in the USA, where the distributor arranged for Stereophile and The Absolute Sound to review the arm, and both caused enough problems to put me off reviewers and reviews forever.

The Stereophile review by Dick Olsher, was, on balance, good, despite the reviewer using a deck (The Pink Triangle) which was not really suitable for the XG (although the original RP1 was both a good physical and sonic match for the PT). The thing that got me was the comment added by Gordon Holt at the end. I thought, what a hypocrite! I replied to the review and that was that - no further contact with the magazine.

The Absolute Sound review, though again with good comments, showed up the lack of understanding on the part of the reviewer, Tom Miller. He had, either through lack of experience or research, no grasp of some of the most obvious and basic aspects of hifi design and theory.

I replied to both reviews, though to little effect. Both reviews had nice things to say, of course, but it doesn't take much to change the tone, and showed up how personal and subjective it can be.

In the late eighties, Source-Odyssey submitted a Source deck for review to Hifi Choice. Unfortunately, and without  my knowledge, they sent it with an arm on it, but the arm was the old scrapper used to set the speeds, run in the decks, check earthing, etc, and the lead wasn't the standard one either. Even then, the arm did reasonably well physically, despite some strange logic on the part of the reviewer trying to account for the good resonance behaviour.

The only other review I know of was in HiFi World (March 2012) where Adam Smith reviewed the early RP1-XG he had bought second-hand from me, some months previously.

So, take reviews with a pinch of salt - much in the same way as you would a dealer's recommendation. Base your opinion on what you think of the arm by hearing it in a system you  know. If you like the sound and like the looks then forget about it and listen to some LPs.

__________________________________________________

The Absolute Sound Review

I have found and copied the review from The Absolute Sound with my response and a few comments:

The Odyssey RPI-XG

The Odyssey RP1-XG is a departure from conventional design approaches and seems to embark upon a sonic path different from that of other arms In the survey—an intriguing and (potentially) valid path. I am of two minds about this arm. I love it and I distrust it. This is going to drive the manufacturer crazy and give my critics ample ammunition to swipe at me, but only If they choose not to explore the complexity of the dilemma. The Odyssey sounds wonderful, has no gross aberrations in tonal balance—and yet I question its accuracy. Possibly, just possibly, the Odyssey is a significant advance in the state-of-the-art that is marred by subtle problems hard to pinpoint.

What does it sound like? A tonal balance similar to the Syrinx PU-3, with slightly more low frequency impact. Rather than the incomplete tonal body of the Syrinx, the Odyssey has a rare completeness of tonality, from top to bottom. The effect is like taking the Conrad Johnson Premier Three's midrange and extending that character to cover the full range. There is a brilliant vividness of tone that is emotionally powerful. It sounds like live music. It adds a luster to every record in my collection, which would normally indicate a midrange prominence; but I detect no prominence of the midrange at the expense of the extremes. The sound is addictive. So what's the problem? The soundstage. That's my problem with the Odyssey. The soundstage is very forward with a serious lack of depth. Yet, it is wide and there seems to be good focus. But there is very little distinguishable ambient information. The other arms set up the soundstage environment and the performance takes place therein. With the Odyssey, there is no stage set; the Odyssey is the performance. Seemingly, the Odyssey is recovering the ambient information (hence the full tonality) but is not separating it from the initial sound source. I don't claim to understand this, but that's how it sounds.

The oddness of the Odyssey's sonic performance compels a more detailed, objective discussion. The Odyssey is a gorgeous looking arm with unique design approaches. The most troublesome aspect is the looseness in the bearings. Yes, in three separate arms submitted to TAS there was play in the bearings. A letter from the designer informed us that the loose bearing was deliberate because too many bearings were being rejected by quality control because of brinneling. So, Odyssey loosened the bearings to avoid that problem. Odyssey's position is that the mass of the arm controls the energy. I agree, as long as it is an energy above the arm's resonant frequency. Below the resonant frequency, the bearings must be tight to control the energy or, as you will remember, chatter can set in. This simply cannot be good for the sound. As a reviewer, I must express my disagreement with the manufacturing choice here. The Odyssey comes with gold-plated screws, counterweights, and mounting base. I would rather see the money spent on tight bearings with no brinelllng. On the positive design side is the location of the bearing in the plane of the stylus. Also, there is the unique asymmetric configuration that terminates in spherical structures that are said to cancel standing waves in the material. The bearing housing is offset at the angle of the headshell. The headshell is also unique—a solid triangular block that may well be effective In handling energy generated by the cartridge. Unfortunately, the headshell does not and cannot have slotted holes. The stylus tip to pivot distance remains the same, though, because overhang is adjusted by rotating the eccentric mounting structure. A clever idea that overlooks the change it causes in the geometry because it is altering the pivot-to-splndle distance (a dimension that is just as important for proper alignment).

In summary, the objective Odyssey is a combination of unique, innovative, though sometimes questionable, design choices. This makes me wonder if the fullness of tonality is a successful attribute of the Odyssey's innovation or a pleasant distortion resulting from design flaws. Can the soundstage problems be solved without losing the full tonal body? They must be. If the unique design of the Odyssey is to be validated. I sincerely hope so. One last note. The Odyssey had to be used with its own cable. I'm trying to get new cables made to see if the soundstage problems are hidden therein.  

Tom Miller

_______________________________________________________________

My Response:

2.1.85

Dear Tom,

I have been reading your special report on the 5 tonearms. Thanks for the favourable comments, especially the one about the RP1 making your recordings sound like live music which to me is what it's all about.

Regarding imaging, output leads do indeed make a difference, and the leads currently used in the RP1 are actually due to be replaced. This aspect of the arm is one which we have been looking at since before last January but have encountered a number of problems trying to source a suitable cable and universal connector without adversely affecting the retail price. Perhaps I should also be looking at a possible flexible mini interconnect which would allow standard interconnects to be used.  In any case a revision of leads is in the pipeline.

Another change is in parts sourcing and assembly sub contractors which will allow tighter tolerancing of components and closer tolerances in assembly which will mean  in turn that bearing play can be reduced, since new packaging will ensure that no damage to the bearings occurs in shipping the arms which can be a problem.

To recap on the geometry, Tom, you are correct in saying that the arm pivot to platter centre distance is important, but it is you, not I, who have overlooked something. The thing to remember is that all the parameters are interdependent, inasmuch as once the limits of the inner and outer groove are established and consequently the zero tracking error points, then a change in either arm pivot to stylus length (L), or arm pivot to platter centre distance (D), or the offset angle (A), will affect the other two. The overhang is simply a function of L and D.

In a normal slotted headshell, the reason for the slots is to enable the cartridge to be adjusted such that the length L is correct, for a given angle A and distance D, which are determined by the manufacturer and the armboard mounting respectively. In the RP1, there are no slots, so L and A vary with the cartridge. Consequently D has to be able to be adjusted which is the purpose of the eccentric mount. Please see the accompanying sheet for diagrams and calculations. Perhaps you should incorporate a précis of the basis of arm geometry in your second part so that your readers can more fully appreciate the reasons for the various differences in setting up, and if you could mention that I haven't overlooked anything with regard to the RP1 geometry then I'd be most obliged. Perhaps your editor would consider a feature at greater length on the subject, as it can get a bit confusing.

Regards from Scotland.

___________________________________________________________

[Check out my post on SME geometry if you want to learn more and see where Tom Miller's misunderstanding occurred. He was and is not alone in this. I have seen comments not just from reviewers, but also from well respected designers and manufacturers which show they also didn't understand it. And compare the Stereophile article to see how a different reviewer perceives soundstage and imaging.]

Stereophile Review

From the Stereophile review of the ODYSSEY RP1-XG TONEARM:

"Beautifully crafted and finished in 24ct gold-plated brass and satin anodized aluminum, this exotic looking tonearm is a real attention getter. When was the last time you flipped out over the appearance of a tonearm? Most can be accurately described as business-like and functional in appearance. The Odyssey, by contrast, with its beautiful finish and gracefully curved tube, is an object d'art! And incredible as it may sound, it was actually designed by a Scotsman (John C. Gordon) and is entirely made in Scotland. I don't mean to cast aspersions on Scottish engineering, but my impressions of their audio design have been, perhaps unfairly, predicated on the not-too-suave execution of the Linn Sondek turntable and its related acoutrements.

The Odyssey tonearm is of the "fixed-pivot" variety and so at least on

theoretical grounds gives up something in tracing geometry accuracy to the linear tracking designs. The arm, however, combines several design features which make it unique. Hemispherical terminations for the arm tube and pillar are used to damp standing waves. The ball bearings are located in the plane of the stylus to improve tracking stability. The counterweight's center of gravity is also at stylus height for the same reason. The headshell is fixed (non-detachable) and is made out of a solid chunk of metal to minimize vibrations and ensure efficient transfer of energy from the cartridge to the arm tube. From a visual standpoint, the arm definitely impressed me. "If only it could sound as good as it looks!" I wishfully thought as I prepared for the chore of mounting the arm on my reference table---the Pink Triangle. And that was when I encountered my first problem with the Odyssey.

The arm tube is located a good inch or so above the plane of its bearings,

so in order to allow for proper VTA adjustment range, the arm mounting board needs to be about 1/12 inches below the disc surface. Pushing the Odyssey's base pillar as far as it would go into the Pink Triangle base still left the arm 1/4 inch too high, relative to the disc.

I complained to Odyssey. They provided me with a thinner mounting board that gave me that extra arm height adjustment I was looking for. But that did not solve the installation problem. Now there was inadequate

clearance between the arm base and the tabletop under the turntable. In order to clear the tone-arm cable, I had to prop up the base of the table on 1 inch thick pieces of wood.

Needless to say, I do not recommend this arm for the Pink Triangle. It is,

however, compatible with the Michel  Gyrodeck. That's the table it was demo-ed with at CES. According to Odyssey, the arm should also work with the Linn Sondek and SOTA tables, but I can't personally vouch for that.

There are a couple more small criticisms. The first one is really minor and

concerns the lead wire connection at the arm pillar. To facilitate arm tube

interchange, (3 tubes are available of high, medium, and low mass) the lead wire exits the arm tube and clips onto four pins on the arm pillar. I found the clip-on connectors to be rather loose-fitting, and would like to see a better connection scheme used here.

The second and potentially more serious problem concerns the arm's

non-provision for proper torsional alignment. The arm's specifications list a

+/- 5 degree torsion adjustment range, and I fail to see how this could be

accomplished. The arm tube is fastened to the pillar with a single screw in

such a way that no twisting motion is possible. I was in luck, in that the

torsional alignment was right on, but you may not be as lucky. (And personally, I hate using shims to adjust this parameter.)  I've contacted Odyssey about this and I hope they can shed some light on the problem at a later date. (They have not responded as yet.)

There is actually a happy ending to this story. When I finally got to listen

to it, the Odyssey turned out to be an excellent arm. To date, I've tried the

arm with the signet TK10ML, Promethean Green, and Win cartridges. Overall the arm's sound character is very neutral, with rock-steady imaging and excellent focus. The attacks and decays of musical transients are clean and unfettered by overlying fuzz. It excels in conveying a sense of solidity even through complex orchestral passages. Its clarity and fine transient-tracking behavior mean that inner detail and ambience clues are superbly resolved.

Clearly, the Odyssey is in the top rank of today's tonearms, and is easily the best pivoted arm I've used to date. I don't think, though, that it's any better than the Eminent Technology air bearing arm I reviewed not too long ago, and may in fact not quite equal the ET in dynamic contrast capability. Neither is it the bargain that the ET arm represents. But the Odyssey has the advantage of being able to partner a wider range of cartridges than the ET arm, including high compliance cartridges when the various arm tubes are used. On the basis of looks alone, no other arm comes close (although the new Shure Series V [SME V] may outdo it there, if one can judge from photos.) An arm of this high caliber deserves the best cartridge and table money can buy. But be sure to verify table compatibility"

Dick Olsher

 The following is a comment immediately after the review, by J.Gordon Holt, the influential, and now dead, (sadly missed by some, but not by me,) reviewer:

"Without having either seen the Odyssey or heard it in action, I cannot comment on either of these points. But I am distinctly worried about the arm's compatibility with most high-quality turntables. The Pink Triangle is lower in profile than most, but not by much. The fact that it had to be lifted by an inch in order to accommodate the arm means that similar problems are going to be encountered with a lot of other turntables, and I am not convinced the arm is good enough to offset the amount of botheration that will be involved in installing it."

Fair enough, you might think. 

Or you might think he would at least have had a listen before being convinced the arm wasn't good enough. 

Or found out if it was a "botheration" to install it on other decks. 

Or even asked me about it.

Well, the old bugger had indeed seen it - and heard it - and could have asked me - at the CES in Las Vegas mentioned by Olsher in the review - in a room with a very nice system - Kiseki Agate; custom GyroDec; Burmester pre; EAR and Burmester power amps; Perkins speakers; and Peterson interconnects. 

He repeatedly returned to the room with the comment that it was a garden of delights, a haven in the storm etc...  Make of that what you will.

In other words, take reviewers' comments (especially technical ones) with a pinch of salt, and decide for yourself.

My response, from a letter to Larry Archibald of Stereophile:

"I received a copy of the RP1-XG review and would like to clarify a couple of points regarding sizes and compatibility.

Since last year, the minimum height required has been reduced such that for a cartridge of average height, a mounting board to record surface distance of 31mm is sufficient.

Clearance below the mounting board is consequently increased, and mods to internal parts have helped. The main pillar protrudes 35mm below the top face of the mounting board and problems with clearance are more to do with the lead than the arm itself because of the long connector used. This is currently being revised and will save some 15 - 25 mm, depending on the final decision. In some cases, the connector's flexing section can be snipped off and the leads tied back with a cable tie so saving space in tight situations as well as improving performance. The little connectors are in the process of being replaced with machined pins and sockets of better quality and more reliable supply, this having been a problem in the past. The original sockets can be gently crimped to improve the connection should they become loose.

With regard to torsional adjustment of the cartridge, there is sufficient clearance in the mounting arrangement of the arm tube to-enable a few degrees of adjustment. The screw is 6BA (0.110") and the hole is 5/32" which gives around 20 thou clearance each side which translates to approximately 5 degrees or so of tilt. Even allowing for manufacturing tolerances in the arm, any cartridge which requires more than a couple of degrees of adjustment will not be performing at its best anyway.

Thanks for all the nice compliments..."

_________________________________________________

Hi Fi World Article

Just to say that there is an excellent article by Adam Smith on the  RP1-XG in the March 2012 (Vol 22, No 1) issue of Hi Fi World. It includes a great photo of the arm on its own, and a review of the arm on a Garrard deck (presumably the one in the pic below):

The magazine is available in most countries, and it is the issue with the Avid turntable on the cover.

Right click and open the images in a new tab to enlarge them.