Mostly classic rock with some acoustic music too. Right now the biggest thing is detail, it just has more than the Dyna.
Aside from detail, they're neck-&-neck, then? Do you also find that pops/crackle to be more noticeable with the ART9 or are the additional details you're hearing strictly musical?
I wouldn't call it neck and neck as I like the ART9 better right now. It just sounds right to me. Crackles and pops about the same.
I may have to buy a new cart soon and i am tempted by the ART9.The thing is i used to have an OC9/III and when i bought a SME309 the cart was a terrible mismatch with too high a compliance,woofer oscillation and complete lack of life and energy.Since then i have used only stiff and heavy carts,maybe against the recommendations for this arm,and never looked back.Koetsu,Zu,Kuzma... Still,i am more tempted by the ART9 than a Dyna or Transfiguration cart.It has the same compliance on paper as the OC9,so this is a big red flag for me.Is it possible that the cart may not suffer from the same issues?
Your tonearm (9.5g) should be OK with the ART9. Mine is 10g effective mass and I have no issues. The ART 9 is .5G more mass than the OC9/iii which should help. A guy on audiogon runs your tomearm and the ART9 as well- "Hi, arsh, I have a Music Hall mmf-7 and in addition to the Goldring Eroica H that came with the turntable, I have enjoyed using a Goldring 1012GX, a Dynavector DV-20XL, and an Audio-Technica AT-33PTG, which is currently on the tonearm. Each of them has worked well on the ’arm and sounded very nice. The tonearm on the mmf-7.1 is a decent ’arm (Pro-Ject 9c) and is more than capable of bringing out fine performances from these cartridges. I also have a Michell Engineering Gyro SE with a SME 309 tonearm and have used the DV-20XL and AT-33PTG on the ’table. In comparison to the mmf-7 the sound is more revealing and dynamic with a more quiet background but the Pro-Ject 9 tonearm holds it’s own. I’m currently using an Audio-Technica ART9 (on the SME 309), which replaced an aging Dynavector Karat 17D3. After a hundred hours or so I can say that I prefer the ART9 because if its better tonal balance (less emphasis on the lower frequencies), improved bass control, and a more natural sounding mid-range and uppermost frequencies (cymbal crashes for example). Plus, it does a better job of tracking difficult high-energy passages. I think the AT9 would sound very good on your Pro-Ject 9c tonearm if you decide to spend more money on the cartridge. Regards, Tom"
Tom"[/QUOTE] Thanks for the input.Apparently many people are running the 309 with AT carts without complaints and there is no low compliance AT cart,but my experience was different.Also i was advised by a specialist to steer away from AT and even Lyra and to try out Dyna,Trans and other stiff carts with short cantilevers that can put more energy into a relatively lightweight,but rigid arm like the SME.I was running the 15g Zu without problems and my current cart is on the limit at 17 g,but it is too taxing on the arm as it is also very stiff. Is it possibe that the armboard and/or the deck can also have an influence on the arm and cart synergy in regards to the compliance issue?I dont own a Michell table and i hope that 0.5 gramms can make a difference.
I'm running the ART9 on a SME 309 which is installed on an AVID Diva II SP. I haven't had any problems so far. I think it sounds great.
After some deliberation,which included the Ortofon Quintet Black,i ordered an ART 9.I should have it on Tuesday morning and i may order the Soundsmith headshell screws set(with four different materials and weights) too.The ART 9 comes with brass screws and very high quality leads,which retail for 60 dollars on their own,i think.I have the very pricey silver Ortofon LW 800S leads,which are ultra smooth,but a bit bright,so i will compare both sets. I am still worried about the compliance and my experience with the OC9,but i will take the risk.I cant see another cart for that price from the boutique manifacturers,which is not compromised in several ways and even the Cadenza Black is 2.5 times the price.Buying used is risky and could be a false economy.All IMO,of course.
Congrats! As one of the two guys who started the ART9 train said- the only thing wrong with this cartridge is the price is too low!
I received it today and listened to it for half an hour.It came with the cheaper 6101 leads(not the advertised 6106),which i already had and i am using now,and the azimuth is not easy to do by eye. My fears were partially ameliorated as it has more energy,drive and dynamics than the OC9.It is still a bit reserved,but it probably needs more burn in time.The clarity and the soundstaging are tremendous even now,it has terrific resolution and liquidity.
partially ameliorated is good... although things will change as the hours accumulate, you have in effect nailed its essence right out of the box. Absolutely huge (wide and tall) soundstage, a squeaky clean presentation that still offers color, detail and resolution and a slightly polite overall profile. you can maximize the dynamics by optimizing your phono pre gain setting, 60 to 66 db if you can. happy listening!
Thanks.My phono is fixed at 67db/100 ohms.The OC9 didnt lack energy and vitality on my Biotracer,but it was lifeless when i changed my TT and arm.The ART9 is in another league so far,just a tiny bit more polite than my previous two carts for now.I will listen to it later on.My deck is Roksan Xerxes 20plus.
I havent experimented with different azimuth, VTA,VTF(left it at 1.8) and leads(may try the Ortofons next week) yet,but it sounds fine after less than four hours. There is a slight softening of the leading edge,but it is very fluid,neutral,resolving and "in-there".No sibilance as well.
Yeah, it does an incredible job at "staying clean" no sibilance or anything objectionable at all. Probably the most impressive part about this cartridge
Things are getting worse now,i hope it just needs more burn in time.It got brighter(!),edgier and it is lacking bloom and image density,the instruments sounding thin and not fleshed out. The silver leads i tried were even brighter,so i am back to the AT ones.I bumped the tracking force to 2.0,but it sounds the same. I still have not more than 5 hours on it and considering that it has a reputation of a cart that really needs some burn in time i will continue listening to it,before experimenting with VTA.
it could be break in but double check your alignment and tracking force. go up to the high end of the VTF. mine was a little bright when it was out of alignment and the cantilever was not parallel with the runway grid. believe me, this cartridge is not bright. what are your load settings?
I am at 2.0 now and my MC stage is fixed at 67 db/100 ohms.I suspect the azimuth,my Zu was very sensitive to it.The arm is very slightly tail down,i may drop it little more. The cart is definitively promising,it just needs more time and/or alignment.
I did a complete arm and cart realignment today,VTA,VTF,azimuth,anti-skate,etc.I was using the SME template and my ears only,so it may not be totally accurate.Lowered the VTA a bit. The cart does sound a bit thin and peaky.I havent done 10 hours on it yet and i will give it a week of listening before doing any other adjustments and evaluations.It is fluid,smooth and free of sibilance,it just has to mellow and open up a bit.
A couple of thoughts from an AT-9 fan: Suggest you run the cartridge at 1.8 grams. Not a great idea to increase the weight to make a poor sounding cartridge sound good. After you zero it in, small increments in weight may make it sound marginally better. The cartridge is an exceptionally good tracker--extra weight is not necessary. Azimuth by eye is easy for this cartridge. Shine a penlight on the front of the cartridge while playing a disk. The bright line there should be made parallel to its reflection on the disk. My experience with this cartridge is that will bring you very close to the correct azimuth, but you can adjust later either by ear or measurement. Finally, the consensus for the cartridge is that it should be run tail UP, not down, and I heartily concur. You seem to be going in the wrong direction. Although there may be outliers, I think the large scale manufacture of AT will have these cartridges with similar configurations. This cartridge, like most, will not demonstrate what it can really do unless you set the SRA/VTA close to its optimum. If you don't know how to do this, it's time to learn.
Really, I had not read this, thanks. I have been running mine perfectly level which dials in ~ 92 degrees SRA. I would actually like to see the sound a touch brighter, sounds like lowering the tail is the way to go.
Well,usually lowering the tail should make a cart darker and i am a bit sceptical that raising it will ameliorate the brightness,but i will give it a go.
No, raising the tail. It's not just a question of brightness. Wonderful things happen when a good cartridge is brought to proper VTA/SRA. This can only be done by listening. Raising or lowering the arm is not a tone control. There is only one correct height!
Just one question to the ART9 users,did you receive the AT-6106 leads with the cart or the cheaper ones like me?
I set the VTA level to very,very slightly tail up,which turned out to be not higher than where it was at the beginning,and returned the downforce to 1.8.If i am not satisified with the sound i will try lower tracking force,then higher VTA to see if it really prefers tail up. I worry that the gain could be a bit too much for this cart,hopefully not.
