Best cartridge you've never heard of: the Audio-Technica AT33PTG/II

LMBO nope. I guess that's your way of saying "it doesn't matter" but I'm still curious. The somewhat "nerd" in me wants to have the knowledge in my bank.

 

I'm 27. I'm sure I can't hear it, but I still have the curiosity since they're published specs.

 

LOL.... yeah, that's getting into "overthinking it" territory! Specs are good.... to a point.

I am curious to hear your thoughts though and learn something....

 

27.... sheesh.... I remember that.... have some great stories from that time in my life. I'll save it for over a beer sometime....

 

The range of the frequency does not matter much. Some people are impressed by that stuff I guess. What matters is the curve of the response along the audible band, unless you are setting up a quadrophonic system or something.

Most manufacturers do not tell you that. You have to look for a lab test or measure yourself. Focus on the range that is actually within your hearing ability.

For example, if you can only hear to say 16-17K, then forget about anything beyond that.

 

Alright man, cheers when that time comes!

 

I'm considering this cartridge for my SL1200G. Been told elsewhere on here that it requires a spacer for my SL1200G though, but I don't suppose that's a deal breaker.

However, looking at the AT range, it is very busy around this price point. Not only is there this model, there's also the OC9 range. Has anyone done any comparison, or know which one would be best suited to the Technics SL1200G?

 

Guess a thicker mat could replace a spacer/enabler

 

Google Valeron's Vinyl Youtube. The guy's got wavs of the needledrops of oc9xml and 33ptg/ii on the same Dire Straits track IIRC in different videos. I listened to both and chose 33ptg/ii.

 

Thanks. Sorry to bother you, do you have a link? I'm unable to find it.

 

Mostly talking on the videos ... he does use a nice Micro Seiki DD-8 though ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZdppkEovt8

Here's a post I made on the comparison, includes a recording of the OC9XML a couple posts below, though not the greatest ...
OC9ML/II or AT33PTG/II?

 

In the thread you linked, you also referred to an OC9iii comparison in another thread!!

Having owned all of the AT33PTGii, OC9iii and OC9XML -- do you have a current, up to date / latest quick and dirty summary of the XML and 9iii? I really like the 9iii on my PL-70L2 with the JC3+.... but could be tempted to try the XML some day.

 

I haven't revisited it lately with my new MA-505 MKIII tonearm with the removable arm tubes, mainly been doing comparisons of different arm materials, but below is what I said around here before ... also highly recommend the Melanie de Biasio record I mentioned below, hope she gets something new out this year, big talent ...

 

Wow, the comparison was not subtle in your system.... interesting! Thanks....

EDIT: Just wanted to add as I type this I am listening to Phish Picture of Nectar on my PL-70Lii with and OC9iii right now, paired with the JC3+. Your line of "the OC9/III does sound nice and well integrated, but the sound is kind of gauzy and not well lit, not nearly as colorful." makes me realize how system dependent cartridges are --- because I am hearing the opposite right now!

The OC9 (original mlii, iii) has a long history of highly varying opinions and experience across the net / forums. But I've had nothing but success with them.

Still may try the XML though...

 

Yea, hopefully people know enough to take these little reviews in context. My system is purposely built for that certain sound I like, and not really with any concessions to others. It's all tubes, no feedback except around the output transformers in the power amp to get the output impedance down a bit, and some local feedback in the turntable motor since it is a DC servo motor, and no electrolytic capacitors except in the tube heater circuits. It's what I consider a natural sound, minus a lot of the cues that we use to put outlines around the sounds and add detail. So lots of dimension without defined edges, lots of height and width, but not the "pinpoint imaging" that some people seem to value. Others place more value on different aspects of the sound, so always keep that in mind

That said, The OC9XML seems like a very neutral cartridge. I haven't measured the response yet but I would be surprised if it wasn't very flat. In my MA-505 MKIII tonearm, it has a very well controlled tonearm resonance, I doubt most could even find any effects from the resonance due to the low mass of the tonearm and the silicone damping. And really great tracking, it's a really impressive sound...

 

So far day 2 with this cartridge (AT33PTG) is gone, and I can say I'm fairly satisfied. Initially the sound was kind of uninspiring and not what I expected a MC to be. But somewhere along the line today, it started to sound very good! After some tampering with the loading and cart adjustment it is sounding very exciting.
One thing is for sure, that it's definitely more laid back in its presentation and on some records the "air" is really open. The treble is smoother overall and where some albums certain things could be harsh with the MM are less so with this MC.
In all honesty I'm not disappointed with it like I was at first as the sound seems to be opening up. Now would a SUT make it sound any better? I don't quite see how. I'm interested to hear if things will possibly open up even more, as that's all part of the excitement of a new cartridge isn't it?
P.S. it's loaded at 8500 Ohms.

 

And that's been my finding as well, stepping from the 740ML to the 33PTGii.

 

My experience with the 33 PTG is that is can sound very different with small changes of VTA. But when you get the set up locked in with the small line contact stylus you get lots of HF detail with a tremendous absence of HF tracking distortion and a real "right sized" soundstage that makes other carts seem kind of artificially widescreen.

 

The soundstage and separation in details is where this cart excels, and it is an excellent tracker.

 

I agree! I'm still playing with the loading however. I'm hearing that 47k is dynamic but doesn't have that "air". So I'm switching between the values of 900, 1000 and 8500, but I'm hearing a lower value gives more air.
I'm sure I'm done setting the overhang and I keep the VTA pretty solid too.

 

I never found resistance loading to make a critical difference with MC carts -- the inductance of the cart is so low that the effects of the loading changes are all taking place in the radio frequency range. I would say in my experience, extremely light loads -- 47K ohms, and really anything over 1K ohm -- can be a little light and bright sounding. but 1oo ohms, 200 ohms, 400 ohms, 500 ohms, I couldn't tell any sonic difference. However I found with this cart, it could go from dark and muffled sounding to bright and thin sounding to locked it with detail but not high frequency heat with remarkably small changes in VTA. Its a 10 ohm internal impedance cart, so any load of 100 ohms or higher should be fine in terms of preserving signal voltage at the input, but in terms of damping any ultrasonic resonances, the closer to 100 ohms the better. I'm using a 1:20 SUT with mine now, with a reflected impedance of around 117 ohms.

 

I went from the 33EV to the 33 PTG/ii -- basically the same cart expect for the stylus shape and the cantilever size and material. I found the big differences were the PTG were that the soundstage became more natural in size and scale and made the EV sound stage seem a little unnaturally big in contrast; and alls the high frequencies were extended but easier to listen to. The EV was a great tracker, but the freedom from HF distortion with the PTG is a fair notch up. However, getting that sound require futzing with the VTA. When I first installed it it sounded bright thin and shrill; when I lowered the VTA too much is sounded muddy and lost detail and transparency. The EV, with its spherical stylus, was not nearly as finicky about VTA.

 

I found the same going from the EV to the 33SA. Took a lot of adjusting and probably 40 hours of break in until it came to life. It's an amazing cart.

 

I installed mine a little over a week ago and have 5-6 hours on it (which I no longer have to guess at thanks to my new StylusTimer!). Table is a ca. 2008 KAB'd SL-1200MkII w/ fluid damper and Cardas arm wire.

First impressions were not good as some devious designer decided to include totally smooth and round nuts. Curse these people. Every time I install a cart I swear I'm buying a threaded one next time. Because of this trepidation I tend to stick with carts 'till death do us part.

Used the stock headshell and set tracking force/antiskate to 2g. Set the top of the headshell parallel with no spacer needed due to the thickish Herbie's mat. I had to use the auxiliary counterweight on the arm. Geometry was set via the Technics jig which I've not had reason to question in the past (no IGD, etc.) I have neither the interest in nor patience for a more protracted (nyuk-nyuk) setup process.

I have it loaded at 184 ohms via my original Bob's Devices 3440A (red) SUT @ 1:16.

As I understand it it takes a bit to break in but I'm really enjoying it so far! Quite different from the DL-301 MkII I've run for the past 2 years or so. A bit less "full and romantic" but very detailed, dynamic, and open with a delicate treble range. Big soundstage. Great bass - an original pressing of Gaucho really slammed.

Vocals seem to form in a more "3D" way. The Harrow & The Harvest floated Gillian Welch between the speakers almost spookily with lots of detail.

I don't think I have very hard-to-track records in my small collection with which to test its abilities in that area but there's a part in an old pressing of "Chet" (right in the middle of "Time on my Hands") that would cause a song-stopping skip on my DL-301 and which doesn't even cause a noticeable tick with the PTG/II.

I may try playing with VTA a bit reading chervokas' observations above but it's sounding just right at the moment. I'm also wondering if my old 3440A SUT isn't holding it back some. Kinda looking at the Lundahl LL1931 as an upgrade.

Anyway, just some random thoughts and my thanks to the OP and the rest of the thread for the suggestion.

 

I don't understand why you would need to use the aux weight, it's not a very heavy cart at 6.9 grams, so maybe 7.8 grams total with hardware since it requires long screws, but I think the SL-1200 will balance over 9 grams without aux weight. I know some people like to use the aux weight with all carts to increase the effective mass a bit, but just curious.

The Harrow & The Harvest is a really nice sounding record, I've used that one myself to dial in things, music is so good that sometimes I forget what I'm doing, but that just means I have repeat it a couple more times, so no problem. That and the Melanie de Biasio No Deal are two of my modern favorites for both setup and funtime listening