Pani ... New ART-9 up and running ...

Hi panic, thankyou for the response,  I do not have a phono stage yet,  that was the reasonfor the question,  like to know the mid-range to state of the art phono stages for this cart.

dodgealum ...

I have to respectively disagree with you.  

I've had a number of good to high end cartridges over the years. Every one of them needed time to break in ... the ART-9 included. The ART-9 was the first cartridge where I relied on a person with expert knowledge on my turntable and cartridge setup to set up the ART-9 for me. It was well worth the extra expense. 

Prior to using the ART-9, I had been using AT's OC-9 MKIII's which I considered to be one of the major bargains in cartridges based upon what it does and doesn't do.

Upon initial listening to the ART-9, compared to a fully broken in OC-9 MKIII, the sound wasn't "terrible" at all. It was grainy on top and bloated on the bottom. Also, in comparison to the OC9 MKIII, it had a somewhat pinched sound stage, lacked depth and the 3-D imaging was reduced as well. As time went on, the ART-9 opened up and all of the artificial artifacts were gone. It just killed the OC-9 MK-III. 

In the area of suspending disbelief, in my experience, which granted, does not include the megabucks $10,000+ cartridges, only the Lyra Clavis that I purchased new and owned for several years could compete with the ART-9.  Here's the rub ... The Clavis only did this on "special" nights when the power coming into the house was purer, like at 2 in the morning. The rest of the time, the Clavis called attention to itself in one way or another. The OC-9 doesn't call attention to itself at all. Its just music ...accurate music emanating from the speakers that are no longer there. As far as the musical presentation, there is a lot more "there there." 

Not taking anything away from Lyra in general or the Lyra Clavis here at all. The only cartridge I've had that can compete with the Clavis on correct piano tones is the ART-9. The Clavis was truly great at this. My philosophy has always been ... get the piano right and the system will be right. Tonally, the ART-9 would be the overall tonal balance champ. Again, I have not had experience IN MY SYSTEM with the 10k+ cartridges. 

Is a new ART-9 night and day better than a fully broken in OC-9MK III?   If I had the choice of living with a fully broken in OC-9-MKIII or a brand new ART-9 ... I'd take the OC-9 MKIII. Would I take a fully broken in ART-9 over a fully broken in OC-9 MK-III?  Yes, in a nano-second. It really is night and day. 

Just as a side  note ... Both the OC-9 MKIII and the ART-9 are killers on mono records. I look at that a a major bonus as I own hundreds of mono early released jazz records from the 1950's that were never produced in stereo. 

As a final caveat ... the system has been greatly improved over the years since the Clavis was being used as my go-to cartridge. In all fairness, who knows what the Clavis would sound like today? A bit mind blowing I would suspect. 

Frank

Audiolabrinth, I think if you comb they this thread and other ART9 threads, you'll find a comprehensive list of phono stages used with this cartridge.

What do you mean by mid-range?

Some might call my Rogue Ares mid range ($2k new).  The used market is a buyer's paradise right now it seems.  I'm not seeing gear move, even at really low prices. Back to the Ares, I am really enjoying it's ability to get out of the way.  Very quiet, great soundstage (width and depth) and dynamic.  Does not add tube bloom.

The only phono stage I've heard that betters it, costs 5x more... ASR Basis Exclusive.  I'm sure there are others but no where near $2k that I've heard.  I had a HEED Audio Quasar that was awfully good, particularly for $1200.

Hope that helps.

I totally agree with @chakster and others who say that ART-9 cannot be for everyone. I also agree that expecting an equipment that sounds awful in the beginning to blow you away later is not an easy argument to buy.

Without showering any more praise for the ART-9 I would like to emphasise why I suggested @avanti1960 to hold on to this cartridge. This is one cart which has replaced at least in my own system some of my "favourite" carts costing 3 to 4 times as much. It is one thing to say "Hey I will take a $2k Ortofon over a $5k Lyra any day", it only means you dont like Lyra. But for me ART-9 has replaced my favourite Ortofons, Dynavectors, Decca and Miyabis. Lyra, Benz and Van Den Hul are not on my favourite lists anyway even though I have heard them in my own system. With that kind of backing I think if @avanti1960 likes Dynavector, he stands a good chance of liking ART-9. I agree that Dynavectors, especially XX2 and below are warmer than ART-9.

@jollytinker 

If you read Arthur Salvatore's description of the Zyx Universe II, he's nearly in tears on first listening to it because the cart sounds so awful. And yet by 50 hours it's the finest cartridge he has ever heard. that's a pretty radical difference. One may or not agree with him in general but he does have a ton of experience and a highly resolving system.  

I'm sure Arthur's ultra hi-end system is better than mine, along with his ability to buy cartridges like ZYX Universe II.  I have owned Zyx Airy 3 and later upgraded to Zyx premium 4D (thanks to mehran at sorasound). it was long time ago, but at that time i've bought dedicated Zyx headamp especially for my Zyx cartridge (based on Arthur's review when he praised so much this Zyx CPP-1 pre-preamp compared to many top SUTs). My ZYX Premium 4D SB2 was new and very nice from the start, i didn't noticed huge improvement in the first 50 hrs, can't remember how long i've been using my ZYX since then, but not so long unfortunately, later i have stupidly broke the cantilever! Luckily my back up cartridge was Audio-Technica ART-2000 Ltd. To be honest the price difference between $4500 Zyx (+ special Zyx CPP-1 headapm) and used $700 AT-ART2000 compared to the difference in sound quality between those carts, make me think the AT is a better cartridge.They are both high-resolution superb cartridges, but one can do everything (or a little less) just for 1/6 of the price of another, without hustle with sut or headamp. 

Anyway, when some people prefer different sound than Audio-Technica's house sound, i can totaly understand that. For some reason my vintage Argent MC500HS high output MC with sapphire cantilever sounds much better to my ears than any other MCs i have tried, including the most expensive ZYX Premium 4D. Maybe i will change my opinion when i will find something better, who knows.