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

No pro reviews means that nobody is sensing them any review samples, not some big conspiracy against value products offending the big spenders. 
I have had dialogue with Michael Fremer about cartridge reviews and he will review a given cartridge as long as the distributor sends him one.  
Some distributors have refused to send him some product because of his honesty.    
If someone were to send him an ART9 i am sure he would review it on Analog Planet.  
       I also believe that comparisons to the Ortofon 2M black are valid and significant because it is a highly regarded, high value, universally praised cartridge by critics and consumers alike.  
The fact that the ART9 trounces it is no small feat IMHO.  

From my very first post that started this threadd:

" At under $1100.00 from LP Tunes, its a bargain. The ART-9 surpasses all cartridges I've had in the system before. That would include Dynavectors, Benz, Grado Signatures and a Lyra Clavis that I dearly loved. In fact, its more musically correct than the Clavis. The Clavis was the champ at reproducing the piano correctly ... the ART-9 is equally as good in this area."

Frank

I also like the fact that it is a little too careful and polite compared to some cartridges that like to manufacture air and sparkle that isn't on the recording.  I hear it as adding to the realism factor, not detracting from it.  It gives the ART9 its squeaky clean, natural sound and demeanor.  

I personally have had Van Den Hul Condor, Lyra Skala, Benz Micro Ebony TR and Miyabi standard/47 before the ART-9.

@avanti1960

I also believe that comparisons to the Ortofon 2M black are valid and significant because it is a highly regarded, high value, universally praised cartridge by critics and consumers alike.

Have you tried old Ortofon M20FL (fine line) against your new 2M Black? Or Stanton 881s mk2  or maybe 981 (stereohedron) which kills 2M for much less money.

I wish i could come up with my Audio-Technica AT-ML170 and AT-ML180 VM OCC from the 80’s. It would be nice to compare ART9 MC to the best AT’s vintage MM, they are in the same price range today, but the technogy has changed. Look here how the diamont mounted on the cantilever. Those two AT-ML models are the ultimate MMs ever, hard to imagine today price for them if AT could make them, their new MMs are far away from their top products from the 70s/80s, so why their new MC must be better?

Those vintage AT-ML 170 and AT-ML180 VM OCC are much better than newly made ART2000 MC i have owned (it was good cartridge too).

So i’m curious why not compare Audio-Technica’s own stuff to find out what is better. At least they are from the same family tree.

I posted comparisons vs. Dynavector XX2, but it wasn't mkII, and I didn't say that the ART9 came out ahead.
It came out ahead on value for price if that 2x factor or ~$1000 is important in your decision. 
I found both carts excellent and could live with either, but I found the ART9 a tad polite and lacking warmth; not on an absolute basis, but relative to the XX2. The ART9 was very neutral in tonality, detailed and had very clearly defined images in space. 
The XX2 had a more engaging way with vocals and more 3D body to the instruments, excelling with instruments like cello and acoustic guitar, but a smaller soundstage overall, with slightly less ability to untangle each instrument from the next in a large orchestra. 
My takeaway was that listeners primarily listening to rock might prefer XX2, and those into classical might prefer the ART9.
Granted all this was based on just a few hours listening, but we are all hungry for viewpoints so I didn't hesitate to share mine in case it might help somebody. I recall that the night of the comparison I felt that I'd wished that the next lower priced Dynavectors were on hand to compare to ART9 at equal price points. 

To go WAY OUT ON AN OVERSIMPLIFICATION LIMB for sh*ts and giggles here if I had to line up other carts I've lived with relative to these on a sonic continuum it would be like this:

VDH Colibri XGP <> ZYX Airy3 <> ART9 <> Signet MK111E <> XX2 Allnic Verito <>Denon103R

The left side would be described by a random room of audio buffs as detailed/delicate/airy/bright/trebley/fast/neutral/hifi/transparent/tape-like, while the same group of fans & detractors might call the right side smooth/relaxed/diffuse/rocking/warm/smeared/musical/concert-like. YMMV.
Hey if I keep going this way, maybe I can turn a whole review into just a thumbs up or thumbs down :-) Cheers,
Spencer

I don't have as much experience as some of you here. I now have a new SL1200GAE and about 25 hours on the ART9. I am loving this combo. Running my Parasound JC3+ at 100 Ohms. I can only compare to my last set up which includes VPI Scout 1.1 and Soundsmith Zepher. The SL1200GAE with the ART9 is in another league entirely and the ART9 has some more break-in to go.

Having lived with the 9 for over a year now, I'm really wondering at what cost will a worthwhile improvement come at? I've used several Dynavectors, and do like them, XX-2 mk11 and 17d2 which I still have bought new in 1991, and it still sounds fine. Art9 is in a totally different TT though, a rebuild of a Sony TTS 8000 with SAEC 506/30. This combination with very careful set up is addictive. I recently re-wired the 506 with silk covered silver which brought more out of the art9 than before, depth, definition space and bass /hf extremes are extended but very natural, nothing is fighting for attention more than other area's, just more like the music flows better. So, how much more does the ART1000 give over the ART9? Or, a Dynavector XV-1t??

"Having lived with the 9 for over a year now, I'm really wondering at what cost will a worthwhile improvement come at?"

ps68- I mentioned in another thread at some point, we should see a MKII model and perhaps there is something to fill in the considerable gap  with the 9&1000?

Following what's been done with other other models, kinda expected?
Been playing mine for 1.5 years, if a revised model came out, I would buy one.

Having lived with the 9 for over a year now, I'm really wondering at what cost will a worthwhile improvement come at?

That is the whole point. The ART9 is not the ultimate cart but it is at a level where you are surfing in the upper echelons of what is possible from an MC cart. A worthwhile improvement from here means getting the top cartridges from other serious brands like Ortofon (A90 and above), Lyra (Etna and above), Dynavector (Xv1s and above), AT ART-1000, Transfiguration Proteus etc. Even among them you may have to choose carefully. So, when you are ready to get into that ultra-fi category it would make sense to look beyond ART9

My Soundsmith re-tipped Dynavector 20X2L (nude contact line stylus with ruby cantilever) gives the ART9 a serious run for the money and is slightly more dynamic but not quite as clean / smooth on all recordings.
I can see where some Soundsmith carts might be an upgrade from the ART9- e.g. the Zephyr MIMC star- especially if the dynamics are better than my re-tipped DV. The MIMC Star is a low output moving iron that has ultra low moving mass that is a fraction of the mass of a low output moving coil.

I finally got a chance to compare the ART9 to my Zyx UNIverse Premium, so I’m posting the results here as promised. The comparison is a bit silly since the cartridges are separated by an order of magnitude in price. It's clearly an unfair 'fight'. But the lingering question here is whether the ART9 can compete against the upper echelon of MC carts, and if not, just how far up the scale it reaches. For me this exercise helped to impart some clarity. I’m not a pro so please bear with me and apologies in advance if I step on any toes. My system is detailed at the bottom of the post.

In the end the results were about what I expected. The Zyx outperformed the ART9 in pretty much all the categories I could think of. I enjoyed the ART9 profoundly during the first 100 hours of break in, to the point where I felt no desire to put another cartridge in the system. But once I installed the Zyx UNI Pre again the differences became apparent, and I do hear the ART9 differently now. (I think it was Mark Twain who said that “comparison is the death of joy”)

First off, the Zyx is significantly more detailed, or has a lower ‘noise floor’. The ART9 is excellent in this regard, particularly in the upper mid range, but I always heard a certain dullness or compression as I noted in an earlier post. Break in improved this considerably but it never fully disappeared.

On the high end, the Zyx reaches further than the ART9. Rooms are more audible for example. On Keith Jarrett’s Koln Concert LP, the ART9 made the piano sound more close-miked. With the Zyx I heard the piano sitting on a stage in a particular hall, making for a more engaging listen.

On the low end, the ART9 is good - bass drums are felt and heard in a natural sounding way. But the Zyx goes much deeper and still stays taught and controlled. The bass is one of the great things about this Zyx IMHO (and btw I don’t hear Zyx cartridges as ‘bright’, as people commonly say, although i’ve only heard this one, a UNI II, and the 4D mono).

Mid-range is more complicated and I’m still teasing it out. The two carts are more comparable here - especially in vocals. But after switching back and forth I’m hearing the ART9 as a bit cloudy and colored in the lower mids - like there’s extra ‘stuff’ hanging on the notes. I probably wouldn’t have heard this without going back to the Zyx, but now that I’m aware of it I can’t “unhear” it. My overall sense with the ART9 is that it’s a bit over-emphasized in the mid range and (perhaps) under-emphasized at the bottom and top.

On dynamics, again the ART9 is great but the Zyx is better. There’s a sense of pure surprise that I get with the Zyx, usually a few times per LP if it’s an acoustic recording, that I don’t experience nearly as often with the ART9.

Also I heard a difference in the leading edges of notes, or in fast transients. The Zyx is sharp and precise in this regard, where the ART9 has a more rolled-off feeling. It’s like a decent knife versus an Obsidian blade. A reedy saxophone or a bow drawn across a double bass brings the distinction into focus.

Imaging? Again the Zyx excels here, but it’s slightly complicated. The ART9 has this wonderfully delineated quality, giving it a big, open soundstage. It’s the first thing that jumped out at me when I first installed the ART9. But in comparison to the Zyx this quality began to feel a bit exaggerated, as if the musicians were sometimes in different rooms altogether (which I suppose could be true). The Zyx otoh delineated the instruments but maintained an overall ‘organic’ or integrated feel. Also the Zyx has very precise images that extend out to the sides of the soundstage, more so than the ART9.

On tracking I have no strong opinion. Both cartridges were fine in this regard. However I have had some struggles in the past getting this and other Zyx cartridges to play nice with the VPI tonearm, so I might place the ART9 ahead in this category as it was flawless.

What’s the takeaway? To me the ART9 is still a remarkable cartridge that punches well above its weight. In the first 100 hours of use I thought my system had never sounded better (although that’s partly a result of the new Doshi Phono stage). The combined mid-range warmth and detail got me interested in some LPs that I had overlooked before (I’m thinking of a Mozart string quartet LP by the Sequoia Quartet).

In general my sense is that the real strength of the ART9 is in the upper mid range, where it’s remarkably clean and detailed, but that those strengths diminish as you move up and down the spectrum from there. Also, the differences between the ART9 and the Zyx UNI Premium were smaller on studio recordings in contrast to live ones or recordings of acoustic instruments.

However I wouldn’t say the ART9 belongs in the top echelon of cartridges, or pushes the boundaries of MC technology. I haven’t heard enough different cartridges to make that judgement, to be honest. But I don’t think the ART9 defies the laws of gravity. In other words, manufacturers have to make trade offs at lower price points. The ART9’s trade-offs are artfully done but they do exist. If the cartridge pushes an envelope, it's in delivering much higher performance than you would expect for its price.  

But just how high? The decisive thing to me now would be a comparison between the ART9 and one of the more moderately-priced insanely expensive cartridges, like the Benz Micro LP-S, Dynavector XVs, some Lyras (Titan?), Miyajima Kansui, etc. etc. I would love to see someone here do that!

System:
The ART9 was installed on a VPI Aries 1 turntable, modded so that all but the plinth is replaced. It has a Teres Verus II ‘rim drive’ motor, aluminum Classic platter, 3D tonearm, Edensound brass footers (with rubber shock mounts removed). The TT is sitting on a vibraplane.

Phono stage is a Doshi Alaap 2.1 with stock tubes, connected to a Horn Shoppe The Truth optical volume control. Amp is an Art Audio Jota HC SET amplifier, with Devore Silverback Reference speakers. Cables are mostly Auditorium 23, with one run of Kimber double stranded silver ICs. DIY isolation rack and various gewgaws for vibration control.

During break in I had the ART9 mounted on a 3D arm wand with the current “reference” tonearm wire. After 100 hours were completed I moved the ART9 to a second arm wand (a JMW 10.5i with Nordost Valhalla wiring) and put the Zyx UNI Pre on the 3D arm (its normal home). I switched back and forth between those two arms to compare the two carts. Cartridges were both aligned using a Mint LP protractor.

Jolly ... 

Wow! What a super effort and great comparison review. Thank you for doing that.

Its pretty much what I would expect, especially in the "detail" and "bass" area. Did you try comparing the two cartridges on any mono records? The ART-9 is great on monos, as is the AT OC-9 MKIII.  Oh, and what's the price difference between the two cartridges? You didn't mention it.

I got the feeling from your review that if you didn't know about the  Zyx UNI Premium that you could live happily with the ART-9.  Am I correct in assuming this?

Thanks again ... quality review. 

Frank

Thanks for the kind words Frank. I did try the ART9 on a few mono records but I wasn't too crazy about it. I found the sound too warm and thick in the mid-range, much more so than on stereo LPs. Not sure why that would be the case.  

On the second question... Yes I'd probably be happy with the ART9. However I've been kind of restless with tweaking and improving the system, so it's hard to predict whether or not I'd have the bug to try something else. I will say that the Zyx and the AT were remarkably close at times. On some studio recordings where there's not a lot of 'room effect' and not too much happening in the bass, the differences may be pretty subtle. I found this to be the case on the Rounder LP of the Boyoyo Boys (classic South African Mbaqanga music), when I listened to each side on a different cart. 

Thanks for that review.  I own a first generation ZYX Universe with low hours on it, and I just bought an ART7.  I plan to compare those two, and if anyone is interested, I will report here.  The ART7 is very different from the ART9 in terms of construction, and, of course, voltage output.  The difference between how two stereo cartridges play mono LPs is kind of beside the point, because it may have as much to do with the phono stage as with the cartridges themselves, but I assume you had the Dolshi in mono mode when you made that comparison.  Yes?

@jollytinker many thanks for taking that effort even though many would have considered this to be a non-starter (looking at the price difference).
I have not heard those highest grade ZYX carts. 4D is the highest ZYX I have heard it was one of the most impressive sonics that I have ever heard. The rest of the chain also amazing (Avid Acutus SP TT and SME V tonearm). The name 4D itself is explanatory on what it was all about, it presented music with such air, ambience and atmosphere, it was crazy. All that with as you mentioned, terrific transients and deep taut bass. While the soundstage was precise, it extended wall to wall because of those floating ambience. All this really created so many wow! moments in that listening session. When I compared this to lower end ZYX there was always something missing. Especially in the critical midrange zone the lower ZYX sounded less involving than other carts in general.
Now, I can imagine the Universe premium which is 3 times more expensive than the 4D to be actually ultra special.

The ART-9 may not be as uncompressed as a top ZYX or a DV but I dont hear any voicing per se. To my ears it disappear really well into a system because of its studio like character. 

@lewm are you planning to use an SUT with the ART7 ?

@lewm the Doshi doesn’t have a mono switch, nor does the Truth volume control. I’m not sure why that would warm up the mid range though. ?  (I mean not having the preamp switched to mono). 

@pani I knew this wasn’t really a "shoot-out" because the Zyx would almost certainly come out on top, but I wanted to know exactly How. And the comparison taught me something - I hadn’t really perceived that arc where the ART9 is a bit stronger in the mids but tapers off above and below that. So I just thought I’d put it out there in the interests of building a base of information on this cartridge.

What you said about the ART9 disappearing into the system jibes with my own experience. And the Doshi combined with the Truth VC is pretty transparent and unkind to lesser carts....

New here 1st post.

Just ordered the ART-9. Many thanks to all the posters in this thread. The great questions, comments and concerns offered by the various posters, enabled me to make an informed choice.

Thanks

^^^ Welcome aboard the ART-9 train. :-)

Just thought I'd stop in and shovel some coal in the boiler of the ART9 train.

Good to see there's plenty of steam still movin this thread.

Closing in on 2 years use here. STILL rockin without any desire to upgrade(unless 50k falls in my lap to completely redo everything)

Has anyone heard the ART 1000 yet? I realize it's in a different league for uber setups, so I'm thinking most here wouldn't bother with such decadence.

@tablejockey I do not want to derail the ART-9 train but it will be interesting to understand which turntables would be considered "Uber" from the ART-9 perspective ?

Any good $5k turntable should be able to differentiate between a $1k ART9 and say $6k Ortofon A95 sufficiently to justify the difference in price. At the same time I do not expect a ART9 on a Continnum turntable either. However as one goes up the ladder of turntables, what is the level where ART-9 seems to be a non-starter ?

For the reference, before my current turntable I was using the ART9 with a Verdier TT. One may not consider it Uber going by the price and the fact that it is an "old" design but it was a legendary machine in more than one ways. On the Verdier the ART-9 was as good as anything, I would say it was the sweetest spot for a TT like Verdier. So, the "Uber"has to start much higher than the Verdier at least.

just read on another forum that for VPI owners an upgrade to the 3D printed tonearm has made the ART9 sound much better in their system.  

FWIW I ran the ART 9 on the standard JWM9 that came with my Scout and it sounded great. However, a recent upgrade to the 3D-10 made a tremendous difference and really helped me to get the most out of this excellent cartridge. There is a tonal purity and utter lack of distortion that comes with the 3D arm. Highly recommended!

Pani, I find the correlation between goodness of sound and price, when it comes to cartridges, to be unreliable at best, if not totally non-existent. Thus, if I find a cartridge that is "special", no matter what the cost, I would use it on the best turntable I could afford, regardless of cost. Among the MM/MI cartridges in my stash, I adore the SS re-tipped Grace Ruby and the Acutex LPM320STRIII.  Neither is worth more than $500-$600, but I would use either on any turntable with any suitable tonearm regardless of cost.  And they do respond to better and better equipment downstream.

Great thread.  Thanks Pani for your input.  Have a couple questions for the group.  Looking for suggestions. 

I see most people are using an appropriate phono pre-amp to deliver 100 ohms or more.  Went through the 8 pages and might have missed it but is anyone using a SUT with their pre-amp.

I ordered the ART9 and it's going to go on my new VPI Prime with 3d arm.  For step up and pre-amp capabilities I have several options.  I have the Parks Audio CM1254 SUT and was using it with my AT33PTG/II on my VPI Scout.  Not because my pre-amp options wouldn't support the .3 mv, but mostly because I'd bought into the idea that an a passive SUT to 47k mm pre-amp would deliver better results than most pre-amps could handle unless I was using a very high end pre-amp.  It sounds really good.

So I have the budgie CM1254 SUT.  I also have an Emotiva XSP-1 stereo pre-amplifier.  It has an okay pre-amp.  I believe it's MM 47k plus the option for the MC @ 47,100, 470, & 1000.

In addition I have the Clear Audio Nano V2.  I bought this when I had my Project TT and was having trouble with isolating the unit to a point to avoid low frequency rumble through the speakers.  That has both the MM option of 47k ohms and MC at 51, 200, 402 and 1000 ohms.  Again, bought the Clear Audio mainly for the rumble filter but it seems to be a really good phono pre-amp for the $500 and under range.

So what are your thoughts.  I'd be interested in people's point of view having the options detailed above.

wrxified-

the best setup may be  to just experiment with your options and go with what sound best to your ears.

The ART 9 should sound great with the Prime. I hear excellent results with my Classic through a tube phono 

Loading doesn't seem to be an issue with my setup. I just leave it at 100ohms. Happy listening

+1 on tablejockey's comments. Give it the best you've got, and the ART9 won't disappoint (as long as it's in good shape). SUT vs SS gain stage seems to come down to personal preference a lot, or implementation in a particular product, so you'll need to experiment. I used a Clearaudio Nano for a while, and I agree it's a good unit for the price point.  However I've found things get a lot better as you move up the spectrum.  Which leads to another point... 

Lately I've been switching around between a few different cartridges - the ART9, Dyna XX2, 'modded' 103r, and Zyx Universe. Each one has its own character but I'd venture to say that the differences between them are not as great (even with the mighty Zyx) as the improvement I experienced when moving up to a high end phono stage. I was surprised by the degree of difference to be honest, but that's what I've experienced. So now that you've got the TT and cartridge squared away, you might think about pushing the envelope with the first gain stage.  enjoy it. 

"So now that you've got the TT and cartridge squared away, you might think about pushing the envelope with the first gain stage."

wrxified- jollytinker has offered sage advice. You have a $5k setup, that deserves
a highly competent phonostage. If I had your table, I would consider a unit up to $3-4k retail(half used)

Also, Fremer gave that Iphono a thumbs up for its price point.If value SS is your bag, another unit to check out.

That table deserves to be presented in its best light. Being a tube fan, there are seems to always be listings for nice units. Allnic,Audio Research,Herron,Manley...
all can be negotiated for a deal.

Play the music LOUD!

Thanks all.  Was considering the PSAudio Nuwave Pre-Amp while they were closing them out.  Have seen some pretty good reviews on it and kinda liked the idea of picking up the XLR outputs and ADC for ripping some of my favorite albums.

http://www.psaudio.com/products/nuwave-phono-converter/

I will check out the others mentioned above.

On the issue of turntable matching with the ART 9...just saw a $25K Artisan Fidelity Garrard 301 come on this site with an ART 9 mounted to a Schroeder arm.

https://www.audiogon.com/listings/turntables-artisan-fidelity-garrard-301-statement-dual-arm-1-year-...

Suggests the sky is the limit with this cartridge......

That is flat out sexy.  Would easily trade my wife for that turntable.

Got my ART9 less than a week ago. Upgraded from the OC9III and what an upgrade it is. I kind of sit there in awe at what I hear coming out of my speakers. Such a fun yet accurate cartridge. Still breaking in. The lows and mids sound perfect. The highs are still getting there but getting better every hour.
Scout->Sutherland PHd->Decware Torii->Tekton Lore2

I also have a Threshold SL10 preamp that has a fantastic pp that I will AB someday if I can ever pull myself away from my listening chair.
I would have never stumbled across this cartridge if it wasn't for this thread, so thanks to all who have contributed.

^^^  bryantdrew ...

The highs will come around, don't worry. The Art-9 is very extended with sweet, clear highs that seem to go on forever. Give the cartridge a good 75-100 hours. 

By the way, I don't know if you play a lot of mono records, but if so, can you believe how good the OC-9 MKIII was on mono?  Once your Art-9 is fully broken in, its at least twice as good as the OC-9 III on mono recordings. They just seem to get way down into the grooves into some previous unplayed territory.  :-)

Frank

Wonderful cartridge and great stories. My own experience is that the amp manufacturer recommended 2.5x impedance (hence 30 ohms) worked beautifully from the beginning, whereas the 100 ohms was more dynamic but with the highs out of control and the upper mid range sounding too energetic. I settled on 30 ohms, with very well balanced and sparkling results, and the cartridge is still breaking in. Once it is broken in, i will experiment with higher impedance, and highs will likely be in control then, and the greater vividness will be still apparent relative to 30 ohms. 

Cool_jeeves,

what phono amp are you using?

my Art 9 is also breaking in beautifully.

I picked up my ART-9 in early April.  I also have the AT 33PTG/II.  The PTG was a replacement for the 33EV.  I've really been an Audio Technica fan. Over the past 3 weeks I've been putting the hours on it   Probably a little over 50 hrs at this point.  

So how does it sound compared to the PTG? Using some brevity, I'd simply say it's no better, no worse.   

We actually did a comparison this past weekend.  Actually more people chose the PTG/II over the ART9.  To me they sound very close.  Who knows, maybe it'll break in a bit more.  

The 33EV to PTG/II was a noticeable difference.  Way more detail and resolution in the upper frequency range.  Funny thing was I paid less for the PTG.  The PTG to ART9, not earth shattering.  

Lancelock, I am using a plug in phono from Accuphase AD2820. It plugs into the preamp. It has 10/30/100/300 Ohms in MC.

@wrxified, I also had a AT33/PTG for some time and that piqued my interest into AT line up but I did not find it to be the last word in detail, dynamics and resolution. I mean it could be my second cart instead of the DL-103r but not my first cart. The ART-9 was in comparison a totally different level, letting me forget about cartridge upgrades for about 2 years now. I was using a Naim Superline with Supercap PSU as the phonostage which definitely is a very resolving phono stage to tell the difference between the 2 carts. Which phonostage are you using ?

@pani, we used 3 phono stages for the testing.  Among them was a Clearaudio Nano, a Rothwell MCX SUT to Rothwell Simplex, and a Spectral DMC-6 with phono stage.  The Spectral was easily the best of the 3, followed by the Rothwell setup, then the Nano

It definitely is all subjective.  To me I could barely hear a difference.  

^^^ j_damon ...

Its a custom belt built by Origin Live in the UK. Very smooth transaction and it was a solid improvement for my Well Tempered table. Here’s their site:

www.originlive.com

Here's a review of their turntable with an excellent picture of their custom belt. I've made a lot of mods to the turntable but this was the best one by far. You can actually hear the thing break in over about an hour's time. It all about  how the belt grips the platter and accurate speed control. More dynamic and lower noise floor with a more accurate tonal balance. Highly .... very highly recommended.

What table are you using??  I'm curious about the mat you're using. I was thinking of ordering one from Herbie's. 

@Frank I'm using a VPI Super Scoutmaster Reference, it has the HRX flywheel with 2 motors with classic III arm and platter. I very highly recommend Herbie's mats, I have the thinnest model 2 mm thick, his basic model, they do have a page on the website that gives recommendations for various tables, the underside grips the platter tight. It has made a world of difference. The ART and mat have elevated the performance of my rig without question. I'm very happy I didn't go with a Delos, which is what I was eyeing. I do field recording with a pair of AT mic's and they amaze me for the price, into my 2x DSD recorder, that is what brought me to the AT family and got me looking at the ART. Last night I had Philip Glass's Heroes LP and they were in the room, or perhaps I was in their room.  

Cool_jeeves, When you went from 100 to 30 ohms load, was there a subjective loss of gain from the cartridge, which is to say, did you have to turn up the volume a bit in order to get the same sound pressure levels in your room?  I ask because I think at a 30-ohm load, you may be attenuating the treble frequencies, and overall, as you drop the load impedance, the cartridge gets less and less able to drive the phono stage, which loses gain; some of the signal voltage is lost to ground.  You yourself mentioned that the treble was too energetic at 100 ohms and is more tame at 30 ohms.  You may like this effect, but it is an artifact of the impedance mismatch. I bet that as the cartridge breaks in, you will grow to prefer the 100 ohm load or higher.  On the other hand, some prefer the Denon DL103 at very low load resistances, where that cartridge should not really work well. So sometimes theory does not predict personal preferences.

Lewm - right on both counts. I had to turn up the volume slightly when shifting from 100 to 30. My gain is adjustable, but significantly upwards, and not in a small step, and right now I get the right volume at the 9am position and want to keep it that way. I also agree that when fully broken in, I will attempt reverting to 100 ohms. I will also entirely redo the cartridge and tonearm settings, to account for any small creeps (I particularly worry about the very stiff cardridge cables, which can cause small creeps of the cartridge which can slide inside the headshell no matter how tightly screwed).

j_damon ...

Nice analog rig you have there. If it uses a "flat" belt as opposed to a "round" belt, get the Origin Live custom belt. Its worth every penny and far more. You'll think you've upgraded a component ... its that good. 

Now you've really gotten me interested in the Herbie's mat. I just completed the system with Herbie's tube dampeners on all of the tubes.  Wow! Another cost effective upgrade and highly recommended for anyone running tube gear. 

Frank

Lewm, your input regarding the effect of cartridge loading is very interesting especially considering I am currently running a very interesting phono stage by EMIA.

This is an MM phono stage and a Slagle built SUT is being used for MC gain. The MM stage has an input impedance of 300 kohms (not the typical 47kohms). Now, when I use a SUT with 1:20 ratio, the reflected impedance seen by my ART-9 is about 750 ohms (300k/square of turns ratio). This is almost like not loading the cartridge at all. The ART-9 likes to be loaded at 250 ohms in general. 750 ohms is very high and while the effect is a sound that is very live, there is some loss of body in the tones. What do you think would be the right way to load the cartridge down ? Can adding capacitance be an option too ?

Frank, do not hesitate with herbies mat, you will thank me, I got his excellent II 2mm thickness. I have to measure the belts  and will be trying the origin belt, wondering if I should get 3, two for the motors that drive the flywheel and one for the platter, I'm thinking three...  I was also considering Herbies tube dampners as well. Never ends  

Pani, You could replace the 300K ohm resistor with 100K ohms, or have Dave do it for you.  Then the cartridge would "see" a 250 ohm load. Easy, peasie.

Or add a resistance in parallel with the 300K resistor that would bring the net resistance down to 100K.  150K ohms would do it.