2. analog
  3. 1437001122

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

The Cartridge arrived and I took it down to Studio City to Acoustic Image to have Eliot Midwood set it up properly. Eliot is the bomb when it comes to setting up the Well Tempered turn tables correctly.

http://www.acousticimage.com/

So, last night I had Mr. Golden Ears over to get his assessment as well. For a brand new cartridge that had zero hours on it ... all I can say is WOW! This is one naturally musical cartridge that doesn't break the bank. Its everything I liked about the OC9-mk III, but it goes far beyond the OC-9 in every respect.

In a previous post, I talked about the many mono records I own and how good the OC-9 was with the monos. Well, the ART-9 is on steroids. Just amazing on mono recordings.

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.

Sound stage, depth of image, left to right all there. Highs ... crystalline. Mids ... female and male voices are dead on. Transparency ... see through. Dynamics ... Wow! Low noise floor ... black. Mono records ... who needs stereo?

Your assessment that the ART-9 doesn't draw attention to itself is dead on. You just don't think about the cartridge at all. Not what its doing, or what its not doing ... its just beautiful music filling the room.

Thanks again Pani for the recommendation. I'll keep posting here as the cartridge continues to break in.
128x128oregonpapa
oregonpapa's avatar
oregonpapa OP
4,867 posts
 
^^^ I think the rising top end of most high end moving coil cartridges give s false sense of "detail" or "transparency" when in actuality, its more of a slight edgy brightness and  not natural.

I believe that when reproducing music in our homes with all of our fancy and expensive gear, we should try to emulate a live performance as much as possible. I attend concerts a little less frequently than I used to, but I never recall a time at any concert thinking ... "boy, those strings sound "detailed," or ... oh geeze, what a black background." 

I believe that one's system has arrived when audiophile and music loving friends come over for a listening session and say ... "Man, those GUYS sound great," instead of, "Hey, your system sounds great."   Big difference. 

So, for last nights listening pleasure I invited Kenny Burrell and Stanley Turrentine into the room along with Gabor Szabo.  Both recording are on fine Japanese CD transfers. 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kenny-Burrell-Midnight-Blue-Japan-CD-cp32-5229-MEGA-RARE-/201748350397?hash=...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SZABO-SORCERER-CD-NEW-/401166703602?hash=item5d67661bf2:g:-oAAAOSwRGlXpz1s

Again ... these guys sounded great. 

Frank
pani
1,219 posts
 
@oregonpapa Thanks for creating this thread and keeping it alive with valuable posts. Regarding the rising top end on MC carts, I experienced it drastically with Lyra and Van Den Hul carts and even though they were very dynamic and lively I could not live with them. I wonder if these artefacts could have been taken care of if one would use a SUT instead of an active stage. After all MC carts were built to be used with SUTs in the first place. Just thinking aloud since I am considering going the SUT route for a change.

@almarg I would be grateful to get some advice from you on choosing the right SUT for the ART-9. I am considering Jensen JT-347-AXT with 1:12 step-up, here it is:
http://www.jensen-transformers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/jt-347-axt-112.pdf

I was having a discussion with Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note and he emphasized that the primary impedance of the SUT is a huge factor in matching a MC cart to the SUT. He suggested that I look at SUTs with primary impedance in the range of 30 - 40 ohms. I guess primary impedance of the SUT is not the same as the reflected impedance that the SUT presents to the MC cart. The reflected impedance as we know is the (input impedance of the MM stage i.e 47k)/(square of turns ratio). So what do you think about Peter's suggestion around primary impedance of the SUT ?
avanti1960
1,473 posts
 
great post pani about the Jensen transformer.  $500 US for the makings of a very nice SUT (plus chassis components) seems like a very good deal.  lots of retail markup on those very simple devices.  
let us know how it works out!  
-
oregon papa- thanks for the music references.  i found the Gabor Szabo recording on video search and then ordered the LP, sounds great! 
almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
Hi Pani,

I'm not sure what to make of Mr. Qvortrup's statement.  After looking at the descriptions of the various SUTs listed at the Audio Note UK site it does appear that his reference to "primary impedance" refers to something other than the reflected load impedance.  The descriptions appear to imply that his various SUTs have "primary impedances" ranging from 1 to 64 ohms.  But I have no idea whether that means DC resistance, impedance at some frequency when some resistance is placed across the secondary, or what.  Also, those listings all state that:
It is important to appreciate the utmost importance of getting the impedance matching between the cartridge coil and the primary of the transformer as close as possible.
 But what constitutes an optimal match is not stated.  The ART9 has a specified DC resistance and a specified 1 kHz impedance of 12 ohms.  (The two numbers are the same because the impedance presented by the cartridge's inductance at 1 kHz is very small).  So his 30 to 40 ohm recommendation is about 3 times that value.  I have no idea what his basis for recommending that ratio may be.

Finally, my impression is that whatever he may mean by "primary impedance" is not specified in the case of most other SUTs.

In any event, after reviewing the detailed specs on the Jensen SUT I see no technical issues that would arise using it with the ART9.  And FWIW, as you may be aware the Jensen line-level audio transformers are used with fine results by many audiophiles, and I believe are also used internally in some well regarded high end components.

Good luck.  Regards,
-- Al
   
oregonpapa's avatar
oregonpapa OP
4,867 posts
 
Pani ...

Even though I loved my Clavis, I agree with the rising top ends of the Lyras.

I recently spent an evening listening to a VERY high end system that most likely retailed for 350-450k.  Three turntables, one of which was sporting the Lyra Etna. Everything about that system was HUGE, including the sound. It was spectacular in every way. However, the slight brightness on the top end was still there. While listening, I attributed the slight brightness to perhaps cartridge setup. I could be dead wrong here, but it sounded like that rising top end again. Personally, I think most audiophiles would really love it. In fact, most do. Its perceived as "transparency," or "detail" in the upper registers. To me, it just doesn't sound correct. 

And by the way ... Robert (Mister Record) was over the other night and made a good point. He said ... Instead of talking about transparency, inner detail, sound stage, black backgrounds, or any of the other descriptive words in the audiophile lexicon, how about we just start using two words: "correct" or "incorrect." Made sense to me.

Frank



More to discover