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

I agree @chakster  - this is what I tried to say earlier. But I have to wonder whether it changes from one cartridge to the next. 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.  

Is anyone using a rogue ares phono stage with this cartridge?  Also, does anyone with this cartridge live in Seattle?

I think the whole topic of equipment break in is over cooked. In my experience the essential characteristics of ANY piece of gear are discernible within the first five hours of playback. Yes, subtle improvements do occur over time--more so with equipment that has mechanical properties like speakers and cartridges. But the idea that the ART 9 or any other quality piece of gear sounds terrible at first and transforms itself to a "giant killer" after hours and hours of play does not square with my experience. Avanti1960 I don't think you have done yourself any favors by switching the cartridge in and out of your system. The differences you are hearing are most likely more attributable to changes in set up rather than hours on the cartridge. I'm not sure you really know what the ART 9 sounds like at this point, nor do I think you are really able to make reliable comparisons with the other cartridges you mention. I'm not here to sing the praises of the cartridge--do I think it is great? Yes. But of course others may be looking for a different sound given their preferences and associated equipment. My point is that there is far too much emphasis in this discussion (and others) on the relevance of break in. Like most cartridges, if you set up the ART 9 properly and don't like the way the sounds after a few hours you probably are not going to like it after 100 hours either. 

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