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