AT OC9/II vs AT OC9/III

I have owned the OC9 II, III, and the 50ANV. The OC9 III has a noticeably different presentation than the II. The earlier cartridge has always been voiced to be a bit cool in the best of circumstances, and in the worst it can be bright and lean. 

The III is richer, with more meat on the bones in the lower mids, and a top end that is more controlled. The bass response is fantastic, with it being solid and powerful. It is a nice cartridge that can be had in the $500 range if a person shops carefully, and its a good value in my opinion. 

Does anyone remember the OC-9? The first one, with no Roman numerals? I bought one 25 years ago when it was the latest "greatest bargain ever", and kept it for future use. It's still NOS. Any comments on what I can expect to hear, not in comparison to its successors, but as a cartridge in general? The tonearm(s) I'll use are good matches and shouldn't be a factor, and the suspension seems fine.

What OP should really get is the ART9. 

Many years ago I spoke with the US Importer (I believe) about the difference between the two and (if I recall correctly) he told me the ONLY difference was the way the stylus was fixed to the cantilever. Consequently, he said, there was no difference in the SQ. I'm not sure whether or how this would impact the compliance difference noted in the thread (I did not look the compliance stats up to compare) but that is my recollection. FWIW, I ran an OC9MLII for a number of years and liked it very much on my VPI Scout. I also ran the ART9 which is superb--much better than the OC9MLII (and much more money as well).

dodgealum - Are you still running the ART9?