SME 3009 II Unimporved -- "Thin" Sound

Most likely it is a cartridge and your phonostage weakness. 

But it is also depends on records you're listening to, you don't need audiophile pressing (re-issues), just a proper original pressing. Some records are better than others, but re-issues most likely inferior to the originals. I hope you have some great recordings to start with. 

For extended frequency response you need a cartridge with the best possible stylus profile (not conical, not the elliptical), something like MicroRidge, MicroLine, VdH, Gyger or at least Shibata, LineContact. 

P.S. You can always try a decent MM ot MI cartridge and maybe it will be better. 
 

wdesbrow, I tend to agree with roberjerman on this one. I have not heard a high output MC cartridge that I have liked. The Ortofon 2M series of MM cartridges is better particularly the Black.
Having said all that the coils of high output MC cartridges are larger and heavier. I can not find a compliance spec for that cartridge but I suspect it is too stiff for your arm which would effect bass performance quite a bit.
If you want to be accurate about it get a test record with vertical and lateral resonance tracks and check where you are. You could also empirically add mass to the head shell to see if it sounds better.

Mike

Try using a thicker mat (or place a thin "import" record under your current mat) and then reset VTF.

Doing so will change the VTA of the cartridge (making the tail of the cartridge ride lower).

This will not harm anything, and it's easily reversible.

If this sounds better, then have the arm height (it would need to be lowered) adjusted accordingly.

I've been using 3009 non-improved arms on Thorens decks since the 70's (including the 121, 124, various 160's and  currently 125II).

IMO, VTA needs to be set by ear once the cartridge has some playing time (50+ hours).

DeKay

but ... (after being accustomed to good quality digital reproduction) I am beginning to wonder if my expectations are too high!

Oh. That's a shame. And you were so close too. You had me at "after being accustomed to..." That's where you should have stopped.

Oh well. Never too late. You simply did what a lot of guys do and became accustomed to a sound and learned to like it. Which is fine. But if you go trying to make everything else sound like that, that's where things go off the rails. If your goal is to make analog sound like digital when everyone knows the Holy Grail of digital is to sound like analog, well just read that last little bit and think about it some more.

The sooner you put that out of your mind the better. Because only when you stop trying to put legs on a snake, only when you start listening for music instead of details, then you will be in the right frame of mind to have a good shot at getting the most out of what could be one awfully good front end.

So if your goal is analog that sounds like digital you can count me out. But if you want to try and discover just how captivating and musically involving a really good analog setup can be let me know.

Oh, and stay away from those expensive "audiophile" reissues. The best that can be said for them is that they are new. Almost never sound as good as you can find in a decent used copy. Sorry. But just one more reason records are not CD. You have a lot to learn.

The OP elicited a lot of good comments.  None of us is inside "widebrow"'s head, so none of us can be sure what is "missing", as far as he's concerned, from the results of this experiment into analog. I can only offer my personal opinion. When I read the list of equipment being used, I can sort of paint a picture in my mind of how it might sound, albeit the OP does not tell us what speakers he is using, which could be very important.  But from amplifiers back to the turntable/tonearm/cartridge, this sounds like a system that would underwhelm me, just as it underwhelms the OP.  I have heard at one time or another each element, and none of them is "top drawer".  None of it is "bad", but none of it is in my opinion first rate, and therefore I would not expect the ensemble to yield my own version of Nirvana. I would expect a decent but not thrilling result. For example, it is not for nothing that the SME 3009 was "improved" in versions of the tonearm that came later.  I have heard the TD124 many times, and I know it is an audio icon, but I have always heard it as a bit colored and not as silent as many modern turntables.  In contrast, I much prefer the Garrard 301 or the Lenco L75. I say this with all due respect; it's just my impression based on my set of opinions of the gear in question.  I agree also with Mijo who I think was the one who said he has never been able to place an HOMC cartridge in the top rank; I haven't either.