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

Great thread.  Thanks Pani for your input.  Have a couple questions for the group.  Looking for suggestions. 

I see most people are using an appropriate phono pre-amp to deliver 100 ohms or more.  Went through the 8 pages and might have missed it but is anyone using a SUT with their pre-amp.

I ordered the ART9 and it's going to go on my new VPI Prime with 3d arm.  For step up and pre-amp capabilities I have several options.  I have the Parks Audio CM1254 SUT and was using it with my AT33PTG/II on my VPI Scout.  Not because my pre-amp options wouldn't support the .3 mv, but mostly because I'd bought into the idea that an a passive SUT to 47k mm pre-amp would deliver better results than most pre-amps could handle unless I was using a very high end pre-amp.  It sounds really good.

So I have the budgie CM1254 SUT.  I also have an Emotiva XSP-1 stereo pre-amplifier.  It has an okay pre-amp.  I believe it's MM 47k plus the option for the MC @ 47,100, 470, & 1000.

In addition I have the Clear Audio Nano V2.  I bought this when I had my Project TT and was having trouble with isolating the unit to a point to avoid low frequency rumble through the speakers.  That has both the MM option of 47k ohms and MC at 51, 200, 402 and 1000 ohms.  Again, bought the Clear Audio mainly for the rumble filter but it seems to be a really good phono pre-amp for the $500 and under range.

So what are your thoughts.  I'd be interested in people's point of view having the options detailed above.

Thanks all.  Was considering the PSAudio Nuwave Pre-Amp while they were closing them out.  Have seen some pretty good reviews on it and kinda liked the idea of picking up the XLR outputs and ADC for ripping some of my favorite albums.

http://www.psaudio.com/products/nuwave-phono-converter/

I will check out the others mentioned above.

That is flat out sexy.  Would easily trade my wife for that turntable.

I picked up my ART-9 in early April.  I also have the AT 33PTG/II.  The PTG was a replacement for the 33EV.  I've really been an Audio Technica fan. Over the past 3 weeks I've been putting the hours on it   Probably a little over 50 hrs at this point.  

So how does it sound compared to the PTG? Using some brevity, I'd simply say it's no better, no worse.   

We actually did a comparison this past weekend.  Actually more people chose the PTG/II over the ART9.  To me they sound very close.  Who knows, maybe it'll break in a bit more.  

The 33EV to PTG/II was a noticeable difference.  Way more detail and resolution in the upper frequency range.  Funny thing was I paid less for the PTG.  The PTG to ART9, not earth shattering.  

@pani, we used 3 phono stages for the testing.  Among them was a Clearaudio Nano, a Rothwell MCX SUT to Rothwell Simplex, and a Spectral DMC-6 with phono stage.  The Spectral was easily the best of the 3, followed by the Rothwell setup, then the Nano

It definitely is all subjective.  To me I could barely hear a difference.  

Crazy.  I was in a similar situation when I bought my ART9 but went the opposite way and sold my SUT.  Coming from the AT33PTG/II at .25 mv it was a perfect match for my Parks Audio CM-1254 SUT.  The SUT was on the high end however for the ART-9 with a 1:20/1:40 configuration. 

Out of curiosity which SUT did you get?  I’m glad I stuck with the ART-9. Don’t know if you recall my initial thoughts but I struggled to pick the ART-9 over the AT33PTG/II even after a short break in.  I’m beyond happy with it now and can’t imagine going back.    

People arent kidding when they say this cartridge needs a long break-in to shine.  For me it was between 75-100 hours and it started to really take on a whole new personality.  

I can see the issue you’re faced with on the potential loss but I would really struggle making a decision to change cartridges because of my SUT.  

Yes if we look at the typical numbers, a lower mass tonearm would get you in the sweet spot.  That said my combination is about the same as yours and it sounds infinitely better than any setup I’ve had yet, including some combinations that fell right in the sweet spot.  

Your arm is 10-11 grams according to vinyl engines specs.

https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sme/series-iv.shtml

About the same as my VPI 3D arm which sounds glorious with the ART9.

Technically if if you go by the calculations, you are slightly below the line for resonance but it’s difficult to know for sure because of the 100hz spec that AT provides.

If you’re worried I’d use the lowest mass mounting hardware you can find.

The change in cartridge weight won’t impact it as much as the tonearm mass and cartridge compliance. Honestly this combo puts you right in the low end of the sweet spot to slightly below (7-8hz cartridge resonance). You can run some numbers on vinyl engine.

https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_resonance_evaluator.php?eff_mass=10&submit=Submit

Along the left you’ll see cartridge compliance. AT rates the ART9 at 18×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz). Assume 18×10-6cm/dyne (10Hz).

I’d be shocked if you weren’t pleased with the setup. You get into that orange area and you’d start seeing issues.

I had some concerns initially and even considered some nylon or aluminum hardware I found online somewhere which might’ve save .5 grams on cartridge weight.  But I never saw any gremlins pop up so I didn’t bother. You’d be hard pressed to find a cartridge in the sub $1000 category that didn’t have multiple shortfalls compared to the ART9.

I’m rambling now. FWIW you’re better on the low end. The higher resonance value will cause a much bigger issue when it falls in the area of the frequency of the music being played. The lower end resonance value becomes an issue with warped records as the cartridge is playing rumble from the bouncing up and down. With a good center weight most people wouldn’t ever know they have a low end resonance issue. If you have a outer periphery ring weight you’d be even better yet. I just have a center clamp (screw down type) and I don’t have a lot of warped records. No issues here.

Here is some lightweight headshell hardware.  

https://www.amazon.com/FYL-Turntable-Headshell-Mounting-Hardware/dp/B01J5FAGQS#featureBulletsAndDeta...

Sorry I typed that wrong. I’m on my mobile. Meant the following but I’m going to add some data. Also keep in mind the compliance rating on the left side of the vinyl engine chart is based on a 10Hz compliance measurement.

AT rates the dynamic compliance on ART9 at 18×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz), most people would say that the 10Hz dynamic rating would be about 1.5 - 2x the 100Hz measurement.

This would put the 10Hz dynamic compliance measurement at 27- to 36x10-6cm/dyne (10Hz). That is an extremely high compliance cartridge!!! Why Japanese cart manufacturers rate at 100Hz is mind boggling to most people. The problem is there is no direct calculation from 10Hz to 100Hz.

I’ve read other people who say you can take the static compliance of a cartridge, which for the ART-9 is 35×10-6cm/dyne, and divide by 2. Again no direct correlation and it’s only offered as a guide. But if we take the 2nd method, you end up with a much more medium high compliance cartridge which seems to jive with what others are seeing.

On the Hoffman forum ART-9 thread there are are countless members with tonearms in the 10-12 gram range that have the cartridge running. Some describe the cartridge experience as if the moment they mounted the ART-9, the clouds above them opened and angels started singing down upon their audio system. 😂. Several of them also ran the combo through various test records to measure the resonance, and came back with a combined resonant frequency well within the 8-11hz range.

This would lead me to believe the cartridge is a moderately high compliance cartridge, not the extremely high end one that many systems would struggle with.