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.
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
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... |
Thanks Wrxified for the information... the nylon hardware certainly looks interesting. However I am not sure I'd need it if I am reading the chart correctly. On the left side where it reads 18 for the spec you supplied on the ART9, it lands at 9hz if I come across to 8 to 9 grams which would be the cartridge and some minimal mass from the screws. That is squarely in the green. That is if I am reading this chart correctly. |
- 461 posts total