Thanks, Chakster. I am not familiar with the discrepancies between the American/Euro and Japanese compliance scales. I do know that Audio Technica website specs for the ART 9 indicate a "Dynamic" compliance of 18CU and a "Static" compliance of 35CU, which is near the 30CU figure you cite. I don't have the specs related to the effective mass of my arm but it is certainly higher than the one it replaced, which partly explains my desire to try out a few cartridges with lower compliance to see whether they would offer a better match. While I don't think the ART 9 was completely mismatched to my arm (which is probably in the medium/high range of effective mass) you are probably correct in stating that better results might have been obtained in a medium/low mass arm, which somewhat clouds my comparative analysis. That said, the ART 9 still put in an exemplary performance that would, I suspect, only get better on an arm with a somewhat lower effective mass.
3 Cartridges Reviewed
A recent upgrade of my analogue front end served as the impetus to try out a few different cartridges to see how my ART 9 ($1000/18CU) would perform against two lower compliance contenders that might represent a better match to my new tonearm--the Ortofon Quintet Black ($800/15CU) and the Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC STAR ($2000/10CU). Like many of you, taking the time to compare cartridges in the same system is not easy, so I thought I would pass along my findings. All three cartridges were fed into a Herron VTPH-2. I ran all three cartridges using loading plugs valued at each manufacturer's recommendation but found that they all sounded best without any resistive load (i.e. Herron’s “Infinite Load” setting).
There has been a lot of discussion about the ART 9 here (and elsewhere):
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/pani-new-art-9-up-and-running/post?postid=1412181#1412181
I have owned mine for less than a year but feel like I have a pretty good handle on how it performs in my system, both on my current setup as well as on my prior stock VPI Scout with the standard JMW-9 tonearm. The cartridge is relatively easy to set up, though the addition of threaded mounting holes would help. The line contact stylus suggests that you take your time getting the alignment parameters correct and the cartridge rewards those who want to play around with VTA a little. The sound is exceptionally even-handed. Nothing is spotlighted and there are no obvious or subtle shortcomings whatsoever. I would say the ART 9 is one of the most refined sounded cartridges that I have ever heard. It is nimble and dynamic, yet has no rough edges whatsoever. Transients are very natural and the soundstage is stable and expansive. This is easily a cartridge that most of us could live with forever--it is so communicative of the musical flow and passion of the performers, yet does not editorialize or bring attention to itself. I could very easily see the ART 9 fronting an analogue playback system of the highest calibre without the owner feeling any sense of loss or sacrifice.
A loan from a friend allowed me to run the Ortofon Quintet Black (QB) for several weeks, replacing the ART 9. This cartridge was a breeze to set up. It has threaded holes and the body design allows the user to easily achieve proper azimuth and alignment. I’ve rarely encountered a cartridge that was this easy to get right in a very short period of time. Sonically, the QB commits no glaring errors--it is very smooth and even throughout the frequency range. Dynamics are acceptable but the QB it is a little weak in the “boogie factor” department. Overall, I found the QB to be a bit too polite sounding in my system and not as capable as the other cartridges of drawing me into the musical performance. The sound is also a bit too clinical for my tastes and therefore somewhat unengaging. These foibles were sins of omission, as the sound lacked the immediacy, resolution and timing that allow you to become immersed in the music. The QB doesn’t do anything wrong, per se, but I found myself feeling a little unsatiated by LPs that captivate with the ART 9. While the least expensive of the three cartridges I tried, the performance of the QB is probably on par with other cartridges in the sub-$1K range, but does not reach the next level of musical enjoyment like the ART 9, which is only several hundred dollars more.
The last cartridge I ran was the Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC Star, which is a moving iron (or “fixed coil” as the folks at Soundsmith like to say) with an output similar to the other moving coils in this brief survey. I’m not sure if cartridges (or any audio component) should be evaluated on their appearance, but like most men I am pretty visual so looks matter to me. The MIMC Star isn’t going to win any beauty contests. I’m sure there must be a form following function thing going on here since every model in the Soundsmith lineup uses the same body style, but these cartridges look like something you would find on a “close and play” rather than at the working end of a high end tonearm. Also, there isn’t a right angle to be found on the body, with various stepped surfaces, and the front protruding “wings” that flank (and obscure the view of) the cantilever made it difficult to achieve proper alignment. Once set up though the MIMC Star is a stellar performer, every bit as good but with a sound very much in contrast with the ART 9. In my system the MIMC Star produced a voluptuous sound, with tremendous density of color and vibrancy. Leading edge transients were very fast, and dynamic nuances were faithfully reproduced. The MIMC Star is a very musically compelling cartridge, allowing the listener to easily follow the different instrumental lines. It vibrantly conveys the essence of music in terms of timing, tone and interplay and always left me reaching for the next record to play.
The ART 9 and the MIMC Star achieve, to my ears, an exalted sound quality that approaches what I have heard in cost-no-object rigs. Yet, they sound so very different. So let me try to provide some contrasts to close. In terms of presentation, the ART 9 is more midhall to the MIMC Star’s front row perspective. Listening to well recorded vocals, both cartridges provide all the texture, nuance and expressiveness you need to bring the singer into the room. With the MIMC Star, they are on the speaker plane, whereas with the ART 9 the stage appears slightly behind. The MIMC Star has more tonal color and density, while the ART 9 is just as vivid but with less saturation. This is probably a poor metaphor but the MIMC Star is like watching a film in technicolor, whereas the ART 9 is like watching a high resolution black and white film (Kubrick’s “Paths of Glory” comes to mind). This is painting too great a contrast--just trying to convey that the MIMC Star might be just a little too rich sounding while the ART 9 could be a tiny bit more colorful sounding by comparison. Another way of framing this is to say that with well recorded guitar and violin, the ART 9 gives you a little more strings while the MIMC Star gives you a little more soundboard. With regarding to dynamics and transient realism, the MIMC Star is very quick, with transient leading edges that can be surprisingly lifelike. The ART 9 is equally fast and nimble, but the leading edges of, say, plucked guitar strings are less forcefully portrayed, with slightly less prominence--perhaps a tiny bit more natural sounding rather than exaggerated? Hard to say. And while both cartridges have exceptional high frequency responses (very extended and airy), the MIMC Star is not quite as good at differentiating between cymbal taps and other types of high frequency percussion sounds. The ART 9 is truly exceptional in this regard, providing all the nuances without any fatiguing artifacts. At the other end of the spectrum the MIMC Star has slightly more slam and a tiny bit better pitch definition in the bass, where the ART 9 is has just a touch less impact and clarity on the bottom end.
Having the opportunity to contrast the ART 9 and the MIMC Star helped me to better understand why some folks mount two arms to their tables. If I had my druthers, I would keep both cartridges and mount the ART 9 to a medium/low mass arm and the MIMC Star to a medium/high mass arm (like mine) that wants to see a slightly lower compliance cartridge. Each is extraordinary in their own way and yet provide a very different sonic palette and presentation that would suit for the broadest possible range of vinyl recordings. If I had $2K to spend and my system leaned toward the lean side of the spectrum, I’d recommend the MIMC Star without reservation. If I wanted to stay around $1K and my system was a shade to the warm side, I’d say go with the ART 9. I could live with either cartridge for the long haul--they are both extremely musical performers. Alas, since the MIMC Star’s lower compliance represents a better match for my current arm and it’s vivid portrayal of the essence of music is completely intoxicating I’m going to hang on to it and let someone else enjoy the ART 9, which is posted on that other site for anyone who is interested.
There has been a lot of discussion about the ART 9 here (and elsewhere):
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/pani-new-art-9-up-and-running/post?postid=1412181#1412181
I have owned mine for less than a year but feel like I have a pretty good handle on how it performs in my system, both on my current setup as well as on my prior stock VPI Scout with the standard JMW-9 tonearm. The cartridge is relatively easy to set up, though the addition of threaded mounting holes would help. The line contact stylus suggests that you take your time getting the alignment parameters correct and the cartridge rewards those who want to play around with VTA a little. The sound is exceptionally even-handed. Nothing is spotlighted and there are no obvious or subtle shortcomings whatsoever. I would say the ART 9 is one of the most refined sounded cartridges that I have ever heard. It is nimble and dynamic, yet has no rough edges whatsoever. Transients are very natural and the soundstage is stable and expansive. This is easily a cartridge that most of us could live with forever--it is so communicative of the musical flow and passion of the performers, yet does not editorialize or bring attention to itself. I could very easily see the ART 9 fronting an analogue playback system of the highest calibre without the owner feeling any sense of loss or sacrifice.
A loan from a friend allowed me to run the Ortofon Quintet Black (QB) for several weeks, replacing the ART 9. This cartridge was a breeze to set up. It has threaded holes and the body design allows the user to easily achieve proper azimuth and alignment. I’ve rarely encountered a cartridge that was this easy to get right in a very short period of time. Sonically, the QB commits no glaring errors--it is very smooth and even throughout the frequency range. Dynamics are acceptable but the QB it is a little weak in the “boogie factor” department. Overall, I found the QB to be a bit too polite sounding in my system and not as capable as the other cartridges of drawing me into the musical performance. The sound is also a bit too clinical for my tastes and therefore somewhat unengaging. These foibles were sins of omission, as the sound lacked the immediacy, resolution and timing that allow you to become immersed in the music. The QB doesn’t do anything wrong, per se, but I found myself feeling a little unsatiated by LPs that captivate with the ART 9. While the least expensive of the three cartridges I tried, the performance of the QB is probably on par with other cartridges in the sub-$1K range, but does not reach the next level of musical enjoyment like the ART 9, which is only several hundred dollars more.
The last cartridge I ran was the Soundsmith Zephyr MIMC Star, which is a moving iron (or “fixed coil” as the folks at Soundsmith like to say) with an output similar to the other moving coils in this brief survey. I’m not sure if cartridges (or any audio component) should be evaluated on their appearance, but like most men I am pretty visual so looks matter to me. The MIMC Star isn’t going to win any beauty contests. I’m sure there must be a form following function thing going on here since every model in the Soundsmith lineup uses the same body style, but these cartridges look like something you would find on a “close and play” rather than at the working end of a high end tonearm. Also, there isn’t a right angle to be found on the body, with various stepped surfaces, and the front protruding “wings” that flank (and obscure the view of) the cantilever made it difficult to achieve proper alignment. Once set up though the MIMC Star is a stellar performer, every bit as good but with a sound very much in contrast with the ART 9. In my system the MIMC Star produced a voluptuous sound, with tremendous density of color and vibrancy. Leading edge transients were very fast, and dynamic nuances were faithfully reproduced. The MIMC Star is a very musically compelling cartridge, allowing the listener to easily follow the different instrumental lines. It vibrantly conveys the essence of music in terms of timing, tone and interplay and always left me reaching for the next record to play.
The ART 9 and the MIMC Star achieve, to my ears, an exalted sound quality that approaches what I have heard in cost-no-object rigs. Yet, they sound so very different. So let me try to provide some contrasts to close. In terms of presentation, the ART 9 is more midhall to the MIMC Star’s front row perspective. Listening to well recorded vocals, both cartridges provide all the texture, nuance and expressiveness you need to bring the singer into the room. With the MIMC Star, they are on the speaker plane, whereas with the ART 9 the stage appears slightly behind. The MIMC Star has more tonal color and density, while the ART 9 is just as vivid but with less saturation. This is probably a poor metaphor but the MIMC Star is like watching a film in technicolor, whereas the ART 9 is like watching a high resolution black and white film (Kubrick’s “Paths of Glory” comes to mind). This is painting too great a contrast--just trying to convey that the MIMC Star might be just a little too rich sounding while the ART 9 could be a tiny bit more colorful sounding by comparison. Another way of framing this is to say that with well recorded guitar and violin, the ART 9 gives you a little more strings while the MIMC Star gives you a little more soundboard. With regarding to dynamics and transient realism, the MIMC Star is very quick, with transient leading edges that can be surprisingly lifelike. The ART 9 is equally fast and nimble, but the leading edges of, say, plucked guitar strings are less forcefully portrayed, with slightly less prominence--perhaps a tiny bit more natural sounding rather than exaggerated? Hard to say. And while both cartridges have exceptional high frequency responses (very extended and airy), the MIMC Star is not quite as good at differentiating between cymbal taps and other types of high frequency percussion sounds. The ART 9 is truly exceptional in this regard, providing all the nuances without any fatiguing artifacts. At the other end of the spectrum the MIMC Star has slightly more slam and a tiny bit better pitch definition in the bass, where the ART 9 is has just a touch less impact and clarity on the bottom end.
Having the opportunity to contrast the ART 9 and the MIMC Star helped me to better understand why some folks mount two arms to their tables. If I had my druthers, I would keep both cartridges and mount the ART 9 to a medium/low mass arm and the MIMC Star to a medium/high mass arm (like mine) that wants to see a slightly lower compliance cartridge. Each is extraordinary in their own way and yet provide a very different sonic palette and presentation that would suit for the broadest possible range of vinyl recordings. If I had $2K to spend and my system leaned toward the lean side of the spectrum, I’d recommend the MIMC Star without reservation. If I wanted to stay around $1K and my system was a shade to the warm side, I’d say go with the ART 9. I could live with either cartridge for the long haul--they are both extremely musical performers. Alas, since the MIMC Star’s lower compliance represents a better match for my current arm and it’s vivid portrayal of the essence of music is completely intoxicating I’m going to hang on to it and let someone else enjoy the ART 9, which is posted on that other site for anyone who is interested.