AT ART-9 vs Audio Note IQ3

If it was an ebay purchase, you are well protected for damage. I’d plug ’n play. If it doesn’t work right, return it. If it does work right, photo the inside of the box to document the problem and contact the seller with a request for a token discount for the visible wear and tear.

The same thing happened to mine when ordered from LP Gear in NV. 

Must be poor QC in the AT factory when mounting the cartridge within the case.  I notified LP Gear who instructed me to try the cartridge which I did without any issues.

I bought mine from LP Gear as well.  Mine came well packed with zero issues.  Just letting people know that shipping issues are random.  I agree with others; try the cart to see if it plays well. 

Can’t speak to the ART-9. I’m running the AN IQ3 on my Nottingham Interspace Jr. with stock arm. At approximately $1200 U.S., I’m not sure if I would consider the IQ3 an "inexpensive" cartridge but then that’s a matter of opinion.

Also, the IQ3 is manufactured by Goldring for Audio Note and I believe current production for the IQ3 has taken a backseat to Goldring’s products which makes the IQ3 difficult to obtain unless your audio dealer happens to have one in stock.

According to Peter Qvortrup, you’d have to move up to a MC (reference is probably to an AN cart), to achieve better sound.

So, Invictus, apparently you have listened to both the ART7 and the ART9 in the same system, on the same (SME V) tonearm, and you conclude that the ART9 is superior.  Can you say more, in more detail, about why you prefer one vs the other AT cartridge? Do you own both?