Installed an Audio Technica OC 9 III On the Main Table

Mister Pig

Pigamus Maximus
Decided to have a bit of analog fun this afternoon as I had a bit of free time. Broke open a box and installed an AT OC 9 III on the Galibier Audio Serac and Riggle String Theory arm. Worked a bit at alignment and tone arm height, and had to go in and fiddle with the cue device height any everything else. One thing I am not fond of on AT cartridges is that the bodies are not threaded for bolts. Finding the right length ones to work with my head shell arrangement was a bit inconvenient.

But I have it spinning now, getting a bit of break in time. A little bit of George Winston piano work to hear if there is anything really off on the set up. But so far there seems to be no issues. Got the loading up at 220 ohms, and we will see how that works out.

Just got to get some records spun now, and a few hours on that suspension and diamond. We will see how it goes.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20150521_180348_664.jpg
    IMG_20150521_180348_664.jpg
    40.5 KB · Views: 119
Last edited:
Yes, do let us know your thoughts, I have often thought of acquiring that cart as well. What phono pre are you using? Would also be interested in your thoughts on your loading choice...
 
Started with 220 ohm loading, have bumped it up to 330 ohms, and like it better there in my system. But my system is a bit different than most other people, as it is Single Ended Tube amplification and co-ax speakers in open baffle arrangement. If you have a SS based system you might like a lower impedance load than I do.

Break in is going well though. Cartridge is quiet in the groove and tracks well. Not going to make any kind of meaningful comments in terms of sound, because its just not fair to the cartridge. Going to give it a week of playing, and see where things shake out. Then we go to fine tuning from there.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Looking forward to your assessment when things settle in as it is a definite contender for somewhere around here.
 
I'm about a week ahead of you. I installed mine on 5/14. FWIW, my Luxman preamp has only 3 choices for MC loading - 50, 100, or 300 Ohms, and while the specs for the OC9/III say "at least 100 Ohms", I also found that mine likes the 300 Ohm loading better than the 100. I'm very pleased so far.
 
I'm about a week ahead of you. I installed mine on 5/14. FWIW, my Luxman preamp has only 3 choices for MC loading - 50, 100, or 300 Ohms, and while the specs for the OC9/III say "at least 100 Ohms", I also found that mine likes the 300 Ohm loading better than the 100. I'm very pleased so far.

So which table do you have it on? And curious to know what cartridge it replaced for you.

I had a 33EV on the table for several weeks before this OC 9 III, and it is interesting how different these cartridges sound. It is also significantly different than my ZYX, Transfiguration, or Ortofon cartridges.

We are just starting an annual maintenance shutdown at work, so I am not going to get any critical listening time with it, but I hope to get enough time in to break the cartridge in. I might have a home for this cartridge on the modified AR XA when it arrives here.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
So which table do you have it on? And curious to know what cartridge it replaced for you.

I have it on my TD124, and it replaced an AT ML440OCC. This is my first MC, and I still need to sort out a slight 60 Hz hum from my preamp, but it's not loud enough to hear during play.

Compared to the 440, the OC9 is not markedly different in sound profile to my ear. The bass is fuller and smoother and the whole presentation is more detailed. The sound stage is much larger and better defined. Finally, the capability of the OC9 to bring detail to very soft passages is one of its real strengths. I'm hearing music where I thought there was only silence.
 
So which table do you have it on? And curious to know what cartridge it replaced for you.

I had a 33EV on the table for several weeks before this OC 9 III, and it is interesting how different these cartridges sound. It is also significantly different than my ZYX, Transfiguration, or Ortofon cartridges.

We are just starting an annual maintenance shutdown at work, so I am not going to get any critical listening time with it, but I hope to get enough time in to break the cartridge in. I might have a home for this cartridge on the modified AR XA when it arrives here.

Regards
Mister Pig
So, what are the differences you're hearing between the two AT carts? Which are you preferring so far and for what repertoire?
 
So, what are the differences you're hearing between the two AT carts? Which are you preferring so far and for what repertoire?

Tip over the container of prepared legume seeds, my porcine acquaintance.

Looking at OC9/III, 33SA, 33PTG/II, 33EV, or other AT MC cartridges in this basic range. The SA is quite a bit more $$, and has a Shibata stylus, and the PTG is Japan import, so we got that to consider.
 
OK I snagged an AT0C9/III and an AT33SA for the AT throwdown.

Seems like the differences between the AT33PTG/II and the AT0C9/II were slim, the AT0C9/II has a nice following, and nobody has really heard the AT33SA.
 
OK I snagged an AT0C9/III and an AT33SA for the AT throwdown.

Seems like the differences between the AT33PTG/II and the AT0C9/II were slim, the AT0C9/II has a nice following, and nobody has really heard the AT33SA.

I suspect these are going to be very different cartridges. I find the OC 9 III and the 33EV to be decidedly different on how they present music.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
I'm excited that one of us had made the SA acquisition. As you have alluded to above, the stylus and cantilever play a large part in the character of the sound (noted similarities between OC9/II and 33 PTG - both micro line with boron cantilevers). I hope the SA proves out its price point with some outstanding resolution, micro dynamics and tracking ability. Otherwise it risks losing its place in the pecking order of the other high end AT carts.

Jblnut
 
I suspect these are going to be very different cartridges. I find the OC 9 III and the 33EV to be decidedly different on how they present music.

Regards
Mister Pig
What are the differences? I guess from my own selfish standpoint if you were going to pick one or the other for listening to classical.jazz rep which would it be and why? I should look up the loading etc. requirements of the two of them as well
 
The OC 9 III is a richer and fuller sounding cartridge than the 33EV, It requires a higher loading than the 33EV, and yet still has a more textured and genteel presentation. The bass response is actually very impressive, with as solid a bottom end as I have ever heard from a cartridge. Not quite the imaging champ as the 33EV, but still very good. I found the cartridge to be very quiet in the groove, and dealt with noisy albums in a very capable manner. Great tracking cartridge. It is the polar opposite of the 33EV. if the 33EV is a light green tea, then the OC 9 II is a dark robust Colombian coffee. Both are very nice cartridges, but will appeal to different types of owners I think.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
The OC 9 III is a richer and fuller sounding cartridge than the 33EV, It requires a higher loading than the 33EV, and yet still has a more textured and genteel presentation. The bass response is actually very impressive, with as solid a bottom end as I have ever heard from a cartridge. Not quite the imaging champ as the 33EV, but still very good. I found the cartridge to be very quiet in the groove, and dealt with noisy albums in a very capable manner. Great tracking cartridge. It is the polar opposite of the 33EV. if the 33EV is a light green tea, then the OC 9 II is a dark robust Colombian coffee. Both are very nice cartridges, but will appeal to different types of owners I think.

Regards
Mister Pig
John, thank you for that. Exactly what I wanted to know. I am definitely more of a Colombian sorta guy, though green tea does have its pleasures. Most of all though orchestral recordings do not respond well to thinness for the most part, so a cart that leaned in that direction would be a mistake unless the rest of the system tended to be overly thick (in which case maybe that should be addressed on its own).
 
I'm excited that one of us had made the SA acquisition. As you have alluded to above, the stylus and cantilever play a large part in the character of the sound (noted similarities between OC9/II and 33 PTG - both micro line with boron cantilevers). I hope the SA proves out its price point with some outstanding resolution, micro dynamics and tracking ability. Otherwise it risks losing its place in the pecking order of the other high end AT carts.

Jblnut

I'm with you on this one, I would really like to know if the AT33 SA is a step down from the AT33 PTG/II. The price says otherwise, but I was under the impression that the microline tip was superior to the shibata.

I think Audio Technica has moved a lot of its more recent carts away from the microline tip. Carts such as the ART7/9 and AT50ANV just simply say line contact or special line contact as the tip shape. The AT150MLX and AT150ANV still use the microline however.
 
Back
Top Bottom