Differences between AT OC9XML and 33PTG/2?

[Bob Edwards]

All -

Shopping in that forest that is cartridge hunting. Currently using a AT VM95ML, which, while still breaking in, was a significant step up from the VM95E (which was itself terrific). Would like to retain the drive and bounce of the VM95s while increasing resolution and, for lack of a better word, refinement. All while not sacrificing dynamics, bass, or impact.

I've ordered an OC9XML which should arrive today or tomorrow, but after seeing the "Cartridge History" thread I've seen a lot of references to the AT 33PTG and the /2 version. Is one better/preferable to the other? Are the differences between them noticeable/significant? They are the exact same price in the US - $549.

Phono stage is a Rega Aria Mk3. (I'll save my gushing over the Karousel for the Karousel thread. But it really is ALL THAT!)

 

[Robert]

I've had both the original and Mk2 2 PTG, plus the older OC9/II.
All are very, very close in performance and share some common parts.
The 9 has the more modern, 'rigid' body and has a very slightly leaner sound IME, but unless to run them direct A/B I doubt you'd notice.

Assuming the latest OC9XML follows typical AT tradition of them repackaging the same (excellent) designs every few years for marketing (Ouch, sorry AT) then relax and don't worry about the 33s.

 

[itskeith]

I compared a OC9 mk2 vs an AT33? in the same arm (PMAT AT1010) in the same audition.

I much prefered the OC9 (two of us did), so I bought that.

There are I believe plenty of fans about for the 33 also though.

Suggest listen to either in you arm and see if you like it, or pref compare both!

 

[Bob Edwards]

Thanks @Robert and @itskeith !

The OC9XML I ordered is here and installed. So far it has about 12 hours on it and is breaking in. But even out of the box it was quite a bit better than the VM95ML it replaced.