Audio Technica AT OC9 or f7/f2/f3 for original Rega Planar 2 w RB250?

[Depthgrammar]

Hi all,

I've got a vintage Rega Planar 2 on the way and I'm in the market for a budget MC cartridge for it, since I have two amps here with decent (I'm told) MC stages (Tandberg 3012, Nakamichi SR4A), and I've never tried an MC cart. I've done a lot of reading already and pretty much narrowed it down to some variant of either the AT OC9 or F7 families, but I'm having trouble deciding. Any opinions on which way to go? The F7 or F3 would be a little less expensive, and I've read that elliptical styli are less fussy about VTA (difficult to adjust on the Rega) than the microline stylus of the OC9ML/ii, which is my leading contender. I see there are variants of the OC9 that also have elliptical styli - OC9XEB and OC9XEN, but i don't see any user feedback on those. Would the F7 suit the limits of my table & arm better? Or is it worth it to go for some variant of the OC9?

 

[Balifly]

Hi all,

I've got a vintage Rega Planar 2 on the way and I'm in the market for a budget MC cartridge for it, since I have two amps here with decent (I'm told) MC stages (Tandberg 3012, Nakamichi SR4A), and I've never tried an MC cart. I've done a lot of reading already and pretty much narrowed it down to some variant of either the AT OC9 or F7 families, but I'm having trouble deciding. Any opinions on which way to go? The F7 or F3 would be a little less expensive, and I've read that elliptical styli are less fussy about VTA (difficult to adjust on the Rega) than the microline stylus of the OC9ML/ii, which is my leading contender. I see there are variants of the OC9 that also have elliptical styli - OC9XEB and OC9XEN, but i don't see any user feedback on those. Would the F7 suit the limits of my table & arm better? Or is it worth it to go for some variant of the OC9?

The Audio Technica OC9 ML II should be well with the tone arm of the Rega Planar turn table.

- Stylus shape: Microline
- Stylus construction: Nude square shank
- Cantilever: Gold-plated solid boron
- Wire used for coils: PCOCC
- Dynamic compliance: 9 x 10-6cm/dyne
- Static compliance: 35 x 10-6cm/dyne
- Recommended tracking force: 1.25 - 1.75 g

The Audio Technica AT OC9XEB and AT OC9XEN are relatively new models, you may have to wait a bit for feed back.

 

[Depthgrammar]

Thanks, good to know it will work. Just reading through a thread on the OC9X series over at Vinyl Engine, now I'm zeroing in on the OC9XEN vs the F7 - both nude elliptical but the F7 has a 0.2 x 0.7 stylus, while the OC9XEN is 0.3 x 0.7. Different body, etc of course, but I wonder how much of a difference would this alone be likely to make in practice? Would the F7 still be more desirable just for having the premium stylus dimensions, or would the lesser stylus still fare better in the OC9X design? So many variables...

 

[Depthgrammar]

Anyone care to weight in on which of these would seem to be the better buy, if the price was the same? The F7 seems to have better frequency response & channel separation, but the OC9XEN is more expensive. Is it just because it's new?

Model AT-OC9XEN
Mounting 1/2” centers / Threaded inserts
Frequency Response 20 - 30,000 Hz
Body Material Aluminium
Channel Separation 25 dB (1 kHz)
Output Channel Balance 1.5 dB (1 kHz)
Output Voltage 0.35 mV (@ 1 kHz, 5 cm/sec)
Vertical Tracking Angle 20 degrees
Vertical Tracking Force Range 1.8 to 2.2 g (standard 2.0 g)
Stylus Shape Elliptical Nude
Stylus Size 0.3 x 0.7 mil
Stylus Construction Nude square shank
Cantilever Aluminium pipe
Coil Impedance 12 Ohms (1 kHz)
Coil Inductance 25 μH (1 kHz)
DC Resistance 12 Ohms
Static Compliance 20 x 10 – 6 cm / dyne
Dynamic Compliance 9 x 10 – 6 cm / dyne (100 Hz)
Terminal Pins Brass
Wire Used for Coil PCOCC (Copper by Ohno Continuous Casting process.)
Recommended Load Impedance Min 100 Ohms
Cartridge Weight 7.6 g

AT F7
Type Dual Moving Coil
Mounting 1/2" Centers
Frequency Response 15 - 50,000Hz
Body Material Aluminium/Synthetic Resin
Channel Separation 27dB (1kHz)
Output Channel Balance 1.5dB (1kHz)
Output Voltage 0.35mV (1kHz and 5cm/sec.)
Vertical Tracking Angle 23°
Vertical Tracking Force Range 1.8 - 2.2g (2.0g standard)
Stylus Shape Elliptical
Stylus Curvature Radius 0.2 x 0.7 mil
Stylus Construction Nude Square Shank
Cantilever Aluminium
Coil Impedance 12Ω (1kHz)
Coil Inductance 25µH (1kHz)
DC Resistance 12Ω
Static Compliance 35×10-6cm/dyne
Dynamic Compliance 9×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz)
Terminal Pins Brass
Recommended Load Impedance Min 100Ω
Weight 5g

 

[Tom6to1]

Difference in price is likely the use of OCC copper in the OC9. I don't have either of these cartridges so can't comment on sound. If you have not already done so, go to Vinyl Engine and use their resonance calculator to determine how well either cartridge will work with the arm. Tonearm effective mass is the key input (if not available there are ways to calculate/estimate that). You may find both will work with the tonearm (or already know this) in which case you are back to what will work best. You may want to look at the height of standard Rega cartridges vs. height of the AT cartridges to see if you will need to make large adjustments to VTA. As noted, Microline is likely more sensitive and may require minor adjustments.

 

[mprince]

I have the OC9XML (big brother to the OC9XEN), and would recommend that cartridge highly (I ran mine for about 11 hours before I replaced it with a big step up from Ortofon, it is my secondary/backup cartridge). Not sure if the F7 is a US market cartridge or not (or where you are located), which could affect warranty coverage from AT (and as a result you may not find many here who have used it). In any case, the new OC9 lineup from AT is very appealing across a wide range of stylus profiles and price points.

EDIT - The F7 is on the AT-US website, so my statement about it not being US-market above is not correct. There is one review on the site stating that there were cantilever alignment issues, even with replacements sent directly from AT.

 

[Depthgrammar]

Thanks, They're both the same dimensions, more or less, 17mm height over the stock 14 of the Rega carts, and they both seem to work about the same with the arm, going by the Vinyl Engine chart. So I guess it comes down to - OCC copper vs smaller stylus dimensions? Not sure which would be better. I've been listening to a lot of youtube needledrops. I know there are too many variables to really tell much from those, but I can say that recordings of the OC9MLii tend to impress across the board, while the F7 rips are nice but not quite as spectacular. Of course, the OC9XEN doesn't share the boron cantilever & microline stylus with the ii - instead we have aluminum & elliptical. Not having much experience with different cartridges I'm not sure how that translates in terms of sq in the real world. If it still has the OC9 family sound, I think I'd be happy. Might just go for it and post impressions, though I don't have much to compare it with (Shure V15iii w Jico HE, Grado Black, a friend's Denon 103).

 

[Tom6to1]

Though not a direct comparison I do have and use the AT150MLX which has the same boron cantilever / microline stylus as the OC9 (can't recall if it uses OCC copper). In any event a very nice sounding cartridge and I do like the microline. Of course I am also happy with Denon DL103 (conical) and a Quintet Black (Shibata). It is difficult to do direct comparisons unless you have 2 turntables side-by-side and can switch back and forth quickly, o/w I find that for any but really gross differences (which is not going to be your experience here), it is tough to remember what you heard with the first cartridge. Even tougher here as the Rega uses a fixed cartridge head so you would have to re-install to compare. As regards the 3mm height difference. You might need to look into buying spacers for the Rega arm to allow you to adjust VTA.

 

[Depthgrammar]

Well I found a pretty sweet deal on the OC9XEN (for less $ than the F7) so I decided to give it a try. Should be here next week, I'll share my findings when it arrives.

I won't be able to a-b with the F7, but for what it's worth I don't really do too much a-bing anymore. I've found that direct a-b comparisons are not always helpful. You can learn more by living with a component for awhile, and then giving something else a thorough audition in the same chain. Sometimes the component that seems to win in a direct a-b just winds up having more initial 'wow' factor. Listening through a wider variety of music over time gives a better picture of the character of a given piece of gear, and I find that my memory of what things sounded like is actually better when I'm listening to a song that I've heard a few times through on a different setup. Plus, direct a-bing is a pain. Just my experience.