2. analog
  3. 168226-3976

Classic Ortofon Cartridges: The MC2000 MK II or the MC3000 MK II?

So I have owned quite a few Otofon cartridges over the years, everything from the modest OM cartridges to a couple of Cadenza up to an A90. I typically enjoy Ortofon cartridges.

Now one I have never owned is the MC2000. It seems from a bit of reading I have done that owners of the MC2000 felt it was the most accurate of the Ortofon cartridges, and that releases after it were not its equal.

However, when you look at the MC3000 it has a higher output level that would allow it to work with my Esoteric phono stage. The Esoteric is happy running an MC200 on it which has .09 mV output. but the MC2000 is .05 mV. The MC 3000 MK II is .13 mV from what I find.

Has anyone spent time listening to these classic MC 000 series of Ortofon cartridges? I know there is also a 5000 and 7500, but those seem to be pretty rare.

Regarding the MC2000, I wonder if I use a low mass headshell if I can use it on the Dynavector DV505. I don’t think the mass of the arm in the horizontal plane should affect it, and the vestigial arm can be configured to be an appropriate match for the compliance on this cartridge.

I currently have an MC200u on the arm and its very surprising regarding how good it sounds. Its actually pretty neutral, pretty expressive, but just a bit relaxed in the top end. I certainly enjoy it, but I wonder how these statement cartridges from the classic Ortofon line will sound. These would have been from their long time designer who has now retired, so its a different era of Ortofon versus what their current offerings are. Even though we should acknowledge that the current cartridges use design principals that were developed from this earlier time period and engineering team. 

Thoughts?
neonknight
ihcho's avatar
ihcho
612 posts
 
Thanks for the reply Raul.
I've been tempted to get MC30, but always settled for others, like MC20, MC20 super, and SL15/20 due to the budget I had.
On my system, MC20 super sounds better than MC20 and SL cartridges. SPUs sound a bit smoother, but I cannot really tell my SPU gold ref and Silver Meister MKii are noticeably better than MC20 super.
Currently I am using SPUs, MC20 super, Denon DL103R, DL303, and AT150mlx. I like them all, but I will try MC30 some time in the near future.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,101 posts
 
Dear @best-groove : The MC-30 manufacturer spec was 0.08mv but each sample was tested in its main specs that is what you received in the card certification. The MC 20 spec was even lower 0.07mv

Something that I can’t explain is why ( from 1948. ) in those years Ortofon was not a very well regarded cartridge designer/manufacturer by the " high-end " market even its great contributions in the cartridge development and not only LOMC cartridge bu MM/MI too.
Seems to me that almost no one but only a few audiophiles as you or edgewear and some other gentlemans gave and give the real credit that Ortofon deserves in the cartridge market.

When every one talks about: ZYX or Koetsu or Dynavector, Clearaudio, Lyra, etc, etc..but not Ortofon down there,.

It was with the Anna and A90 when the people turn his head for Ortofon.

I can’t remember, from its top designs, any Ortofon with a bad sound or " so so " performance. Its quality level always up to the task and a challenge for any other top cartridge out there.

R.



edgewear
543 posts
 
Raul, it’s true that Ortofon always had a somewhat mundane reputation, at least here in the West. The book released for their 100th Anniversary describes in detail their professional heritage and they did their business accordingly. No brand mystique or fancy marketing tactics. Their record cutting lathes were equal if not superior to the Neumann lathes, but didn’t sell as well mostly resulting from licensing agreements and other business reasons. Their tonearms and SPU cartridges were also broadcasting industry standards, in direct competition with EMT. Again the EMT products were generally more succesful, perhaps because Ortofon never produced a dedicated turntable.

In the 70’s they became a household name for low priced MM cartridges, competing with companies like Grado. In the 80’s when digital took over, they managed to be very succesful in the DJ crowd. This market position probably didn’t sit well with a high end reputation, even when such products were just as much part of their portfolio (like the ’000’ series discussed here). The new management made the decision to put more emphasis on the expensive high end products, which has changed the reputation amongst audiophiles. It has to be said that the situation in Japan was very different, where they had always been one of the most highly regarded European brands, especially for the SPU cartridges.


best-groove's avatar
best-groove
843 posts
 
It was with the Anna and A90 when the people turn his head for Ortofon.

It depends; in my country Ortofon in the 70s-80s 90s has always been appreciated for its products and sold a lot, even the x000 models.
With the early 2000s many brands took over the sales for hi-end models but Ortofon it survives well especially with models accessible to all.


I have two MC 30 as I wrote but I use one of them without the body; the sound is much better without a body; as it happened in the 80's when I extracted the body of a Dynavector 10x4 the leap forward in terms of quality and freshness in the sound was immediately noticeable.
If it were possible and easy I would like to listen to all my cartridges without the body
lewm
13,165 posts
 
The Ortofon M20FL Super is a superb contender in the MM category.  And really "cheap" by any standard.  Was once discussed on the old MM thread.
More to discover