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

Edgeware, In his original Stereophile review, none other than J Gordon Holt rated the MC2000 the best he had yet heard, while he also cited its problems (high cost and minuscule output). So I’d say the MC2000 put Ortofon on the high end map. There was no one more influential back then than Holt, except maybe HP. But Holt was the elder statesman, having founded S'phile way before HP founded TAS.

Anyway, this thread got me thinking about my MC7500, which has been sitting on a shelf for more than a year (or maybe more than a few years), not in use.  Today I mounted it in my Kenwood L07D, driving Raul's 3160 Phonolinepreamp into modified Atma-sphere amplifiers driving modified Sound Lab 845PXs.  After about an hour of warm up, the MC7500 is very very good.  Better than I remembered it.  More "musical" and better in low bass definition and extension, compared to the AT ART7 it displaced.  I plan to listen to it for an extended period. I am still not sure if I would rate it ahead of my MC2000. I was surprised to read that the recommended VTF is 2.2 to 2.7g, as for the MC2000.  I wonder why two such high compliance cartridges require relatively high VTF. Perhaps due to stylus shape? Comments appreciated.

Lewm, the MC 2000 has a recommended VTF of 1.5 gram, so very different from MC 7500. The compliance of the MC 2000 is also much higher than MC 7500 (don’t have the exact numbers), so I would assume the suspension of the MC 2000 demands lower tracking force. The MC 7500 is more in line with the other top level Ortofons like Anna and A95 that also have high VTF of 2.6 and 2.3 grams respectively. This has never bothered me. Most of my classical records were issued in the late 50’s and early 60’s and were most likely played on very crude playback devices with tracking forces of 5 grams or more (remember those?). They have survived these conditions against all odds, so I have no doubt they can handle modern cartridges or even SPU’s with ease.

As for the stylus shape: the stylus of MC 2000 is one of the smallest I’ve ever seen. By comparison the Ortoline of MC 7500 and Replicant 100 in other top Ortofons look like big boulders.

Dear @lewm  : My take in the MC 2000 issue is that was not through STPH JGH review who puts that cartridge in the market map but was the 1984 Audio review by B.Pisha because this magazine had higher circulation that STP.

In reality the cartridge had succes not in the " high-end " niche but out side it.

In those old times the MC 2000 was the more expensive cartridge down there: 2K because needs the T2000 and was a new road to Ortofon when its top of the line was a really good performer the MC30 that had a price of 600 plus the T30 SUT,

I was fortunated to bougth it at very special price directly to Ortofon because in those times was not an Ortofon distributor in my county México and from Ortofon I bougth the MC3000, MC3000MK2, MC5000, etc.

In reality Ortofon was out of the high-end market because its great cartridges were not reviewed by the high-end magazines. Your 7500 is a good example: no one cares about Ortofon was in the mid-fi market and was magazines as Audio who really help to some high-end audiophiles experienced with.

You are an example of what I'm saying here: you know about the MC2000 or the 7500 here at Agon several years after those cartridges appeared in the market. In the Asia market audiophiles had and have in very good place Ortofon through the SPU models and today new catalog.

Reviewers turn around their faces to Ortofon with the Jubilee and latter on the A90 and its today sucess came with the Anna.

R.

Good points, Raul.  Any thoughts on the surprisingly high recommended VTF (2.2-2.7g), for both cartridges?  My old MC7500 is tracking just fine at about 2.2g.  Before I finally looked up the recommended VTF, I set it at 1.6g, just based on my faulty memory, and it actually did fine at that VTF, too. I do think it's a bit better at 2.2g.