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 lewm for your response.
Somehow, the majority of cartridges I've used so far are Ortofons MC cartridges, including very low output MC20, SL15, SL20, and MC20 super, and SPUs (Gold ref, Silver Meister MKii, and mono). I like them all. But I've never had a chance to try those 4 digit cartridges. Maybe they cost much more than I could afford to, but I just wonder how much better they could be compared to SPUs. 
nandric's avatar
nandric
4,086 posts
 
chakster, you are probably  confused with my Sony XL 44 l. This
one got boron cantilever + nude Shibata from Axel. Lew got MC
2000 without box and headshell and the one I still own is complete
with box and (titanium?) headshell. 

neonknight OP
392 posts
 
This cartridge was purchased to be used as a daily player for more casual listening sessions. I listen to a lot of vinyl, and while I enjoy my digital rig its really the turntables that get played more. I need a cartridge that I can use up and not worry about the hours it accumulates. My other cartridges are pretty decent, a Transfiguration Audio Proteus, a ZYX 4D, and Ikeda 9 Kawami, and indirectly they set the bar for the sound quality needed from the casual cartridge.

I had obtained an Ortofon MC200 to try in this application, and it sounds quite respectable, but its not where I need it to be. I could have bought a new Audio Technica OC9 series, maybe an Ortofon Quintet, but in the end when the hours are done on those carts they become throw aways. Also, they trail my main cartridges in terms of SQ by a fair amount, so they would not be something you look forward to listening to, but rather also rans.

So this is my attempt to have a good sounding casual cartridge. The acquisition price was a bit higher than a TOTL OC9 cartridge, but I am thinking its worth the difference. We shall see. My ZYX is getting up there in hours and I need to plan for a diamond replacement for it. I don’t need the MC3000 MK II to vie for the best sounding cartridge spot in my collection, I just need it to be competent.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,092 posts
 
Dear @neonknight : The A95 is better than the 90 and I agree with you about but these cartridges not only were designed for the 90 and 95 Ortofon anniversary as limited edition where some Ortofon collectors are and were really happy with.

But those designs were and are an Ortofon departure in overall design and specially in the cartridge body shape and the way they builded that body material used.

Normally Ortofon shows something new in its anniversary designs.

The 7500 is too a limited edition by the 75 anniversary and really good performer. For you this is the one to go if you want a different top Ortofon cartridge with out all the deals you have to do with the MC2000: extreme high compliance, extreme output level and higher weigth that the desired for its compliance.

About the MC2000 almost no body cares on it ( at least in Agon. ) and several audiophiles not even knew of that model till several years ago I brought here as an owner of that model and after that some gentlemans started to be interested/curiosity on it to confirm if what I posted about was a reality . @lewm is a very well regarded Agoner and confirmed it in this thread.

Miss I my MC2000? not really I owned for years and enjoy it at its best, so I move on.

Btw, this humble AT today cartridge not only could be a challenge for your top cartridges at very good price point that you can get for your today and future casual listening sessions:

https://www.audio-technica.com/en-us/cartridges/type/moving-coil/at-art9xa

R.


neonknight OP
392 posts
 
@rauliruegas 
When in college I worked part time in an audio store. We were an Ortofon dealer and the owner was a fan of the MC2000. We always had one in the store, but very very few were sold. It was too expensive for most customers. But I got to hear it back then, and have always knew of it's pedigree. 

I have owned the A90 and it's a nice cartridge. But I suspect I will like the voicing of the X000 cartridges, I have plans to acquire a 7500 whenever an opportunity arises. 
More to discover