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
best-groove's avatar
best-groove
844 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
13,228 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.
pindac's avatar
pindac
2,864 posts
 
VAS NY Inc now has a Video of a Needle Drop of a MC 7500.
Always contentious listening in this manner, but a rough outline of an  idea can be gathered for the performance, especially when compared to a few other Videos of Needle Drops on other MC Models.

Only hearing any Cartridge 'in the flesh' will be the best practice for a demonstration.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,103 posts
 
Dear @best-groove : "   I use one of them without the body; the sound is much better without a body;  "

I did it with my Allaerts MC2 Finish Gold and you are rigth: betterquality performance.

VdH knew and knows about and that's why the Colibri is an open cartridge design. As almost anything in audio less is more and the best cartridge body is not cartridge body.

R.
edgewear
543 posts
 
Ortofon offers an interesting comparison to answer ’to have a body or not, that’s the question’: the A95 versus MC Anna. A95 has a titanium skeleton, while Anna has a voluptuous titanium body of more than twice the weight. Both (no)bodies were made with additive manufacturing technology (3D laser printing), both have the same boron cantilever and Replicant 100 stylus and they share several other design principles. The only significant other difference is that Anna has a non magnetic armature.

To what extend ’body versus no body’ is the main reason is open to debate, but the way they present music couldn’t be more different. The A95 is all about neutrality and speed, definitely belonging to the ’maximum information retrieval’ school. Anna seems more intent on creating tonal beauty above all else. More ’old school’ in a way that resembles their own SPU sound, albeit on a much higher level of refinement. It also reminds me of the Miyabi’s. Perhaps it’s a deliberate attempt on Ortofon’s part to reconcile the two ’schools’, to ’have their cake and eat it’. Whatever was the design brief, it makes for spellbinding listening.

More to discover